Open Tech Support
Open Tech Support Archives
Back to HomeCommunityReviewsGuidesDownloadsTech LinksMarketplaceContact Us
 »  SITE NAVIGATION
»  OTS Home
»  OTS Forums
»  OTS Archives

»  About our site
»  Search our site
»  Support our site

»  What is this site?
»  Who are we?
 
 
 »  ADVERTISMENT
 
  Pages: 1

Operation: Iraqi Freedom

(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)


Posted by: 9:35

http://www.boston.com/news/world/ar...face_clampdown/
Quote:

Returning Fallujans will face clampdown
By Anne Barnard, Globe Staff | December 5, 2004

FALLUJAH, Iraq -- The US military is drawing up plans to keep insurgents from regaining control of this battle-scarred city, but returning residents may find that the measures make Fallujah look more like a police state than the democracy they have been promised.

Under the plans, troops would funnel Fallujans to so-called citizen processing centers on the outskirts of the city to compile a database of their identities through DNA testing and retina scans. Residents would receive badges displaying their home addresses that they must wear at all times. Buses would ferry them into the city, where cars, the deadliest tool of suicide bombers, would be banned.

Marine commanders working in unheated, war-damaged downtown buildings are hammering out the details of their paradoxical task: Bring back the 300,000 residents in time for January elections without letting in insurgents, even though many Fallujans were among the fighters who ruled the city until the US assault drove them out in November, and many others cooperated with fighters out of conviction or fear.

One idea that has stirred debate among Marine officers would require all men to work, for pay, in military-style battalions. Depending on their skills, they would be assigned jobs in construction, waterworks, or rubble-clearing platoons.


I just want to stop the article here to say one thing:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Quote:

"You have to say, 'Here are the rules,' and you are firm and fair. That radiates stability," said Lieutenant Colonel Dave Bellon, intelligence officer for the First Regimental Combat Team, the Marine regiment that took the western half of Fallujah during the US assault and expects to be based downtown for some time.

Bellon asserted that previous attempts to win trust from Iraqis suspicious of US intentions had telegraphed weakness by asking, " 'What are your needs? What are your emotional needs?' All this Oprah [stuff]," he said. "They want to figure out who the dominant tribe is and say, 'I'm with you.' We need to be the benevolent, dominant tribe.

"They're never going to like us," he added, echoing other Marine commanders who cautioned against raising hopes that Fallujans would warmly welcome troops when they return to ruined houses and rubble-strewn streets. The goal, Bellon said, is "mutual respect."

Most Fallujans have not heard about the US plans. But for some people in a city that has long opposed the occupation, any presence of the Americans, and the restrictions they bring, feels threatening.

"When the insurgents were here, we felt safe," said Ammar Ahmed, 19, a biology student at Anbar University. "At least I could move freely in the city; now I cannot."


A model city

US commanders and Iraqi leaders have declared their intention to make Fallujah a "model city," where they can maintain the security that has eluded them elsewhere. They also want to avoid a repeat -- on a smaller scale -- of what happened after the invasion of Iraq, when a quick US victory gave way to a disorganized reconstruction program thwarted by insurgent violence and intimidation.

To accomplish those goals, they think they will have to use coercive measures allowed under martial law imposed last month by Prime Minister Iyad Allawi.

"It's the Iraqi interim government that's coming up with all these ideas," Major General Richard Natonski, who commanded the Fallujah assault and oversees its reconstruction, said of the plans for identity badges and work brigades.

But US officers in Fallujah say that the Iraqi government's involvement has been less than hoped for, and that determining how to bring the city safely back to life falls largely on their shoulders.

"I think our expectations have been too high for a nascent government to be perfectly organized" and ready for such a complex task, Colonel Mike Shupp, the regimental commander, said at his headquarters in downtown Fallujah.

While one senior Marine said he fantasized last month that Allawi would ride a bulldozer into Fallujah, the prime minister has come no closer than the US military base outside the city.

The Iraqi Interior Ministry has not delivered the 1,200 police officers it had promised, although the Defense Ministry has provided troops on schedule, US officials said. Iraqi ministry officials have visited the city, but delegations have often failed to show up. US officials say that is partly out of fear of ongoing fighting that sends tank and machine-gun fire echoing through the streets.

