Click here to sign the petition to recall Nancy Pelosi as Speaker
of the House
Many people are extremely frustrated in this country. But I don't have to
tell you two that. Whether they are with the Anti-War movements or the
Peace Groups or the Anti-Globalists or even the 9/11Truth groups, they
have all come up against an organized and well funded effort to
stone-wall their attempts to effect a change in this country.
Organizations like your Grass Roots America should be commended for
bringing together organizations with similar goals in order to strengthen
their efforts and increase the visibility of our cause. I have been
working in my own way on an effort to do something similar to that. It is
my opinion that all of these critical issues of our time can be achieved
once one thing is done. The impeachment of Dick Cheney and
George W. Bush. But right now we have a slight problem; Nancy
Pelosi will never allow that to happen. For whatever reasons she has
taken the side of enabling this criminal administration and refuses to
allow impeachment hearings on the floor of the House. And even if
they were impeached, Pelosi herself would not end this war. She has
said as much. In a recent interview, John Conyers has stated that he
will not allow the impeachment hearings to take place in the Judicial
Committee. He knows that no matter what they do or come up with,
Pelosi will use the considerable power of the Speaker Seat to under-cut
his efforts. Then, next term, he may even find himself off of the Judiciary
Chair. Pelosi doesn't care about petitions or marches. She will block
impeachment. That is a fact. Well, knowing this I wondered if there
were something we could do to fix this problem, and as it turns out, there
is (those clever Founding Fathers). House Rules IX allows for
replacing a Speaker of the House during session. Any member can
bring forward a question of privilege to declare the Speaker seat vacant.
There are several grounds for doing so. One is if a Speaker refuses to
allow impeachment proceedings, another is to maintain the integrity of
the House of Representatives. Either way, it can be done and must
be done. And I am asking for your help. I have written a petition to do
just this. So far there are 1800+ signatures (in about a week) but we
need many more. The idea is simple; there are those in the House
that want to impeach (many Republicans want to impeach as well to
save the reputation of their party. To make it seem like these things are
the acts of rogue administration and not the Republican Party) but they
know that with the Speaker protecting the White House and using her
power behind the scenes to frighten other Dems into blocking
impeachment, it would not happen. We need to get as many
signatures as possible and then start sending out letters and emails to
other House members telling them what we are doing. With enough
support for this, I feel we can convince a Democratic member to put
forward the question of privilege and to get enough members to vote to
declare the Speaker seat vacant. On the 17th of March 2008 I intend
to come to DC with the petition to give to that Representative to use as
proof that Pelosi is harming the integrity of the House. That is the day
after the Winter Soldier Conference. Hopefully there will be some of the
people who signed there to present it with me. I need to get the word
out. To unite some of these groups under one, simple effort; to replace
Pelosi with a Rep. who will not block impeachment. So I am asking you
two to have a look at the petition and tell me what you think. I know this
will work. So many Dems right now know they will suffer in the next
election unless they do something to set this right... and this could be it.
But either way, whether you will help or not, I want to thank you both for
all your efforts to end this damn war and bring our troops home. Yours is
the kind of heroism that is rarely appreciated before the changes take
place. But there are those of us out here that recognize and appreciate
your efforts. Thank you both. Scott Creighton rscdesigns@verizon.net
of the House
Many people are extremely frustrated in this country. But I don't have to
tell you two that. Whether they are with the Anti-War movements or the
Peace Groups or the Anti-Globalists or even the 9/11Truth groups, they
have all come up against an organized and well funded effort to
stone-wall their attempts to effect a change in this country.
Organizations like your Grass Roots America should be commended for
bringing together organizations with similar goals in order to strengthen
their efforts and increase the visibility of our cause. I have been
working in my own way on an effort to do something similar to that. It is
my opinion that all of these critical issues of our time can be achieved
once one thing is done. The impeachment of Dick Cheney and
George W. Bush. But right now we have a slight problem; Nancy
Pelosi will never allow that to happen. For whatever reasons she has
taken the side of enabling this criminal administration and refuses to
allow impeachment hearings on the floor of the House. And even if
they were impeached, Pelosi herself would not end this war. She has
said as much. In a recent interview, John Conyers has stated that he
will not allow the impeachment hearings to take place in the Judicial
Committee. He knows that no matter what they do or come up with,
Pelosi will use the considerable power of the Speaker Seat to under-cut
his efforts. Then, next term, he may even find himself off of the Judiciary
Chair. Pelosi doesn't care about petitions or marches. She will block
impeachment. That is a fact. Well, knowing this I wondered if there
were something we could do to fix this problem, and as it turns out, there
is (those clever Founding Fathers). House Rules IX allows for
replacing a Speaker of the House during session. Any member can
bring forward a question of privilege to declare the Speaker seat vacant.
There are several grounds for doing so. One is if a Speaker refuses to
allow impeachment proceedings, another is to maintain the integrity of
the House of Representatives. Either way, it can be done and must
be done. And I am asking for your help. I have written a petition to do
just this. So far there are 1800+ signatures (in about a week) but we
need many more. The idea is simple; there are those in the House
that want to impeach (many Republicans want to impeach as well to
save the reputation of their party. To make it seem like these things are
the acts of rogue administration and not the Republican Party) but they
know that with the Speaker protecting the White House and using her
power behind the scenes to frighten other Dems into blocking
impeachment, it would not happen. We need to get as many
signatures as possible and then start sending out letters and emails to
other House members telling them what we are doing. With enough
support for this, I feel we can convince a Democratic member to put
forward the question of privilege and to get enough members to vote to
declare the Speaker seat vacant. On the 17th of March 2008 I intend
to come to DC with the petition to give to that Representative to use as
proof that Pelosi is harming the integrity of the House. That is the day
after the Winter Soldier Conference. Hopefully there will be some of the
people who signed there to present it with me. I need to get the word
out. To unite some of these groups under one, simple effort; to replace
Pelosi with a Rep. who will not block impeachment. So I am asking you
two to have a look at the petition and tell me what you think. I know this
will work. So many Dems right now know they will suffer in the next
election unless they do something to set this right... and this could be it.
But either way, whether you will help or not, I want to thank you both for
all your efforts to end this damn war and bring our troops home. Yours is
the kind of heroism that is rarely appreciated before the changes take
place. But there are those of us out here that recognize and appreciate
your efforts. Thank you both. Scott Creighton rscdesigns@verizon.net
 |  |  |  |  |
Washington splits on Iraq troop cut
Thu, 17 Jan 2008 20:53:27
Divergent views on the US troop withdrawal from Iraq have reportedly caused
a deep-running rift among senior White House officials.
US President George W. Bush and the commander of US forces in Iraq,
General David Petraeus, are in no rush to further reduce the number of
troops stationed in the war-torn country.
This is while Defense Secretary Robert Gates and many Pentagon officials
believe US troops have accomplished their objective and there is nothing
more for them to do in Iraq.
The disagreements were highlighted after defense officials ignored Petraeus’
recent call for more troops. Courtesy PressTV.com
But President Bush made clear this week that additional troop withdrawals
were far from a sure thing. After a meeting in Kuwait with Gen. Petraeus and
Ryan Crocker, the U.S. ambassador to Iraq, Mr. Bush said he was open to
slowing or stopping the withdrawal of troops to avoid jeopardizing recent
security gains in Iraq. "My attitude is, if he didn't want to continue the draw
down, that's fine with me in order to make sure we succeed," Mr. Bush said,
referring to Gen. Petraeus. Courtesy of the WSJ
Fight the Surge:
Otherwise known as a bait and switch
We were pushed aside by nay Sayers and media who told us, “it’s a surge,
not a troop build up.” Then it was touted as a success from Bush, Congress
and the media. Reality suspended as editors pushed aside stories of Iraq.
(Chicago Tribune )
We extended the arming of the nation to the Sunni’s with our “Awakening
Forces”, reinforced the dictatorship of Maliki 1, (Alternet) given Turkey a
green light to invade Iraq, (AGI) Increased indiscriminate bombings
(Washington Post), and jailed whoever was left in our “Reeducation Camps”
(Washington Post). We won’t mention al Sadr’s entrance into school to
emerge as an Ayatollah in May and the cease fire called by his militia that
expires in March. All of this declared a success.
Now the switch comes, it is up to Gen. Petraeus to determine troop levels.
Gen. Petraeus wants more troops. He is schedule to testify to congress on
April 2nd.
It is up to us to challenge the media, congress and Gen. Petraeus from today
until April 2nd.
This will take a true grassroots effort to change this. It will take you.
Attached is a list of talking points that you need to share with letters to the
editors, town hall meetings and your neighbors. We need to change the
dialog across the country and you have the power to do it. The facts support
us, now it is up to us to get them out there.
See you in D.C. April 2nd.
Thu, 17 Jan 2008 20:53:27
Divergent views on the US troop withdrawal from Iraq have reportedly caused
a deep-running rift among senior White House officials.
US President George W. Bush and the commander of US forces in Iraq,
General David Petraeus, are in no rush to further reduce the number of
troops stationed in the war-torn country.
This is while Defense Secretary Robert Gates and many Pentagon officials
believe US troops have accomplished their objective and there is nothing
more for them to do in Iraq.
The disagreements were highlighted after defense officials ignored Petraeus’
recent call for more troops. Courtesy PressTV.com
But President Bush made clear this week that additional troop withdrawals
were far from a sure thing. After a meeting in Kuwait with Gen. Petraeus and
Ryan Crocker, the U.S. ambassador to Iraq, Mr. Bush said he was open to
slowing or stopping the withdrawal of troops to avoid jeopardizing recent
security gains in Iraq. "My attitude is, if he didn't want to continue the draw
down, that's fine with me in order to make sure we succeed," Mr. Bush said,
referring to Gen. Petraeus. Courtesy of the WSJ
Fight the Surge:
Otherwise known as a bait and switch
We were pushed aside by nay Sayers and media who told us, “it’s a surge,
not a troop build up.” Then it was touted as a success from Bush, Congress
and the media. Reality suspended as editors pushed aside stories of Iraq.
(Chicago Tribune )
We extended the arming of the nation to the Sunni’s with our “Awakening
Forces”, reinforced the dictatorship of Maliki 1, (Alternet) given Turkey a
green light to invade Iraq, (AGI) Increased indiscriminate bombings
(Washington Post), and jailed whoever was left in our “Reeducation Camps”
(Washington Post). We won’t mention al Sadr’s entrance into school to
emerge as an Ayatollah in May and the cease fire called by his militia that
expires in March. All of this declared a success.
Now the switch comes, it is up to Gen. Petraeus to determine troop levels.
Gen. Petraeus wants more troops. He is schedule to testify to congress on
April 2nd.
It is up to us to challenge the media, congress and Gen. Petraeus from today
until April 2nd.
This will take a true grassroots effort to change this. It will take you.
Attached is a list of talking points that you need to share with letters to the
editors, town hall meetings and your neighbors. We need to change the
dialog across the country and you have the power to do it. The facts support
us, now it is up to us to get them out there.
See you in D.C. April 2nd.
Call to Action: Fight the Surge
This will take a true grassroots effort to change this. It will take you.
Attached is a list of talking points that you need to share with letters to the
editors, town hall meetings and your neighbors. We need to change the dialog
across the country and you have the power to do it. The facts support us, now it
is up to us to get them out there. Read below.
This will take a true grassroots effort to change this. It will take you.
Attached is a list of talking points that you need to share with letters to the
editors, town hall meetings and your neighbors. We need to change the dialog
across the country and you have the power to do it. The facts support us, now it
is up to us to get them out there. Read below.
Surge Report:
An Overview of the Failure of the U.S. Troop
Surge of 2007
Compiled by Nicolas Katkevich, Grassroots America
Onset of the Surge
-On January 10 2007 President Bush officially announced plans to send
upwards of 30,000 additional troops to Iraq. Coinciding with this decision was
a change of strategy, as American forces would be asked to take on the Iraqi
insurgency in a more direct manner. There was immediate public outrage to
this proposal.
-A Fox News poll released January 18, 2007 found that 59 percent of
Americans disapproved of President Bush’s “surge” strategy. A similar poll
released on the same date, conducted by the L.A. Times, found that 60
percent of respondents disapproved of the Surge.
-The Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted 12-9 on January 24, 2007
in favor of a non-binding resolution that denounced the Bush Administrations
plan to deploy additional troops to Iraq.
-On February 16, 2007 The U.S. House of Representatives voted 246-182
on a non-binding resolution that expressed disappointment of the President’s
decision to send additional troops to Iraq.
Casualties in 2007
-901 American troops were killed along with 56 United Kingdom and other
coalition deaths, the highest fatality rate since the war began
-At least 6,075 Americans were seriously wounded in Iraq
-38 Iraqi civilian deaths per day from gunfire/execution
-14 Iraqi civilian deaths per day from vehicle bombs
-It is conservatively estimated that 20,000 Iraqi civilians were killed
-At least 100 billion dollars was spent for the occupation of Iraq
Refugee Situation
-14 percent of Iraq’s population has been displaced by the war and its
aftermath; with at least 2.4 million Iraqis internally displaced, and another 2.3
million having fled the country.
-Data collected through August found that since the beginning of the Surge,
internal displacement has increased by 50 percent in Iraq. With 63 percent
of respondents to a UN survey saying that they fled due to a direct threat to
their lives, while 25 percent fled because they were forcibly removed from
their homes.
-Although 46,000 refugees returned in October 2007 to Iraq, a recent UN
Refugee Agency report found that only 14 percent of refugees were
returning because they believed that the security situation in Iraq had
improved. The study found that 80 percent of refugees were returning due
to financial or visa troubles.
-As of October 1st the Syrian government has imposed new visa restrictions
whereby Iraqis who can prove they need medical treatment or intend to
conduct business alone are permitted entry into Syria.
-A poll of 2,000 Iraqis in August found that when asked about their freedom
to live where they wanted without persecution 77 percent said that the
conditions for doing so were “quite” or “very bad”
-“Under intense pressure to show results after months of political stalemate,
the government has continued to publicize figures that exaggerate the
movement back to Iraq and Iraqis’ confidence that the current lull in violence
can be sustained.”- Damien Cave, The New York Times (November 25, 2007)
-Currently over half of the pre-war population of Iraq are either refugees, in
need of emergency aid, wounded, or dead.
Journalism
-A study published in November, 2007 found that 87 percent of journalist
say much of Baghdad is too dangerous to visit
-57 percent of U.S. reporters have had local Iraqi staff kidnapped or killed in
2007
-Daily accounts of violence made up just 27 percent of news space dedicated
to Iraq during the first 10 months of 2007
-Stories relating to Iraqi civilians made 5 percent of news space
-42 percent of U.S. reporters in Iraq believe that the most underreported
story is the impact of the war on the civilian population
-Only 2 percent of reporters said that security conditions have improved in
Iraq since their first post from the region
Sunni Awakening
-Violence in Iraq has been largely attributed not to the U.S. troop surge, yet
to the organizing of Sunni militias to engage foreign fighters and provide local
security. Thus far America has recruited 77,000 of these fighters, paying
them 300 dollars a month (17 million dollars has been spent on this project
thus far). There are plans to recruit 10,000 more of these fighters. Many of
these militiamen were participants in the insurgency against the United States
before taking up the offer to be paid and armed by the U.S.
-The Sunni Awakening may have thrown al-Qaeda off balance and stalled
the insurgency, yet it has done nothing to quell secretariat friction
-The U.S. backed Sunni militia is now larger than the Mahdi Army and half the
size of the Iraqi Army
-One of the Bush Administrations benchmarks for Iraq to reach is in part
“eliminating militia control of local security”. The backing of Sunni militias
contradicts this goal
-The Iraqi government has insisted that it will disband the Awakening forces
and staunchly has refused to allow the militia to build up any sort of
infrastructure
-"We completely, absolutely reject the Awakening becoming a third military
organization" Iraqi defense minister Abdul-Qadir al-Obaidi
-A poll released in September found that 69 percent of Iraqis had “not very
much confidence” or “none at all” in the local militia in their area
-"Many of those who have joined the Sahwa Councils have been members in
al-Qaeda. They joined al-Qaeda in the first place for the sake of money, and
when more money became available in a different direction, they rushed to
it," Sheikh Harith al-Dari, the head of the Sunni Association of Muslim
Scholars
-It is reported that the Islamic army, one of the leaders of the Sunni
insurgency, has infiltrated the Awakening
-There are signs that tension between Sunni Awakening forces and other
Iraqis has been increasing:
-In Baquba, on January 6th, 2008 Awakening leader Sheikh Dhari Mandeel
was shot at his home and 10 of his relatives were kidnapped
-On January 8th, 2008 Sunni Awakening leader, Colonel Riyadh Samarrai
and a close aide and a security adviser were killed by a suicide bomber
-A Sunni soldier imbedded with Coalition forces shot and killed two Americans
after pleading with the Americans to stop beating a women
Mahdi Army
-On August 29th, 2007, Moqtada al-Sadr, leader of the Mahdi Army declared
a six month cease fire. The cease fire was declared in order for the group to
reorganize and become a more capable resistance force
-The cease fire is set to expire at the end of February 2008
-The U.S. is not trying to overwhelm the Mahdi army during the cease fire,
allowing the Mahdis to reorganize and consolidate.
-Moqtada as-Sadr has used the cease fire time to resume his seminary
studies with the hopes of gaining the title of ayatollah, which would make him
and his group a much stronger powerbroker in Iraq
-Moqtada as-Sadr will receive his ayatollah status in May, 2008
Ethnic Cleansing
-The recent decline in Iraqi civilian deaths can be attributed in part to mass
sectarian killings earlier in 2007 that ethnically cleansed Baghdad and its
neighborhoods. As a result, it has gone from a city that was 65 percent Sunni
to 75 percent Shia
-80 percent of Shiites in Baghdad want the United States to leave within a
year. This is in stark contrast to January when 57 percent reported that they
preferred the United States to stay indefinitely.
