Subscribe to this blog in Radio:
E-mail this blog's author, Martin Marprelate:  |
|
 |
Saturday, March 29, 2003 |
Good news, bad news
The good news is that this group of civilian was friendly…
…the bad news is that the Marines were starving (was that part of the “plan”?):
Iraqi civilians fleeing heavy fighting have stunned and delighted hungry US marines in central Iraq by giving them food, as guerrilla attacks continue to disrupt coalition supply lines to the rear.
3:28:11 PM 
|
|
…that has unnecessarily increased the danger faced by our men and women in Iraq. The only thing these guys seem to excel at is cooking the books and spouting BS:
(thanks to Josh)
Pentagon war games pit "Red Force" (simulating the enemy) against "Blue Force" (the United States). In this war game, as in many war games over the years, Van Riper played the Red Force commander. In his e-mail (which was promptly leaked to the Army Times then picked up, though in much less detail, by the Guardian and the Washington Post), Van Riper complained about Millennium Challenge 02, writing that, "Instead of a free-play, two-sided game … it simply became a scripted exercise." The conduct of the game did not allow "for the concepts of rapid decisive operations, effects-based operations, or operational net assessment to be properly assessed. … It was in actuality an exercise that was almost entirely scripted to ensure a Blue 'win.' "
For instance—and here is where he displayed prescience—Van Riper used motorcycle messengers to transmit orders to Red troops, thereby eluding Blue's super-sophisticated eavesdropping technology. He maneuvered Red forces constantly. At one point in the game, when Blue's fleet entered the Persian Gulf, he sank some of the ships with suicide-bombers in speed boats. (At that point, the managers stopped the game, "refloated" the Blue fleet, and resumed play.) Robert Oakley, a retired U.S. ambassador who played the Red civilian leader, told the Army Times that Van Riper was "out-thinking" Blue Force from the first day of the exercise.
Yet, Van Riper said in his e-mail, the game's managers remanded some of his moves as improper and simply blocked others from being carried out. According to the Army Times summary, "Exercise officials denied him the opportunity to use his own tactics and ideas against Blue, and on several occasions directed [Red Force] not to use certain weapons systems against Blue. It even ordered him to reveal the location of Red units."
Finally, Van Riper quit the game in protest, so as not to be associated with what would be misleading results. As he explained in his e-mail, "You don't come to a conclusion beforehand and then work your way to that conclusion. You see how the thing plays out." He added, somewhat ominously in retrospect, "My main concern was we'd see future forces trying to use these things when they've never been properly grounded in any sort of an experiment."
3:21:47 PM
|
|
Chalk up another scalp for the Librul Media
Hmmm… does a technology reporter report on the war or protesters?
No, didn’t think so… so this guy had no conflict of interest.
In other words his political views should not influence his ability to objectively report on faster microchips and modems.
So why was he suspended?
(Thanks to Romenesko)
-------------------------------------------
SF Chron's Norr suspended after participating in war protest
Romenesko Letters/San Jose Mercury News
San Francisco Chronicle technology columnist Henry Norr (left) says he was suspended without pay after getting arrested in "a peaceful civil disobedience" against the war. "The offense the Chronicle is charging me with is falsifying my timecard, but this is a bogus, after-the-fact cover for an act of political retaliation and an attempt to intimidate other employees," Norr writes in an e-mail. "For Thursday, the day I spent in jail, I took a sick day. I did so because I was sick -- heartsick over the beginning of the war, nauseated by the lies and the arrogance and the stupidity that led to it, and deeply depressed by the death and destruction it would bring."
> J-SCHOOL ASSOCIATE DEAN CYNTHIA GORNEY SAYS the question of whether a journalist forfeits rights to fully participate in public debate is "an enormously complicated question. Should a reporter have the right to hold political views, to vote, to quietly contribute to political campaigns? To most people the answer is yes. On the other hand, should a staff reporter assigned to cover a political issue take a position on the board of an advocacy group directly involved in that issue? Most everyone says no."
> Read the Chron's conflict of interest policy memo (Romenesko Memos)
Posted at 7:45:17 AM
E-mail this item | QuickLink: A27197
2:59:41 PM
|
|
"We believe that we're consistent with our plan and how we designed. There will always be things that occur on the battlefield that are not precisely as you calculated them in your design," said Brooks, Central Command's tall and steady deputy director of operations who has emerged as the chief daily briefer.
and said the current movement of 100,000 additional troops to the region had been part of the plan all along.
How to square that with this report?
US reinforcements face earlier deployment
The Pentagon may speed up the deployment of another regiment of troops it Iraq, a senior military official says.
The deputy director of operations of the Joint Staff, Major General Stanley McChrystal, says the 2nd Armoured Cavalry Regiment based in Fort Polk, Louisiana, may head off earlier than planned.
"There are discussions of potentially moving up part of its force to an earlier deployment," he said. <snip>
2:36:46 PM
|
|
Was this part of the plan too?
Rumsfeld accused of 'micromanaging' war
Senior US war planners have accused Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld of "micromanaging" operations in Iraq and ignoring recommendations from military officials, the New Yorker magazine reports.
