Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Powell: U.S. forces to enter Iraqi 'no-go zones'

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
NeoConsSuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-26-04 01:39 PM
Original message
Powell: U.S. forces to enter Iraqi 'no-go zones'
BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- The U.S. military will move into insurgent-heavy "no-go zones" in Iraq to clear the way for legitimate elections in January, Secretary of State Colin Powell said Sunday.

The Bush administration is hoping free elections will help stabilize the country and build a sense of legitimacy for the new government.

But administration officials have acknowledged that continued violence in many parts of the country could make voting dangerous or perhaps even impossible in some areas.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/09/26/iraq.main/index.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-26-04 01:40 PM
Response to Original message
1. Gee listening to McCain I see
and hagel

Ironnic,

Colin should know where things like this end though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-26-04 02:22 PM
Response to Original message
2. bombing the hell out of the resistance worked wonders in VietNam
right colin? :puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lizzie Borden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-26-04 02:35 PM
Response to Original message
3. And we all know...
elections where only 70% of the people can vote won't bother them at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
readmylips Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-26-04 03:44 PM
Response to Original message
4. I guess, they'll be no one alive to vote...
Puppet Allawi will voted in by bush and administration and the winner is...bush!

How is bush planning to keep Saddam from entering his name in the election run off? Who is running against puppet Allawi? I hope Saddam is the one running against Allawi. I'd love to see little bush explain that one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrBenchley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-26-04 04:25 PM
Response to Original message
5. So the Secretary of State now makes military decisions...
the Secretary of Defense seems to be insane....the Attorney General is 0 for 5,000 in terrorism cases, and the Secretary of Homeland Security is handing out contracts to his stock portfolio...

Yeah, the grown-ups are in charge (snicker)...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
allemand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-26-04 04:56 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. At least the Secretary of State is qualified to make military decisions.
I have my doubts about the Secretary of Defense, though.

The State Department should have been in charge of the reconstruction of Iraq from the beginning, not the Pentagon.

"A parallel battle between pragmatists and true believers was being waged within the Bush Administration. <...>
Whereas the State Department had its Future of Iraq report, the neocons had USAID’s contract with Bearing Point to remake Iraq’s economy. <...>

On May 9, Bush proposed the “establishment of a U.S.-Middle East free trade area within a decade”; three days later, Bush sent Paul Bremer to Baghdad to replace Jay Garner, who had been on the job for only three weeks. The message was unequivocal: the pragmatists had lost; Iraq would belong to the believers."
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0924-13.htm

"Sure enough, the administration was unprepared for predictable security problems in Iraq, but moved quickly — in violation of international law — to impose its economic vision. Last month Jay Garner, the first U.S. administrator of Iraq, told the BBC that he was sacked in part because he wanted to hold quick elections. His superiors wanted to privatize Iraqi industries first — as part of a plan that, according to Mr. Garner, was drawn up in late 2001."
http://www.pkarchive.org/column/042304.html

"The insurgency took root during the occupation's first few months, when the Coalition Provisional Authority seemed oddly disengaged from the problems of postwar anarchy. But what was Paul Bremer III, the head of the C.P.A., focused on? According to a Washington Post reporter who shared a flight with him last June, "Bremer discussed the need to privatize government-run factories with such fervor that his voice cut through the din of the cargo hold." <...> Insurgents are blowing up pipelines and police stations, geysers of sewage are erupting from the streets, and the electricity is off most of the time — but we've given Iraq the gift of supply-side economics."
http://www.pkarchive.org/column/062904.html

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrBenchley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-27-04 08:07 AM
Response to Reply #6
9. Is Rumsfeld insane? Mercy me, yes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The_Casual_Observer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-26-04 05:03 PM
Response to Original message
7. Don't forget that they tried this already
This is as hollow a promise as going back to the UN for another resolution. These no go cities are potentially the election loser for bush, so don't expect anything but saber rattling until the week after the election, should he win, then look out. bush is ever on the quest to legitimatize the illegitimate through bogus misrepresented resolutions, acts of congress and now phony elections.



Sistani saved the day in Najaf, otherwise we would still be in there "winning hearts and minds".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krkaufman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-26-04 05:51 PM
Response to Original message
8. Well.... What're you waiting for Colon? Get going....!
Or are you delaying the new offensive until after some future date?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Supersedeas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-27-04 04:17 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. delayed until casualties become mute as a political issue
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UpInArms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-27-04 08:16 AM
Response to Original message
10. that should up the death count
in short order!

Perhaps the idiots that occupy our government should be on the front line of this new plan.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 08:33 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC