• Taking the Gloves Off

Replies: 9   Views: 3346
Up one level

 • Taking the Gloves Off

Posted by arthur at 2007-04-04 09:44 AM
I'd like to start a discussion what sort of approach we should take in launching some polemics on the web and in newspapers etc.


My view is there is now very little pretence from the right (including the pseudo-left) that they do not support the violent suppression of democracy in the Middle East.

There is a flimsy cover of trying to sound as though they are appalled by death and destruction inflicted on Iraqis by American aggressors, referencing "carnage" etc. They should be nailed on the fact that they know that mass murder of Iraqis is being carried out by terrorists to intimidate people electing their own government and that the loud mouthed demands for withdrawal that are very popular at the moment come from people who expect there to be more carnage if US troops are withdrawn.

In some cases that is what people want and in others its because they know that the troops won't be withdrawn (and in others it is part of conscious pressure for policy changes by the Iraqi government by threatening withdrawal if it doesn't change policies (some, but not all of which changes are desirable).

But in all cases it is despicable lack of solidarity against victims of the blackest possible reaction.

 • Re: Taking the Gloves Off

Posted by keza at 2007-04-07 04:30 AM
I agree that we should be taking a gloves off approach here.

Despite the fact that there is a lot of confusion among people in general about US strategy and why they went to war in Iraq, there should be no confusion about solidarity with the Iraqi people against this black reaction.

The flimsy cover of media commentators who write about "the carnage" and  simply blame it on the USA should be torn to shreds. And really it shouldn't be so hard to do.

I was just reading a report in the New York Times  which runs together a report of insurgents attacking Shia with a chlorine bomb in Ramadi and a day long battle between US forces and Shia militia south of Baghdad.  It's an example of a completely non-analytical report of "the carnage".

The article describes the chlorine bombing at the beginning of the article:

The explosion burned victims’ lungs, eyes and skin. Dr. Ali Abdullah Saleh, of the main Ramadi hospital, said 30 people had been admitted with shrapnel wounds and 15 had been sent to a second hospital in the city. He said 50 people had been admitted for breathing problems.

It was at least the sixth chlorine bomb detonated in Anbar Province since late January and the most lethal, though it appears that most victims were killed by the explosion rather than the chlorine. Insurgents have also used chlorine bombs in the northern part of Baghdad, the capital, and near Taji, a town about 20 miles to the north.

The attacker in Ramadi struck in the late morning of the Muslim day of prayer, when children off from school usually play in the street and adults run errands and visit before going to the mosque at midday.



Then it moves without a break to a report of the US battle with Shiite miltia members and returns abruptly at the end to a bit more about the chlorine bombing:



The bomb blast in Anbar Province left residents shaken.

Sabir Muhammad al-Rishawi, a shopkeeper who sells mobile phones, was close to the explosion.

“There were many people outside their homes because usually on Friday, you see a lot of activity in our area,” he said. “Then we saw a fuel tanker come close to the police checkpoint. The policemen shot at the driver and he exploded his truck to destroy the building close to the area he was trying to bomb. I felt my temperature start to rise and then we knew that there was chlorine in the bombs.”

Chlorine is widely available because it is used in water purification plants. Insurgents linked to Al Qaeda have become increasingly adept at stealing the chlorine, raiding water plants in the areas of Anbar that they control, said Colonel Dulaimi, the Anbar security chief.

The chlorine is trucked from Jordan and Syria. Insurgents recently held up four chlorine trucks on the route to Water Ministry warehouses in Baghdad. As a result, Anbar officials stopped 12 other chlorine trucks that were in Trebil, near the Jordanian border.

“We’ve stopped these trucks from moving further into Anbar until we can prepare good protective convoy for them,” Colonel Dulaimi said.

Chlorine gas, first used in World War I, is a choking agent. There is no antidote for it. The only remedy is to try to remove it from clothes, skin and eyes with soap and water, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta. If the exposure is limited, people generally survive without suffering lasting damage.