"He thought he knew better. He was the decision-maker at every turn," one senior planner told the magazine, in its edition to be released on Monday.
Planners with the Joint Chiefs of Staff had recommended deploying four or more Army divisions, which Mr Rumsfeld rejected, the report said.
Their plan also called for shipping by sea hundreds of tanks and other heavy vehicles, enough for three or four divisions in advance, but Mr Rumsfeld chose to rely on equipment already in Kuwait, which was enough for one divison, the report said.
After Turkey's Parliament shocked war planners by refusing to allow tens of thousands of US troops to enter Iraq from Turkish soil, General Tommy Franks, head of US Central Command, had argued for delaying the war until those forces could enter from another route, it said.
But a former intelligence official says Mr Rumsfeld "overruled him".
"This is tragic. American lives are being lost," one senior planner told the magazine.
2:36:32 PM
|
|
Also, did the plan include
laying siege to every city in Iraq and starving the population into submission?
BASRA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, Iraq, March 29 -- Ten days after U.S. Marines and British troops stormed into southern Iraq, Basra is still under siege. Iraqi army regulars and members of the Saddam's Fedayeen militia have interspersed themselves among civilians, leaving British commandos wondering aloud whether they will have to enter the city and face house-to-house combat with hard-core fighters.
As the stalemate drags on, many soldiers and even some nearby Iraqi villagers are asking: If Basra has proven so difficult, how much more problematic will it prove for U.S. troops to conquer Baghdad, President Saddam Hussein's capital and the seat of his Baath Party power?
"What's going to happen in Baghdad?" said Sgt. Stu Wickham, 34, of Watford, England. "I think it's going to be a problem in Baghdad."
"They said within 48 hours they would enter Baghdad," said an Iraqi employee of a local oil refinery outside Basra. "Now after seven or eight days, they can't even enter Basra."
Humanitarian liberation:
11:48 EST Coalition forces bombed food supply depots in Basra on March 29, reportedly killing a large number of Iraqi civilians gathered in the area to receive relief supplies, IRNA reports. The injured were rushed to hospitals.
2:36:14 PM
|
|
More of the “plan”?
The PR plan that is…
US soldiers in Iraq asked to pray for Bush
They may be the ones facing danger on the battlefield, but US soldiers in Iraq are being asked to pray for President George W Bush.
Thousands of marines have been given a pamphlet called "A Christian's Duty," a mini prayer book which includes a tear-out section to be mailed to the White House pledging the soldier who sends it in has been praying for Bush.
"I have committed to pray for you, your family, your staff and our troops during this time of uncertainty and tumult. May God's peace be your guide," says the pledge, according to a journalist embedded with coalition forces.
The pamphlet, produced by a group called In Touch Ministries, offers a daily prayer to be made for the US president, a born-again Christian who likes to invoke his God in speeches.
Sunday's is "Pray that the President and his advisers will seek God and his wisdom daily and not rely on their own understanding".
Monday's reads "Pray that the President and his advisers will be strong and courageous to do what is right regardless of critics".
2:35:39 PM
|
|
Apparently the “plan” does now include not announcing US casualties:
U.S. officials at Centcom are also now declining to discuss U.S. fatalities. Early this week, military officials parried questions about the number of casualties, saying this information could not be released until next of kin had been notified. After several days, Brooks announced he had no intention of disclosing that information at all.
2:35:15 PM
|
|
Speaking of recent casualties,
another appears to be the war’s ever-shifting justification:
Speaking to veterans' groups at the White House, President Bush barely mentioned the threats from Iraq's possession of weapons of mass destruction or its ties to terrorists, long his main justifications for going to war. Instead, he, like others in his administration, focused on what he called the "brutal and cruel nature" of the Iraqi government, the plight of the Iraqi people "in slavery" and his determination to free them "from the clutches of Saddam Hussein and his murderous allies."
2:32:51 PM
|
|
These jerks should go to jail.
A Federal Energy Regulatory Commission report this week said Glendale was "associated with Enron in executing the trading strategies in a willful and knowing manner."
Municipal utilities serving Los Angeles and half a dozen other California cities also were targeted in the FERC report, which said their activities appeared to constitute market "gaming" in violation of state tariffs. But Glendale's utility, which serves about 78,000 businesses and households, stood out by the volume and detail of the evidence presented against it.
The FERC report implicates Glendale in ploys that involved creating false congestion on electricity transmission lines, inflating demand and selling nonexistent backup energy through partnerships with Enron and Coral Energy, both based in Houston. The report also said the Glendale utility engaged in speculative trading that took advantage of varying power prices in different parts of the state.
"It should be clear to everyone that fraud, both criminal and civil, was committed in these schemes," said state Sen. Joe Dunn (D-Santa Ana), who chairs a committee investigating energy market manipulation in California.
2:30:58 PM
|
|
This article…
…is causing a stir inside the beltway – not because it is true (which it is) because the truth was spoken aloud in a major media outlet:
The moment the first shots were fired last week in the war against Iraq, the Bush administration pivoted sharply to dampen public expectations of the military operation.