-An August National Intelligence Estimate found that “where population
displacements have led to significant sectarian separation, conflict levels
have diminished to some extent because warring communities find it more
difficult to penetrate communal enclaves.”
-“Many neighborhoods have completed their brutal sectarian segregation,
leaving fewer easy targets for intimidation and murder.” – Charles Crain,
Time magazine
-“The effect of this vast migration is to drain religiously mixed areas in the
center of Iraq, sending Shiite refugees toward the overwhelmingly Shiite
areas to the south and Sunnis toward majority Sunni regions to the west and
north.” James Glanz New York Times (August 23, 2007)
-This has occurred despite the fact that 98 percent of Iraqis in August said
that separation amongst secretarial lines is a bad thing
Living Conditions
-Despite a steady decrease in violence, the Pentagon has admitted that
improving the delivery of electricity, health care and other essential services
has made little headway
- On November 13, the International Committee for the Red Cross estimated
there are 60,000 people detained in U.S. and Iraqi prisons around Iraq.
-"We are living the worst days since the November 2004 siege of Fallujah.
Unemployment is killing us slowly, and we have no real government to care
for us. Only those who work with the Americans can afford to buy food, while
over 90 percent of residents are very poor. People are always the biggest
losers."- Fallujah resident (December 2007)
-Unemployment rates are as high as 70 percent in regions of Iraq
-A poll done in August of 2007 poll found that 60 percent of Iraqis described
their life as being “quite bad” or “very bad”, in 2004 and 2005 these
responses made up 39 percent of answers.
-78 percent of people said that for Iraq as a whole things were going “quite
bad” or “very bad”
-When asked about safety in their neighborhood 75 percent of respondents
said they felt “not very safe” or “not safe at all”
-Iraqi households can receive an average 7 hours of electricity a day, 94
percent of Iraqis said that the availability of electricity was either “quite” or
“very bad”
-80 percent of respondents stated that the availability of jobs was “quite” or
“very bad”
-Family’s economic situation: 63 percent stated “quite” or “very bad” (30 in
2005)
-When asked about the availability of clean water 75 percent stated that the
situation was “quite” or “very bad” (48 percent in 2004)
-The availability of medical care: 67 percent stated “quite” or “very bad” (36
percent in 2005)
-The availability of basic household things: 61 percent stated “quite” or “very
bad” (38 in 2005)
-Availably of fuel for cooking/driving: 92 percent stated “quite” or “very bad”
-Protection from crime: 65 percent reported that the situation was “quite” or
“very bad”
-Freedom of movement around the nation: 74 reported that it was “quite” or
“very bad”
Iraqi Government
-April 2007: Iraq’s Parliament passed a resolution demanding a timetable for
withdrawal of occupation forces
-Despite parliamentary vote, the United States and Iraqi PM Nuri al-Maliki, on
December 18, 2007, pushed through a U.N. resolution that allows
international forces to stay at least one more year in Iraq
-In August 2007 it was found that 65 percent of Iraqis believed the Iraqi
government was doing a “quite” or “very bad” job
-61 percent of Iraqis stated their confidence in the local government "quite”
or “very bad” (38 percent in 2004)
-66 percent of Iraqis disapprove of Prime Minister Nuri Kamel al-Maliki
-On January 13th 2008, 145 Iraqi legislators from rival sects passed a
resolution condemning the American backed Kurds as a threat to national
unity due to their overreaching of power. The Kurds have negotiated with
foreign oil companies without involving the central government and have
taken an independent stance on a variety of issues.
-On November 29, 2007 Iraqi legislators blocked Prime Minister Maliki’s
attempts to get approval for nominees to fill the vacant portfolios of justice
and communications in the cabinet. This was accomplished by boycotting the
session in sufficient force to ensure that parliament did not have the requisite
quorum to vote on the nominations.
-The cabinet and parliament in Baghdad remains paralyzed. Thus effectively
derailing US efforts to push legislation for privatization of Iraq’s oil. Over a
dozen ministers have quit Maliki’s government in 2007. These include
members of the Accordance Front, the largest Sunni block in the parliament,
which withdrew its support in August. The cabinet is presently composed
primarily of Shia and Kurds which only underscores the sectarian and ethnic
battle lines that the U.S. policies have drawn in Iraq.
Toxic Fallout
-Widespread use of depleted uranium in weaponry deployed by the United
States military, a tactic characterized by the UN as a “weapon of mass or
indiscriminate destruction” has turned Iraq into a virtual toxic wasteland
- In the early Nineties, the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority warned
that 50 tons of dust created from detonated depleted uranium explosives
could claim a half million lives from cancer by year 2000. An estimated 2,000
radioactive tons have been fired off in the Middle East, suggesting the
possibility over time of an even higher death toll
Reflection of the Surge and its Effectiveness
-In August 2007, 61 percent of Iraqis said the security situation had become
worse in the passed six months (the beginning of the Surge)
-“We've done everything we can militarily…I think we have essentially stalled
the sectarian conflict without addressing the underlying grievances.” Lt. Col.
Steven M. Miska, deputy commander of a brigade of the First Infantry
Division that is charged with controlling northwest Baghdad (September 2007)
-“These improvements in the face of the general devastation look small and
insignificant because the devastation is so much bigger” and security gains
“have no great influence” Haidar Minathar, an Iraqi author, actor (September
2007)
-As of August 31, 2007, The Government Accountability Office, a branch of
Congress dedicated to research concluded that “the Iraqi government met 3,
partially met 4, and did not meet 11 of its 18 benchmarks. Overall, key
legislation has not been passed, violence remains high, and it is unclear
whether the Iraqi government will spend 10 billion dollars in reconstruction
funds.”