The symptoms can be as slight as a burning in the lungs, coughing, tearing eyes and a burning sensation on the skin. Or they can be far more dire, destroying the delicate lung tissue and making people feel as if they are suffocating.

Colonel Dulaimi said that even though the bomb destroyed a building with six apartments, the city was fortunate.



The impact of such reporting is clearly to create the impression that the Iraqis are all just killing each other and it's  a terrible, out-of-control  situation created by  getting rid of Saddam.


We ought to be able to come in very strongly here and call for a solidarity movement with the Iraqi people against the enemies of democratic change who have now resorted to slaughtering people with chemical weapons.  Currently this appalling black repression  seems to be just passing people by as they call for troops to be withdrawn. 


We should be able to make it crystal clear that calling for the withdrawal of troops does amount to siding with chlorine bombers.  This should be clear even to people who opposed the war in the first place.





 • Re: Taking the Gloves Off

Posted by arthur at 2007-04-07 08:26 PM
Yep, Just on the side, the use of chemical warfare in Ramadi is by Al Qaeda against Sunni, not Shia and reflects local Sunni tribes (and some Baathists) having already turned against them.


Theme should elaborate on it being a small minority of terrorists attacking the Iraqi people in the same way they attacked Americans on 9/11 and Australians and Indonesians in Bali and cowardly appeasers want to let them win while also boasting superior morality.


 • Re: Taking the Gloves Off

Posted by youngmarxist at 2007-04-07 09:06 PM
Perhaps it would be effective to say something like:

No matter what you think of Bush, the Iraqi people are being attacked, and need our support.

It strikes me that any proposal to stand by the Iraqis automatically gets you the response:

But what about Bush's dangerous and illegal war???

So if you start off by at least acknowledging that argument exists, you might get through to more people.

 • Re: Taking the Gloves Off

Posted by dalek at 2007-04-09 08:46 PM

re taking the gloves off. Perhaps the people mentioned in this item could be asked for their opinion:

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Iraqi_Shiites_Unite_in_protest_against_0409.html

Of course they are probably just - "islamofascists"- not representative- radical ratbags-rabble and not worth consulting eh?  

Dalek

 • Re: Taking the Gloves Off

Posted by youngmarxist at 2007-04-09 11:43 PM
Gee dalek, it took you twelve whole hours after the story came out to post that. Reflexes a little slow?

The Shi'ite's who are protesting in that story were called out by Moqtada al-Sadr, who is one of the people playing both sides of the fence - politician by day, winking (at least) at death squads overnight.

No doubt he will either have to agree to rein in his militias, or be treated as part of the problem.

As far as 'islamofascists' go, it should be pretty clear, if you cared, that we have generally referred to Sunni and Wahabi Islamist fundamentalists as 'islamofascists'. Those groups are the worst enemies of the Shia, and hate them like poison.

Islamofascists are the common enemy of Iraqi democrats and the Shias who protested against the US occupation.

If you have anything of actual substance to say, instead of spreading your anger all over Last Superpower why don't you start now?


 • Re: Taking the Gloves Off

Posted by dalek at 2007-04-11 12:15 AM

Er Young Marxist, Check out the underlined bits:

Large anti-US rally held in Iraq


By Anthony Pickles and agencies

Last Updated: 12:48am BST 10/04/2007


 

  • In pictures: Thousands join anti-US demonstration

    Thousands of Shiites have converged on the holy city of Najaf for an anti-US rally called by radical cleric Moqtada al-Sadr as the country marked the fourth anniversary of the fall of Saddam Hussein's regime.

    Some Sunni religious groups were also seen participating in the rally.

     
    Iraqi protesters burn a US flag
    Iraqi protesters burn a US flag

    Large crowds of men, women and children, holding flags and anti-US banners, gathered in Najaf and the nearby twin city of Kufa for the protest which is also seen as a show of strength for the cleric who himself has been in self-exile for more than two months.

    A day earlier, the fundamentalist cleric issued a statement ordering his militiamen to redouble their battle to oust American forces and argued that Iraq's army and police should join him in defeating "your archenemy."