In the months preceding the war, President Bush was largely silent on the subject of the conflict's cost, duration and dangers, while key administration officials and advisers presented upbeat forecasts. Vice President Cheney, for example, predicted Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's troops would "step aside" and that the conflict would be "weeks rather than months," a phrase repeated by other top officials. Others in advisory roles in the administration predicted Iraqi soldiers would "throw in the towel" and Hussein would collapse like "a house of cards" -- phrases senior administration officials often echoed in private.
<snip>
Administration officials now say they were frank about the dangers all along. But in the months leading up to the war, top administration officials offered a number of forecasts that accentuated the positive.
On CBS's "Face the Nation" on March 16, Cheney said the fight would be "weeks rather than months. There's always the possibility of complications that you can't anticipate, but I have great confidence in our troops." Cheney also predicted the fight would "go relatively quickly, but we can't count on that." That same day on NBC's "Meet the Press," Cheney said, "I think things have gotten so bad inside Iraq, from the standpoint of the Iraqi people, my belief is we will, in fact, be greeted as liberators." It was then he predicted that the regular Iraqi soldiers would not "put up such a struggle," and that even "significant elements of the Republican Guard . . . are likely to step aside." Asked if Americans are prepared for a "long, costly and bloody battle," Cheney replied: "Well, I don't think it's likely to unfold that way. . . . The read we get on the people of Iraq is there is no question but what they want to the get rid of Saddam Hussein, and they will welcome as liberators the United States when we come to do that." Cheney has spoken that way for months.
In September 2002, he said that "you always plan for the worst," but he also said, "I don't think it would be that tough a fight; that is, I don't think there's any question that we would prevail." In a speech in August, he cited a scholar's view that "the streets in Basra and Baghdad are sure to erupt in joy in the same way the throngs in Kabul greeted the Americans." <snip>
2:30:48 PM
|
|
(thanks to Atrios)
Some Kuwaiti officials who examined the fragments said they believed an errant American cruise missile had been fired from the Persian Gulf toward Iraq.
"It was an American cruise missile, we know from the markings and writing on it," said a Kuwaiti police colonel who did not give his name. "It doesn't go up, it comes in low from the sea, and that's why there was no alert."
Another uniformed Kuwaiti official said that he, too, believed the missile to have been American and said that it "came from the sea." He then added that "it was a mistake" that it had struck Kuwait.
The Kuwaitis can take comfort in that they are not alone:
US soldiers face barrage of criticism in Turkey
US soldiers have been pelted with eggs and stones during a mission to recover pieces of an alleged Tomahawk cruise missile which came down in Turkey's east.
Two other missiles have landed in Turkey in the past week, increasing anger among the Turkish public, already opposed to the war on Iraq.
US officials say one soldier received a broken nose and the windows of a jeep were smashed when scores of angry Turkish villagers in Urfa province showered military vehicles with stones and eggs.
The soldiers were retrieving what villagers say was a Tomahawk cruise missile, suspected to have gone astray after being fired towards Iraq from a US Navy ship in the Mediterranean.
If confirmed to be a Tomahawk, it will be the third US missile to land in eastern Turkey since the Iraq war began.
Turkey's powerful National Security Council yesterday called on Washington to end its war in Iraq quickly and to prevent further civilian casualties there.
Misfiring Tomahawks land in Saudi Arabia
Some US Tomahawk cruise missiles aimed at Iraq have fallen on Saudi Arabia, forcing planners to suspend certain routes for launches, US military commanders say.
"In the case of Saudi Arabia, we did have a number of T-LAM missiles that were reported down in their territory," Major General Victor Renuart said at war headquarters in Qatar.
"We continue to use Tomahawk cruise missiles throughout the theatre. We have coordinated with the Saudis to hold on a couple of routes that might put them in a position where they could be close to any civilian population," he told a news conference.
A US defence official, speaking in Washington on condition of anonymity, says "about five" Tomahawk missiles landed in the Saudi desert without exploding.
2:29:15 PM
|
|
Don’t they know…
…we’re here to liberate them?
Soldiers from the First Brigade of the U.S. Third Infantry Division were searching a taxi whose driver had asked for help when the vehicle detonated, killing four soldiers and the driver, military officials said. The bombing, near Najaf, an important city about 100 miles south of Baghdad, apparently occurred when members of the Iraqi militia known as Saddam's Fedayeen mixed with civilians who were allowed through U.S. checkpoints to claim the bodies of relatives who had died in fighting nearby, Post correspondent Mary Beth Sheridan reported.
This taste of the occupation to come (estimated by students at the US Army war college to last 5-10 years – Thanks to Agonist) prompted these comforting words:
Air Force Maj. Gen. Victor Renuart, briefing reporters at the U.S. Central Command's field headquarters in Doha, Qatar, said the incident "will not have any operational effect -- it's certainly a tragedy for those families, but no operational effect on the battlefield."
I feel better already…
2:27:03 PM
|
|
|