-Northern Kurdish lands are now under constant bombardment from the
Turkey military
-The surge’s political goal of reconciliation between the Sunni, Shia, and
Kurdish elites has failed
-The U.S. on January 11, 2008 dropping 18 tons of explosives in the area
surrounding Baghdad proves that the region is far from secure
-As of August 2007 53 percent of Iraqis strongly oppose and 26 percent
somewhat oppose coalition forces presence in Iraq
-85 percent reported having “not very much” or “none at all” confidence in U.
S. and U.K. occupying forces
-A mere 18 percent of Iraqis believed the occupational forces made the
security situation in Iraq better
-57 percent of Iraqis said it was acceptable for insurgents to attack coalition
forces, with 48 percent of respondents said that it was acceptable for al
Qaeda in Iraq to attack coalition forces
-Six months into the Surge the people of Iraq thoroughly believed that the
strategy was ineffective:
-70 percent said security situation had gotten worse where U.S. Surge had
gone
-68 percent stated that the security situation in other areas of Iraq have gone
worse since the Surge, only 10 percent said that security had improved
-65 percent reported that the surge made it harder for Iraqi government to
carry out its work, only 12 percent said it had made it better
-67 percent said the pace of reconstruction had gotten worse due to the
Surge, only 9 percent said it got better
-67 percent said the pace of economic development had gotten worse, 6
percent said it had improved
Conclusion
It is clear that the people of Iraq do not trust the occupational forces nor their
ability to secure their country. Furthermore, Iraqis do not believe that the
surge strategy has improved conditions in the region. Namely the cease fire
carried out by the Mahdi Army and the Sunni Awakening have been
responsible for the slow down of violence in Iraq during the past few months.
These occurrences have done little to reconcile the country as a whole and
they may prove to be powder-kegs ready to explode into more Iraqi chaos in
2008.
The Sunni Awakening movement, although initially successful at fighting off
al-Qaeda forces in the region, could become a matter of grave concern.
America has armed, organized into units and paid nearly 100,000 Sunni men,
many of whom at some point were active in the insurgency. The Shiite
dominated Iraqi government, weary of such a large organized Sunni force will
soon insist that the Awakening units be disassembled. If these militias are
not effectively blended into the regular Iraqi Army or police force, there will be
tens of thousands of trained and armed Sunni’s with no source of income.
This is reminiscent of the disbanding of the Iraqi army following the initial
invasion; a move that had a devastating effect on the country.
The six month cease-fire call by the powerful Mahdi Army in late August, was
a move carried out by Moqtada al-Sadr in order to reorganize his
organization into a more effective unit. Al-Sadr has insisted that the goal of
his organization is to expel the occupation from Iraq. Since the cease fire
was enacted, Coalition forces have done little to undermine or restrict the
power of the Mahdi Army. When the cease fire expires at the end of
February, the Mahdi Army could return to violent, insurgent measures with
the added help of greater organizational and strategic capabilities.
The promises of the Bush Administration to reduce troops on the ground as
security improves leaves the impression of a surge. In actuality, as
conditions worsen, the troops will have to remain. This is a troop build-up,
not a surge.
All together the Surge (troop build-up) of upwards of 30,000 new troops to
Iraq brought more violence, more refugees, greater distrust of the Iraqis while
failing to bring about a more stable Iraq. A larger occupational force will not
be able to solve the problems of Iraq; peace and understanding cannot be
pressed upon a nation by a foreign entity. Although Iraq has remained a
nation in turmoil, one thing unites its people: a clear disdain for the
occupational forces and a belief that the presence of such a force is a
distinct root for the violence plaguing their country.
An Overview of the Failure of the U.S. Troop
Surge of 2007
Compiled by Nicolas Katkevich, Grassroots America
Onset of the Surge
-On January 10 2007 President Bush officially announced plans to send
upwards of 30,000 additional troops to Iraq. Coinciding with this decision was
a change of strategy, as American forces would be asked to take on the Iraqi
insurgency in a more direct manner. There was immediate public outrage to
this proposal.
-A Fox News poll released January 18, 2007 found that 59 percent of
Americans disapproved of President Bush’s “surge” strategy. A similar poll
released on the same date, conducted by the L.A. Times, found that 60
percent of respondents disapproved of the Surge.
-The Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted 12-9 on January 24, 2007
in favor of a non-binding resolution that denounced the Bush Administrations
plan to deploy additional troops to Iraq.
-On February 16, 2007 The U.S. House of Representatives voted 246-182
on a non-binding resolution that expressed disappointment of the President’s
decision to send additional troops to Iraq.
Casualties in 2007
-901 American troops were killed along with 56 United Kingdom and other
coalition deaths, the highest fatality rate since the war began
-At least 6,075 Americans were seriously wounded in Iraq
-38 Iraqi civilian deaths per day from gunfire/execution
-14 Iraqi civilian deaths per day from vehicle bombs
-It is conservatively estimated that 20,000 Iraqi civilians were killed
-At least 100 billion dollars was spent for the occupation of Iraq
Refugee Situation
-14 percent of Iraq’s population has been displaced by the war and its
aftermath; with at least 2.4 million Iraqis internally displaced, and another 2.3
million having fled the country.
-Data collected through August found that since the beginning of the Surge,
internal displacement has increased by 50 percent in Iraq. With 63 percent
of respondents to a UN survey saying that they fled due to a direct threat to
their lives, while 25 percent fled because they were forcibly removed from
their homes.
-Although 46,000 refugees returned in October 2007 to Iraq, a recent UN
Refugee Agency report found that only 14 percent of refugees were
returning because they believed that the security situation in Iraq had
improved. The study found that 80 percent of refugees were returning due
to financial or visa troubles.
-As of October 1st the Syrian government has imposed new visa restrictions
whereby Iraqis who can prove they need medical treatment or intend to
conduct business alone are permitted entry into Syria.
-A poll of 2,000 Iraqis in August found that when asked about their freedom
to live where they wanted without persecution 77 percent said that the
conditions for doing so were “quite” or “very bad”
-“Under intense pressure to show results after months of political stalemate,
the government has continued to publicize figures that exaggerate the
movement back to Iraq and Iraqis’ confidence that the current lull in violence
can be sustained.”- Damien Cave, The New York Times (November 25, 2007)
-Currently over half of the pre-war population of Iraq are either refugees, in
need of emergency aid, wounded, or dead.