    The rally will initially begin in Kufa and then head to Najaf's Sadrain Square.

    Members of Sadr's movement were seen guiding the crowds, while Iraqi police and army soldiers guarded key checkpoints in and around Najaf and Kufa. At many places Iraqi and US flags were painted on the ground and being trampled by the Shiite crowd.

    One banner read: "Brothers Sunni and Shiite, this country would not be sold." Another said: "Death to America."

    Iraqi soldiers in uniform joined the crowd, which was led by at least a dozen clerics - including one Sunni. Thirty members of the Iraqi Islamic Party, a Sunni group, travelled several hundred miles from Basra to attend the rally.

    It was not immediately known whether Sadr himself would address the rally later in Najaf. A senior official in his organisation in Najaf, Salah al-Obaydi, called the rally a "call for liberation."

    He said: "We're hoping that by next year's anniversary, we will be an independent and liberated Iraq with full sovereignty."

    The demonstration was peaceful, but two ambulances were seen moving slowly with the marching crowd, poised to help if violence or stampedes broke out.

    In the statement distributed in Najaf on Sunday, Sadr called on Iraqi forces to stop co-operating with America.

    "You, the Iraqi army and police forces, don't walk alongside the occupiers, because they are your archenemy," the statement said.

    He urged his followers not to attack fellow Iraqis but to turn all their efforts on American forces.

    "God has ordered you to be patient in front of your enemy, and unify your efforts against them - not against the sons of Iraq," it said.

  •  • Re: Taking the Gloves Off

    Posted by byork at 2007-04-11 04:56 AM

    dalek likes to belittle others yet he is so reactionary that he cannot even understand that the big anti-US demonstrations in Iraq are evidence of the democracy that the US and other allies of Iraq helped create via the overthrow of the old fascist regime. A demonstration like that, openly against government policy, would never have happened under Saddam. (And, yes, this is the same dalek who opposed the multi-party elections after the old regime was toppled).

     

    Of course, dalek, now that he is challenged, will try to deny that he supports the anti-US 'united front' in Iraq under al-Sadr's leadership, but the pattern is all too clear.

     

    It really doesn't get worse than this.

     

    Barry

     • Re: Taking the Gloves Off

    Posted by arthur at 2007-04-11 08:25 AM
    As far as I can make out the demo is a reflection of Sadr's climb down.

    No time to elaborate on this but you can expect much louder shouting at the US as realignment towards a national unity government that can smash jihadis, baathists and death squads continues.

    Sadr would be in a more awkward position accepting the current crackdown on the death squads if he was not shouting louder at the US.

    Likewise the Iraqi Islamic Party (Muslim Brotherhood) needs to shout louder at the US because a sharper break is developing between Sunni leaders within the political process and jihadis and hard core Baathists outside it.

    Both parties are part of the current governing coalition which is opposed to US withdrawal (at present).

    Incidentally both SCIRI and Daawa were also holding demonstrations against the US shortly after the invasion. It was a necessary preliminary to joining the Iraqi Governing Council. Likewise the "Communist" party (also represented in the current cabinet) put out statements opposing the invasion. The difference was that Sadr's forces really were out to cause problems for the US forces at the time (eg he issued a fatwa in support of looting as long as clerics were given their split) while SCIRI, Daawa and the CP were just posturing.

    Its not clear yet but it looks to me like the demos are a sign of Sadr backing away from causing problems (like condoning the death squads), in favour of just posturing.

     • Re: Taking the Gloves Off

    Posted by dalek at 2007-05-09 11:01 PM

    Is this what you men by taking off the Gloves?U.S. Recruiting Hussein's Spies

    Published on Sunday, August 24, 2003 by the Washington Post
    U.S. Recruiting Hussein's Spies
    Occupation Forces Hope Covert Campaign Will Help Identify Resistance
    by Anthony Shadid and Daniel Williams
     

    BAGHDAD, Aug. 23 -- U.S.-led occupation authorities have begun a covert campaign to recruit and train agents with the once-dreaded Iraqi intelligence service to help identify resistance to American forces here after months of increasingly sophisticated attacks and bombings, according to U.S. and Iraqi officials.