Meanwhile, the large-scale return of residents to a city where only Humvees and dogs travel freely will make military operations as well as reconstruction a lot harder. The military must start letting people in, one neighborhood at a time, within weeks if Fallujans are to register for national elections before the end of January. The government insists the elections will proceed as scheduled despite widespread violence.

The Marines say several hundred civilians are hunkered down in houses or at a few mosques being used as humanitarian centers. In the western half of the city, civilians have not been allowed to move about unescorted. In the eastern half, controlled by another regiment, they were allowed out a few hours a day until men waving a white flag shot and killed two Marines.

"The clock is ticking. Civilians are coming soon," Lieutenant Colonel Leonard DiFrancisci told his men one recent evening as they warmed themselves by a kerosene heater in the ramshackle building they commandeered as a headquarters. "It's going to get a lot more difficult. We've had a little honeymoon period."

A tall order If DiFrancisci's experience dealing with a small delegation of Iraqi aid workers is any indication, sorting out civilians from insurgents in large numbers will be overwhelming.

One afternoon last week, DiFrancisci, a reservist from Melbourne, Fla., and a mechanical engineer, was ordered to escort workers from the Iraqi Red Crescent Society out of the city on their way back to Baghdad. The Red Crescent, an equivalent to the Red Cross, had been butting heads for days with Marines who initially denied the aid organization entry to the city, insisting the military was taking care of civilians' needs. The society finally won a Marine escort in and refused to leave, setting up in an abandoned house.

Dr. Said Hakki, the group's president, met DiFrancisci and Lieutenant Colonel Gary Montgomery at a mosque, eager to mend fences. "We want to play by your rules," Hakki said.

Montgomery agreed that Marines would ferry a group of aid workers to Baghdad, along with several women and children who had been rescued from houses. But when the Humvees pulled up to the Red Crescent house, scores of young men who had taken refuge there were milling around the streets. There was no way to tell whether they were fighters.

"All these military-age males are out during curfew," Montgomery told Hakki. "If you all don't follow the rules, you're going to get people killed."

Tensions rose when about a dozen women and children started climbing into ambulances for the ride to Baghdad. One man tried to get in, gave the Marines who challenged him several versions of his age, then decided not to go rather than discuss it further.

Suhad Molah, a young woman in a veil that showed only her eyes, was indignant that a translator said she might be Syrian because of her accent, implying she was the wife of a foreign fighter.

"I am Iraqi," she said, adding that she and her children had been trapped in their house for weeks.

The Marines were also suspicious when more than a dozen men, not the handful they expected, said they were Red Crescent staff members headed back to Baghdad. Some had no identification, and there was no way to verify whether they were the same men who had come out from Baghdad.

"This is not a 'muj' rescue service," DiFrancisci said, using slang for mujahideen, or holy warriors. Montgomery remarked, "The real negotiations start after you've agreed on something."

The Marines let the men go after Hakki vouched for them, but not before the Iraqis grew angry that their motives had been questioned. The convoy headed onto the highway, but only after a dozen Marines had spent two hours organizing and searching the vehicles. Back at their headquarters, the team debated the procedure for allowing civilians to return. Major Wade Weems warned that there should be a set number per day so that a backlog would not form behind the retina-scanning machine, fueling resentment.

When they heard of the proposal to require men to work, some Marines were skeptical that an angry public would work effectively if coerced. Others said the plan was based on US tactics that worked in postwar Germany. DiFrancisci said he would wait for more details. "There's something to be said for a firm hand," he said.



So in Iraq we have: Not enough troops, not enough equipment, no specialized training in urban occupation for our troops, no reconstruction taking place, and no one to reconstruct which means we have to force Iraqis into working. Kinda like slavery, but I'm sure they'll get payed fron our vast and wealthy war fund!

Oh God I can't wait to hear how the White House Press Secretary spins this



Posted by: redwench

hey, its freedom and democracy baby. after all, we did go there to relieve them of the burden of a dictator so they could be free, right?



Posted by: Gunslinger

I wonder if their badges will be shaped like the Star of David?



Posted by: redwench

rofl. i wonder what shape would work. a bomb shape?



Posted by: SKYHN

Pretty sure its this.



Posted by: laborat

if ever there was any doubt that U.S. foriegn policy in the Mid-East is seriously skewed toward gunboat diplomacy, it is reports like the above that make it harder for even the most ardent hawks to ignore.