Journalism
-A study published in November, 2007 found that 87 percent of journalist
say much of Baghdad is too dangerous to visit
-57 percent of U.S. reporters have had local Iraqi staff kidnapped or killed in
2007
-Daily accounts of violence made up just 27 percent of news space dedicated
to Iraq during the first 10 months of 2007
-Stories relating to Iraqi civilians made 5 percent of news space
-42 percent of U.S. reporters in Iraq believe that the most underreported
story is the impact of the war on the civilian population
-Only 2 percent of reporters said that security conditions have improved in
Iraq since their first post from the region
Sunni Awakening
-Violence in Iraq has been largely attributed not to the U.S. troop surge, yet
to the organizing of Sunni militias to engage foreign fighters and provide local
security. Thus far America has recruited 77,000 of these fighters, paying
them 300 dollars a month (17 million dollars has been spent on this project
thus far). There are plans to recruit 10,000 more of these fighters. Many of
these militiamen were participants in the insurgency against the United States
before taking up the offer to be paid and armed by the U.S.
-The Sunni Awakening may have thrown al-Qaeda off balance and stalled
the insurgency, yet it has done nothing to quell secretariat friction
-The U.S. backed Sunni militia is now larger than the Mahdi Army and half the
size of the Iraqi Army
-One of the Bush Administrations benchmarks for Iraq to reach is in part
“eliminating militia control of local security”. The backing of Sunni militias
contradicts this goal
-The Iraqi government has insisted that it will disband the Awakening forces
and staunchly has refused to allow the militia to build up any sort of
infrastructure
-"We completely, absolutely reject the Awakening becoming a third military
organization" Iraqi defense minister Abdul-Qadir al-Obaidi
-A poll released in September found that 69 percent of Iraqis had “not very
much confidence” or “none at all” in the local militia in their area
-"Many of those who have joined the Sahwa Councils have been members in
al-Qaeda. They joined al-Qaeda in the first place for the sake of money, and
when more money became available in a different direction, they rushed to
it," Sheikh Harith al-Dari, the head of the Sunni Association of Muslim
Scholars
-It is reported that the Islamic army, one of the leaders of the Sunni
insurgency, has infiltrated the Awakening
-There are signs that tension between Sunni Awakening forces and other
Iraqis has been increasing:
-In Baquba, on January 6th, 2008 Awakening leader Sheikh Dhari Mandeel
was shot at his home and 10 of his relatives were kidnapped
-On January 8th, 2008 Sunni Awakening leader, Colonel Riyadh Samarrai
and a close aide and a security adviser were killed by a suicide bomber
-A Sunni soldier imbedded with Coalition forces shot and killed two Americans
after pleading with the Americans to stop beating a women
Mahdi Army
-On August 29th, 2007, Moqtada al-Sadr, leader of the Mahdi Army declared
a six month cease fire. The cease fire was declared in order for the group to
reorganize and become a more capable resistance force
-The cease fire is set to expire at the end of February 2008
-The U.S. is not trying to overwhelm the Mahdi army during the cease fire,
allowing the Mahdis to reorganize and consolidate.
-Moqtada as-Sadr has used the cease fire time to resume his seminary
studies with the hopes of gaining the title of ayatollah, which would make him
and his group a much stronger powerbroker in Iraq
-Moqtada as-Sadr will receive his ayatollah status in May, 2008
Ethnic Cleansing
-The recent decline in Iraqi civilian deaths can be attributed in part to mass
sectarian killings earlier in 2007 that ethnically cleansed Baghdad and its
neighborhoods. As a result, it has gone from a city that was 65 percent Sunni
to 75 percent Shia
-80 percent of Shiites in Baghdad want the United States to leave within a
year. This is in stark contrast to January when 57 percent reported that they
preferred the United States to stay indefinitely.
-An August National Intelligence Estimate found that “where population
displacements have led to significant sectarian separation, conflict levels
have diminished to some extent because warring communities find it more
difficult to penetrate communal enclaves.”
-“Many neighborhoods have completed their brutal sectarian segregation,
leaving fewer easy targets for intimidation and murder.” – Charles Crain,
Time magazine
-“The effect of this vast migration is to drain religiously mixed areas in the
center of Iraq, sending Shiite refugees toward the overwhelmingly Shiite
areas to the south and Sunnis toward majority Sunni regions to the west and
north.” James Glanz New York Times (August 23, 2007)
-This has occurred despite the fact that 98 percent of Iraqis in August said
that separation amongst secretarial lines is a bad thing
Living Conditions
-Despite a steady decrease in violence, the Pentagon has admitted that
improving the delivery of electricity, health care and other essential services
has made little headway
- On November 13, the International Committee for the Red Cross estimated
there are 60,000 people detained in U.S. and Iraqi prisons around Iraq.
-"We are living the worst days since the November 2004 siege of Fallujah.
Unemployment is killing us slowly, and we have no real government to care
for us. Only those who work with the Americans can afford to buy food, while
over 90 percent of residents are very poor. People are always the biggest
losers."- Fallujah resident (December 2007)
-Unemployment rates are as high as 70 percent in regions of Iraq
-A poll done in August of 2007 poll found that 60 percent of Iraqis described
their life as being “quite bad” or “very bad”, in 2004 and 2005 these
responses made up 39 percent of answers.