    The extraordinary move to recruit agents of former president Saddam Hussein's security services underscores a growing recognition among U.S. officials that American military forces -- already stretched thin -- cannot alone prevent attacks like the devastating truck bombing of the U.N. headquarters this past week, the officials said.


    Hussein's security forces were a suffocating presence in Iraq and still cast a long shadow.

    Authorities have stepped up the recruitment over the past two weeks, one senior U.S. official said, despite sometimes adamant objections by members of the U.S.-appointed Iraqi Governing Council, who complain that they have too little control over the pool of recruits. While U.S. officials acknowledge the sensitivity of cooperating with a force that embodied the ruthlessness of Hussein's rule, they assert that an urgent need for better and more precise intelligence has forced unusual compromises.

    "The only way you can combat terrorism is through intelligence," the senior official said. "It's the only way you're going to stop these people from doing what they're doing." He added: "Without Iraqi input, that's not going to work."

    Officials are reluctant to disclose how many former agents have been recruited since the effort began. But Iraqi officials say they number anywhere from dozens to a few hundred, and U.S. officials acknowledge that the recruitment is extensive.

    "We're reaching out very widely," said one official with the U.S.-led administration, who like most spoke on condition of anonymity because of sensitivity over questions of intelligence and sources.

    Added a Western diplomat: "There is an obvious evolution in American thinking. First the police are reconstituted, then the army. It is logical that intelligence officials from the regime would also be recruited."

    Officials say the first line of intelligence-gathering remains the Iraqi police, who number 6,500 in Baghdad and 33,000 nationwide. But that force is hampered in intelligence work by a lack of credibility with a disenchanted public, and its numbers remain far below what U.S. officials say they need to bring order to an unruly capital. Across Iraq, walk-in informers have provided tips on weapons caches and locations of suspected guerrillas, but many Iraqis dismiss those reports as haphazard and sometimes motivated by a desire for personal gain.

    The emphasis in recruitment appears to be on the intelligence service known as the Mukhabarat, one of four branches in Hussein's former security service, although it is not the only target for the U.S. effort. The Mukhabarat, whose name itself inspired fear in ordinary Iraqis, was the foreign intelligence service, the most sophisticated of the four. Within that service, officials have reached out to agents who once were assigned to Syria and Iran, Iraqi officials and former intelligence agents say.

    For years, U.S. relations with both Syria and Iran have remained tense and, if anything, have deteriorated since American forces overthrew Hussein's government on April 9. Once-vigilantly patrolled borders stretching hundreds of miles are remarkably porous, and L. Paul Bremer, the U.S. civilian administrator of Iraq, has openly accused Syria of allowing foreign fighters to enter Iraq. A senior American official said those fighters inside Iraq, mainly from Saudi Arabia and Syria, number between 100 and 200.

    The emphasis on intelligence mirrors a decision earlier this month by Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, the commander of U.S. ground forces, to minimize large military sweeps to the north and west of Baghdad. Launched in June and July, the sweeps rounded up hundreds of Iraqis, but angered residents who complained of mistreatment, arbitrary arrests and humiliation at the hands of U.S. soldiers.

    Sanchez and others have suggested that the anger caused by those raids could bolster the support for guerrillas, who are thought to number in the thousands, mainly in the Sunni Muslim-dominated regions that provided Hussein much of his support.

    The guerrilla tactics have grown in sophistication over the four months of the occupation. But U.S. officials said the guerrillas remain decentralized, with no sign yet of national coordination. In the view of Bremer, a former counterterrorism specialist, and other U.S. officials, their amorphous nature makes them harder to stamp out, and makes more pressing the need for intelligence to pinpoint raids and create the possibility of infiltrating the groups.

    "The expectation is that we're going to have to fight it out," one senior official said.