I mean, what sort of war is this? We have politicians who plan and instigate the war over protesting generals in the field who say it cann't be done. Then after we do go in and the military meets the objective...i.e. topple dictator, leave country in disarray...when most countries would then be courting diplomatic ways out of the mess...we have Generals in the field planning and instigating social policy for the defeated Iraqi people, the sum of which seems to be martial law until elections can be held that would then legitimize that same martial law as democracy *cough cough through a puppet government that no one seems to want, least of all the Iraqi people.

While I am as patriotic as the next guy and have no qualms about waving the flag for a good and righteous war in which there is a clear cut enemy and a clear cut goal, this "My Country Right or Wrong" attitude is so seriously dangerous to our Country's best interests that the pussies in Congress on both sides of the aisle should come forward and tell it like it is for a change instead of platitude after platitude being offered the current administration.

We had no clear exit strategy in mind when we went in to Iraq. Hell, we didn't have much of an entrance stratgy either, considering the logisitics breakdown that left the troops in the field vulnerable. We had no actual intellegence that WOMD were in the country. We had no actual intelligence that Osama Ben-Laden and Al Queda we being financed by Suddam. All of this stuff is coming after the fact that there might be, there could be, there is!!! some proof finally after a years full of sifting through rubble to find it. Even then the actual facts show likewise to what the administration is claiming.

While Bush is fiddling in Iraq, the rest of world's attitudes toward the United States has drifted toward antagonism and hostility. What Allies we have, we have clearly bought and paid for. While it is true that both England and Israel have vested interests. The policy of an unstable Middle East does not bode well for our long term goals in the region, if indeed we even have any. Should anyone wonder why all of a sudden, the whole world seems turned against us...our current Secretary of State was a former General, the next one maybe if Bush has his was will be our former National Security Advisor...neither of which in my view offer much of an olive branch to countrys on our collective "shit" list of terrorist supporting lowlifes.

The biggest thing that bothers me about this whole affair...the Iraqi police action, is that trillions of dollars will exchange hands and realign themselves into new camps of important players. We all know about the Halburton angle and Cheney...but even that doesn't come close to the other deals that we don't know anything about. The current intelligence bill offers a clue as to what might be at stake, when senators object to monies being tied up and controlled by, one intelligence director. You gotta look at where the money is flowing to see who really benefits from this war.

If Oil was the objective like many attest, then we clearly have not met that objective to our satisfaction. If it was the manipulation of the oil market, then OPEC came out the clear winner and we are talking about an organization that is made up of largely muslim countries. Saudi Arabia came out the clear winner once the smoke cleared. The same country we found had elements in the government no less that were funding terrorists. Something doesn't make sense. or does it.

In the final analysis most of us will just yawn and say, well, there isn't a damn thing I can do about it. And considering how the last election turned out, the majority in the country didn't even bother to vote. I mourn the loss of a true and strong republic with democracy at it's core. Somewhere along the line, State's right's turning into whatever monies and favors our elected representatives could manage to eke out of Congress and the President. We are more intent upon getting what is ours, that we fail to realize that we are competing for boondoggles that help insure the re-election of Members of Congress and that being good at back room politics does not necessarily mean the best men and women for the job get elected. They don't.

I sit here and gaze out my window and realize that I can think of a hundred things wrong with this Country right now and less than a handful of things that are right. Sometimes I doubt even those.
Laws suck. Policiies suck. Politicians suck. the Media sucks. Polls suck. Wars suck. especially wars that show frightening insights into the miltary mind of what form of government they would prefer if we didn't have this thing called a Constitution to deal with.



Posted by: Oldcrocd

Laborat
As usual I see you are in good form and sound as though you are recovering well, thank goodness.
Your post, yet again is on target of so many of us that wonder which way is forward. For we have been going backwards for so long, I am doubtful if any of our politicians remember which way is forward.
It seems to me that unless there is a sign with either $ or £ 's the same people go past the obvious routes?
The world is becoming more dangerous by the hour, travel outside of our own countries distinctly difficult.
I a very glad that I am the age that I am and will not have to worry about the future for that many years hence, only where is there a safe place for the contents of the urn!!



Posted by: BooRadley

Quote:

Originally Posted by redwench
hey, its freedom and democracy baby. after all, we did go there to relieve them of the burden of a dictator so they could be free, right?

Quote:

Originally Posted by 9:35

So in Iraq we have: Not enough troops, not enough equipment, no specialized training in urban occupation for our troops, no reconstruction taking place


[FoxNews]
You're obviously a couple of communist America haters blinded by your partisan hatred of Bush and you try to twist and spin this into something bad to make Arabs hate us because you want America to fail!
[/FoxNews]



Posted by: redwench

damn straight.