-78 percent of people said that for Iraq as a whole things were going “quite
bad” or “very bad”
-When asked about safety in their neighborhood 75 percent of respondents
said they felt “not very safe” or “not safe at all”
-Iraqi households can receive an average 7 hours of electricity a day, 94
percent of Iraqis said that the availability of electricity was either “quite” or
“very bad”
-80 percent of respondents stated that the availability of jobs was “quite” or
“very bad”
-Family’s economic situation: 63 percent stated “quite” or “very bad” (30 in
2005)
-When asked about the availability of clean water 75 percent stated that the
situation was “quite” or “very bad” (48 percent in 2004)
-The availability of medical care: 67 percent stated “quite” or “very bad” (36
percent in 2005)
-The availability of basic household things: 61 percent stated “quite” or “very
bad” (38 in 2005)
-Availably of fuel for cooking/driving: 92 percent stated “quite” or “very bad”
-Protection from crime: 65 percent reported that the situation was “quite” or
“very bad”
-Freedom of movement around the nation: 74 reported that it was “quite” or
“very bad”
Iraqi Government
-April 2007: Iraq’s Parliament passed a resolution demanding a timetable for
withdrawal of occupation forces
-Despite parliamentary vote, the United States and Iraqi PM Nuri al-Maliki, on
December 18, 2007, pushed through a U.N. resolution that allows
international forces to stay at least one more year in Iraq
-In August 2007 it was found that 65 percent of Iraqis believed the Iraqi
government was doing a “quite” or “very bad” job
-61 percent of Iraqis stated their confidence in the local government "quite”
or “very bad” (38 percent in 2004)
-66 percent of Iraqis disapprove of Prime Minister Nuri Kamel al-Maliki
-On January 13th 2008, 145 Iraqi legislators from rival sects passed a
resolution condemning the American backed Kurds as a threat to national
unity due to their overreaching of power. The Kurds have negotiated with
foreign oil companies without involving the central government and have
taken an independent stance on a variety of issues.
-On November 29, 2007 Iraqi legislators blocked Prime Minister Maliki’s
attempts to get approval for nominees to fill the vacant portfolios of justice
and communications in the cabinet. This was accomplished by boycotting the
session in sufficient force to ensure that parliament did not have the requisite
quorum to vote on the nominations.
-The cabinet and parliament in Baghdad remains paralyzed. Thus effectively
derailing US efforts to push legislation for privatization of Iraq’s oil. Over a
dozen ministers have quit Maliki’s government in 2007. These include
members of the Accordance Front, the largest Sunni block in the parliament,
which withdrew its support in August. The cabinet is presently composed
primarily of Shia and Kurds which only underscores the sectarian and ethnic
battle lines that the U.S. policies have drawn in Iraq.
Toxic Fallout
-Widespread use of depleted uranium in weaponry deployed by the United
States military, a tactic characterized by the UN as a “weapon of mass or
indiscriminate destruction” has turned Iraq into a virtual toxic wasteland
- In the early Nineties, the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority warned
that 50 tons of dust created from detonated depleted uranium explosives
could claim a half million lives from cancer by year 2000. An estimated 2,000
radioactive tons have been fired off in the Middle East, suggesting the
possibility over time of an even higher death toll
Reflection of the Surge and its Effectiveness
-In August 2007, 61 percent of Iraqis said the security situation had become
worse in the passed six months (the beginning of the Surge)
-“We've done everything we can militarily…I think we have essentially stalled
the sectarian conflict without addressing the underlying grievances.” Lt. Col.
Steven M. Miska, deputy commander of a brigade of the First Infantry
Division that is charged with controlling northwest Baghdad (September 2007)
-“These improvements in the face of the general devastation look small and
insignificant because the devastation is so much bigger” and security gains
“have no great influence” Haidar Minathar, an Iraqi author, actor (September
2007)
-As of August 31, 2007, The Government Accountability Office, a branch of
Congress dedicated to research concluded that “the Iraqi government met 3,
partially met 4, and did not meet 11 of its 18 benchmarks. Overall, key
legislation has not been passed, violence remains high, and it is unclear
whether the Iraqi government will spend 10 billion dollars in reconstruction
funds.”
-Northern Kurdish lands are now under constant bombardment from the
Turkey military
-The surge’s political goal of reconciliation between the Sunni, Shia, and
Kurdish elites has failed
-The U.S. on January 11, 2008 dropping 18 tons of explosives in the area
surrounding Baghdad proves that the region is far from secure
-As of August 2007 53 percent of Iraqis strongly oppose and 26 percent
somewhat oppose coalition forces presence in Iraq
-85 percent reported having “not very much” or “none at all” confidence in U.
S. and U.K. occupying forces
-A mere 18 percent of Iraqis believed the occupational forces made the
security situation in Iraq better
-57 percent of Iraqis said it was acceptable for insurgents to attack coalition
forces, with 48 percent of respondents said that it was acceptable for al
Qaeda in Iraq to attack coalition forces
-Six months into the Surge the people of Iraq thoroughly believed that the
strategy was ineffective:
-70 percent said security situation had gotten worse where U.S. Surge had
gone
-68 percent stated that the security situation in other areas of Iraq have gone
worse since the Surge, only 10 percent said that security had improved
-65 percent reported that the surge made it harder for Iraqi government to
carry out its work, only 12 percent said it had made it better
-67 percent said the pace of reconstruction had gotten worse due to the
Surge, only 9 percent said it got better
-67 percent said the pace of economic development had gotten worse, 6
percent said it had improved
Conclusion
It is clear that the people of Iraq do not trust the occupational forces nor their
ability to secure their country. Furthermore, Iraqis do not believe that the
surge strategy has improved conditions in the region. Namely the cease fire
carried out by the Mahdi Army and the Sunni Awakening have been
responsible for the slow down of violence in Iraq during the past few months.
These occurrences have done little to reconcile the country as a whole and
they may prove to be powder-kegs ready to explode into more Iraqi chaos in
2008.
The Sunni Awakening movement, although initially successful at fighting off
al-Qaeda forces in the region, could become a matter of grave concern.
America has armed, organized into units and paid nearly 100,000 Sunni men,
many of whom at some point were active in the insurgency. The Shiite
dominated Iraqi government, weary of such a large organized Sunni force will
soon insist that the Awakening units be disassembled. If these militias are
not effectively blended into the regular Iraqi Army or police force, there will be
tens of thousands of trained and armed Sunni’s with no source of income.
This is reminiscent of the disbanding of the Iraqi army following the initial
invasion; a move that had a devastating effect on the country.