    The official said it might require 500,000 U.S. troops, perhaps far more, to secure every potential target in the country -- an unlikely prospect, given that many U.S. allies are balking at the prospect of sending more soldiers, especially without a U.N. mandate. The United States has 132,000 troops in the country, and there are 17,000 other soldiers, the majority of them British.

    "The key is to try to stay ahead of this game and prevent it from happening," the senior official said.

    At a news conference today, Bremer repeatedly stressed the need for better intelligence, saying that U.S. authorities were "constantly working to refine and upgrade our intelligence capabilities."

    The goal, he said, was "to find and, if necessary, kill as many of them as possible before they find and kill us."

    Hussein's security forces were a suffocating presence in Iraq and still cast a long shadow.

    Of the four security branches, the Mukhabarat was the best-treated and often supplied agents for the other branches. The largest was internal security, known as Amn al-Amm, which focused on domestic intelligence. The third was special security, which protected government officials. These three answered to the presidency. Only military intelligence was nominally independent of Hussein's inner circle and operated within the Defense Ministry. The Baath Party, with membership in the millions, provided a check of sorts, with its almost endless network of informers in every town and village.

    Within the Mukhabarat, former intelligence officers say, the branches dedicated to Iran, Israel and, during the 1990s, the United Nations were the most important. One officer, a 23-year veteran who spied on the United Nations, said about 100 agents worked on Iran, between 75 and 100 on the United Nations and 50 each on Israel and Syria, in addition to their networks and contacts.

    Earlier this summer, Bremer dissolved those services, along with the information and defense ministries. But Wafiq Samarrai, a former military intelligence chief who went into exile in 1995 and retains contacts, said U.S. officials were seeking to reconstitute them in some form. "They are trying to rebuild it very quietly," he said.

    One officer, who was not contacted by the Americans, said he believed that about 300 people were being recruited. Adil Abdul Mahdi, the director of the political bureau for the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, one of the groups taking part in the Governing Council, said his organization has a list of almost 20 names of recruited officers from the dreaded Fifth Section, an organ inside military intelligence that focused on Iran. He said his group believed that at least one of those agents was sent to the United States for training last month. An official with the U.S.-led administration said he was not aware of agents having been sent to the United States.

    While not disclosing how they check the operatives, U.S. officials said they believed some agents remained "fairly untainted" by Hussein's government. But they said they recognized the potential pitfalls in relying on an instrument loathed by most Iraqis and renowned across the Arab world for its casual use of torture, fear, intimidation, rape and imprisonment.

    "We have to be very careful in how we vet them, in how we go through their backgrounds," the senior American official said. "We don't want to put a cancer right in the middle of this."

    Another official called the recruitment part of an ongoing struggle between principle and what he called the practical needs of the occupation. "Pragmatically, those are people who are potentially very useful because they have access to information, so you have to compromise on that," he said. "What we need to do is make sure they are indeed aware of the error of their ways."

    While many Iraqi officials say they are aware of the recruitment, some have spoken against the use of former operatives, and others have warned against reconstituting an intelligence service before an independent Iraqi government takes charge. Former exiles who cooperated with the Americans were trailed by Iraqi intelligence for years, and among them the issue is particularly sensitive. "We've always criticized the procedure of recruiting from the old regime's officers. We think it is a mistake," Mahdi said. "We've told them you have some bad people in your security apparatus."

    The objections come in the context of a struggle between Bremer and the Governing Council over the degree of Iraqi control over the security services. Bremer said today that despite Iraqi objections, security will remain in the hands of U.S. forces. But many Iraqis, both former operatives and U.S.-allied officials, are dismissive of the U.S. ability to run intelligence inside the country. They say U.S. officials lack the means to recruit effective networks and are overwhelmed with information of dubious quality.

    "There's a difference between how we perceive things and how they react," said one council member. "There's no quick response to intelligence. The Americans have huge quantities of it, most of it nonsense. They have no means of distinguishing."

    © 2003 The Washington Post Company