Posted by: BooRadley

Commie. Why don't you just move to Iraq if you hate America and Jesus so much.



Posted by: laborat

I see no unpatriotic voices on this board...as for me, I love America, always have...yet, in recent years that familiar America has become less so somehow...I can't blame it on either the Democrats or the Republican, yet...I harbor resentments against the elected representatives of both parties for abandoning the needs of the country and it's citizenry to the greedy plundering of the public's assets to corporate interests, even other foreign governments! ... for a percentage of the take.

I vote for candidates chosen for me, often sadly, for the lesser of the two evils, or sadder still for the candidate that will bring the most money back to my state...knowing even as I do so, that by votingI am now in the minority of the eligible voters who fail to vote at all.

My kids are now in public schools that have police patrol the hallways and have monitors at the doorways that check machinery that scan for hidden weapons in backpacks and lunchpails. I can't have my kids go unacompanied anywhere lest some pervert or psycho snatch them up.


We still have children in this country that starve to death! Yet we give billions in countless aid to other country's for political or military reasons, yet we fail to fund programs for the poor in this country that would raise the standard of living and quality of life for them.

Is it any wonder that we are now known around the world in the same light we used to view the emerging nazi's in Germany during the thirties...we don't necessarily target Jews as they did but instead we persecute gays, muslims, blacks, asians and hispanics.

This stuff in Iraq doesn't surprise me. A lot of people support the notion of work camps, DNA profiling, and putting a conquored people to the task of rebuilding a country we destroyed in the process of "Liberation". Since we never had the necessary troops to really do what I thought was our primary mission...osama bin lad in afghanistan, and follow Bush's vendetta against Saddam...there is not much else we can do. Either way our troops have been under equipped, lied to about term to be served, and used more to protect the interests of the corporate raiders that descended into the war zone to reap profits from the government trough. I suppose that is one administration's notion of how to run a war...I just wish they did it right instead of half-assed.
okay...so the majority think its okay to do stuff like that.

But some, me included, don't necessarily see that as the way to ensure peace or prosperity for our children and their children. Just because they have a different opinion that maybe the majority hold as their view, doesn't mean that they are unamerican. Perhaps ...just perhaps...in some people's mind's...they are MORE american. If you have to ask why? then don't.



Posted by: BooRadley

I hope you recognize I was posting mockery of the last two years of bands of screaming retards howling that anyone who disagrees with the Rove/Bush policy on the Mideast is a communist America-hater treasonist, etc.

It was levity at the expense of the red state mentality.



Posted by: redwench

what if youre an ancharist America-hater treasonist?



Posted by: BooRadley

Anarchists are just like any other communist Bush-haters: The hate Jesus so they want George BUsh to fail, because Jesus wants George Bush to kill Iraqis.



Posted by: laborat

Nothing wrong with parody, Boo... I prefer mockery myself but things are so so pathetic these days, that even Red has to stretch to make a humorous point.



Posted by: Oldcrocd

Quote:

Originally Posted by BooRadley
Anarchists are just like any other communist Bush-haters: The hate Jesus so they want George BUsh to fail, because Jesus wants George Bush to kill Iraqis.


First of all we have a weak feeble excuse for invasion of another country, with the ONLY valid reason being we didn't like the dictator who ran it. Now we have discussion and people wanting to nuke the area, then un patriotic if you EVEN dare to think differently from the State version of the truth. Where folks is this type of thinking going?
Under the above it means ANY country is at liberty, according to above to invade another country to remove a dictator they do not like! Some new world we live in.
Has the past experience of Vietnam not taught anyone anything; the parallel of the present action has developed straight into exactly the same scenario - a no win situation.

The communist chant I thought went out with Macarthy or are memories not long enough to remember those years?
As for Bush haters, well I think another country should invade the US and remove him if they don't like him, seems to be the fashion these days!! (After all he was only elected by 25% of the population)



Posted by: redwench

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oldcrocd
As for Bush haters, well I think another country should invade the US and remove him if they don't like him, seems to be the fashion these days!!


works for me. i do hope they bring food and drinks for the party after.



 
Copyright 2000-2008 Open Tech Support.  All Rights Reserved.  Site Design and Development by Tolitz Rosel.