The six month cease-fire call by the powerful Mahdi Army in late August, was
a move carried out by Moqtada al-Sadr in order to reorganize his
organization into a more effective unit. Al-Sadr has insisted that the goal of
his organization is to expel the occupation from Iraq. Since the cease fire
was enacted, Coalition forces have done little to undermine or restrict the
power of the Mahdi Army. When the cease fire expires at the end of
February, the Mahdi Army could return to violent, insurgent measures with
the added help of greater organizational and strategic capabilities.
The promises of the Bush Administration to reduce troops on the ground as
security improves leaves the impression of a surge. In actuality, as
conditions worsen, the troops will have to remain. This is a troop build-up,
not a surge.
All together the Surge (troop build-up) of upwards of 30,000 new troops to
Iraq brought more violence, more refugees, greater distrust of the Iraqis while
failing to bring about a more stable Iraq. A larger occupational force will not
be able to solve the problems of Iraq; peace and understanding cannot be
pressed upon a nation by a foreign entity. Although Iraq has remained a
nation in turmoil, one thing unites its people: a clear disdain for the
occupational forces and a belief that the presence of such a force is a
distinct root for the violence plaguing their country.
The Honourable Michael Wilson
Canadian Ambassador to the United States of America
501 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20001
January 25, 2008
Dear Ambassador Wilson,
We have chosen to contact you concerning a difficult task but a simple request:
that the present Canadian government make true the vision of one of its great
prime ministers Pierre Trudeau who said, "Canada should be a refuge from
militarism."
Prime Minister Trudeau was referring to the war in Vietnam, but his sentiments
hold true as once again the United States is embroiled in an illegal and immoral
occupation into which Canada has refused to send troops. The Canadian
government by not sending its own troops with the "coalition of the willing"
recognized that the war was illegal in keeping with the Geneva Accords but will
not, at present, allow US war resisters who are attempting to comply with
international law the refuge that Prime Minister Trudeau spoke of so many years
ago.
As soldiers who have served in Iraq and mothers of soldiers who have seen their
sons returned broken, the members of the Washington DC and the Ft. Meade
chapters of Iraq Veterans Against the War are asking that the Canadian
government allow service members the functional ability to comply with
international law without facing persecution from the military. Soldiers of
consciences face not just prison time from the Uniform Code of Military Justice
(UCMJ) but also unofficial persecution, which has included unrelenting
harassment and death treats. Thankfully, none of these death threats have
been carried out, but it is only a matter of time before one is. This could,
however, be avoided if Canada lives up to its reputation as an international
refuge from militarism.
The members of the US military volunteer to fight when their country is in need
of defense, but despite the volunteer label, service members cannot leave the
military on their own accord. They are subject to the courts guidance for their
consciences. But what is a service member to do when their conscience is
directly conflicted by US policy? The UCMJ and military regulations only offer
Conscientious Objection to those who disagree with all wars, but not those who
would not fight in ones they believe to be illegal under international law. Some
have chosen to violate their conscience while others have chosen to seek
refuge in your country.
Canada once welcomed Americans who chose going north over violating their
consciences. In return, Canada received a boost to its economy, as well as its
moral authority in world politics. Some of those expatriates from America have
become successful Canadians in both business and government. There is
another generation of brave Americans applying to become Brave Canadians so
our request is simple: LET THEM STAY!
Geoffrey Millard
______________________________________
DC Chapter president
Iraq Veterans Against the War
Trey Kindlinger
______________________________________
Ft Meade Chapter president
Iraq Veterans Against the War
Tina Richards
_____________________________________
Mother of a Marine 80% disabled
from two tours in Iraq
Founder of Grassroots America
Canadian Ambassador to the United States of America
501 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20001
January 25, 2008
Dear Ambassador Wilson,
We have chosen to contact you concerning a difficult task but a simple request:
that the present Canadian government make true the vision of one of its great
prime ministers Pierre Trudeau who said, "Canada should be a refuge from
militarism."
Prime Minister Trudeau was referring to the war in Vietnam, but his sentiments
hold true as once again the United States is embroiled in an illegal and immoral
occupation into which Canada has refused to send troops. The Canadian
government by not sending its own troops with the "coalition of the willing"
recognized that the war was illegal in keeping with the Geneva Accords but will
not, at present, allow US war resisters who are attempting to comply with
international law the refuge that Prime Minister Trudeau spoke of so many years
ago.
As soldiers who have served in Iraq and mothers of soldiers who have seen their
sons returned broken, the members of the Washington DC and the Ft. Meade
chapters of Iraq Veterans Against the War are asking that the Canadian
government allow service members the functional ability to comply with
international law without facing persecution from the military. Soldiers of
consciences face not just prison time from the Uniform Code of Military Justice
(UCMJ) but also unofficial persecution, which has included unrelenting
harassment and death treats. Thankfully, none of these death threats have
been carried out, but it is only a matter of time before one is. This could,
however, be avoided if Canada lives up to its reputation as an international
refuge from militarism.
The members of the US military volunteer to fight when their country is in need
of defense, but despite the volunteer label, service members cannot leave the
military on their own accord. They are subject to the courts guidance for their
consciences. But what is a service member to do when their conscience is
directly conflicted by US policy? The UCMJ and military regulations only offer
Conscientious Objection to those who disagree with all wars, but not those who
would not fight in ones they believe to be illegal under international law. Some
have chosen to violate their conscience while others have chosen to seek
refuge in your country.
Canada once welcomed Americans who chose going north over violating their
consciences. In return, Canada received a boost to its economy, as well as its
moral authority in world politics. Some of those expatriates from America have
become successful Canadians in both business and government. There is
another generation of brave Americans applying to become Brave Canadians so
our request is simple: LET THEM STAY!
Geoffrey Millard
______________________________________
DC Chapter president
Iraq Veterans Against the War
Trey Kindlinger
______________________________________
Ft Meade Chapter president
Iraq Veterans Against the War
Tina Richards
_____________________________________
Mother of a Marine 80% disabled
from two tours in Iraq
Founder of Grassroots America