US "Real" Intention For Iraq: Divide & Conquer

  • Thread starter Thread starter Syed Nizam
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 33
  • Views Views 5K
Well, clearly the majority of the fatalities in Iraq right now are caused by car bombs and suicide attacks. These are not American methods but rather those of elements within the insurgency.

It is also clear that the majority of the fatalities are in regions were the resistance is most active. The most important target of the resistance also appears to be the government of Iraq, which was elected by a majority of the Iraqi people. There is no indication that they have any kind of popular support among the citizens of Iraq.

You can certainly blame the Americans indirectly for the carnage in Iraq, because of their presence. But one must not forget the responsibility of those who actually do most of the bombing and killing.

For an statistical overview of the situation in Iraq the following might me of interest to you:
http://www.brookings.edu/fp/saban/iraq/index.pdf

Is that so?
What about the killing of the innocent woman & children and is termed as `collateral damage' by the yankees?
1. Death by using cluster bombs?
2. Death by using napalms?
3. Death by using depleted uranium weaponry?
4. Death by covert operations inside Iraq as have been reported by Robert Fisks? Those car bombs by using cellphones, are by no means an act of terrorisms by the insurgents!
Who resposibilities are these?

Btw, i do not understand the logic of the yankees to be there in Iraq. All of the pretext used have been proven to be farced! Just spend those billions to helps the impoverished americans. It will do them much good!
 
I have said this before. In my opinion, Iraq was created when Imperialists drew lines in the sand. The lines bear no resemblance to the geographical location of any groups of people.

Therefore in my opinion, Iraq ought to be broken up geographically into smaller countries. Kurdistan would be one.

State this opinion over on a US forum and I AM shot down in flames because America DOES NOT WANT IRAQ BROKEN UP!
 
Is that so?
What about the killing of the innocent woman & children and is termed as `collateral damage' by the yankees?
1. Death by using cluster bombs?
2. Death by using napalms?
3. Death by using depleted uranium weaponry?
4. Death by covert operations inside Iraq as have been reported by Robert Fisks? Those car bombs by using cellphones, are by no means an act of terrorisms by the insurgents!
Who resposibilities are these?

Of course, if the Americans kill people that is the responsibility of the Americans. However, when the government is attacked then it is the responsibility of those who want to bring down the government.

And as I noted, the majority now appear to be killed by the insurgents, not the Americans. If you are so concerned with the Iraqi plight, why not condemn both? Why not condemn those that try to bring down a political system which the majority of the Iraqi people supported and voted for?

Btw, i do not understand the logic of the yankees to be there in Iraq. All of the pretext used have been proven to be farced! Just spend those billions to helps the impoverished americans. It will do them much good!

Irrelevant.
 
No thanks KAding,
I'm aware of the fact of what this main stream media can do in conditioning the opinion of people.

Hi Syed,

The boys have a counter plan in the works to take care of that problem. They just released a statement to President Bush and announced they will be making a documentary for the American people, and this time they're making it... in English!

http://www.jusonenews.com/MessageToGeorgeBushFromAl-RashedeenArmyOfIraq.rmvb

The announcement came yesterday, an it's in English too! Not that JUS has ever had a problem doing the translations for us, but I think you have to register with them to access their resources now.

Ninth Scribe
 
Last edited:
Of course, if the Americans kill people that is the responsibility of the Americans.

No way, u r wrong there. They just terms it as `Collateral Damage', and walk away from it as if nothing happens.....(sic!)

However, when the government is attacked then it is the responsibility of those who want to bring down the government.
And as I noted, the majority now appear to be killed by the insurgents, not the Americans. If you are so concerned with the Iraqi plight, why not condemn both? Why not condemn those that try to bring down a political system which the majority of the Iraqi people supported and voted for?

Called it whatever that u wanted to call. In these terms, the american media must be presented with an award for inventing all of those unimaginable jargons, such as Freedom of choice, Democracy for all.... Yeah right! Freedom of choice, through forces! Democracy, through forces! Called it what u want! Unfortunately the average Iraqi's dont seems to think so! No wise man will called the current Iraqi government as a valid government as long as it is under the occupation forces. That government is a farce as long as they dont have their sovereignity, as long as the occupying forces is operating inside Iraq as if it is nobody's business!

Why must I condemned the insurgents? History have told us so many times, for example at the age of colonialisms, those who fights against the occupying forces is labelled as traitors, insurgents and even terrorists (sic). Those colonial masters have one thing in common, that is to installed a puppet ruler, a puppet government to take care of their own interests in plundering the riches of the country that they have colonised. So, why must i condemned the insurgents? On the contrary, i do think that i must have the duty of condemning the occupying forces instead. Their pretext of invading Iraq is a farce! Their very continued presence there is a farce! Everything about the US in Iraq is a farce. PERIOD. :rant:
 
No Bravery

A nation blind to their disgrace
A 4 Minute Video

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article11799.htm

Produced by GlobalFreePress.com

Music by James Blunt

There are children standing here,
Arms outstretched into the sky,
Tears drying on their face.
He has been here.
Brothers lie in shallow graves.
Fathers lost without a trace.
A nation blind to their disgrace,
Since he's been here.

And I see no bravery,
No bravery in your eyes anymore.
Only sadness.

Houses burnt beyond repair.
The smell of death is in the air.
A woman weeping in despair says,
He has been here.
Tracer lighting up the sky.
It's another families' turn to die.
A child afraid to even cry out says,
He has been here.

And I see no bravery,
No bravery in your eyes anymore.
Only sadness.

There are children standing here,
Arms outstretched into the sky,
But no one asks the question why,
He has been here.
Old men kneel and accept their fate.
Wives and daughters cut and raped.
A generation drenched in hate.
Yes, he has been here.

And I see no bravery,
No bravery in your eyes anymore.
Only sadness
 
It is amazingly clear, the US have been hoping for a civil war in Iraq by trying to adopt the “divide and conquer” strategy. Just as have been employed elsewhere, like what the British did when they colonised India before. The Marines deployed Shiite National Guards during the siege of Falluja with the obvious intention of inciting tensions between the two factions. The Kurdish Peshmerga was utilized in Mosul for the very same purpose. Also, there have been a number of suspicious bombings (particularly the attacks on Sunni clerics in Najaf and Kerbala) that are not at all consistent with the insurgent pattern, but suggest a clandestine (CIA?) operation to incite hostilities. Luckily, one thing is certain; the Iraqi's know who their enemy is. The element of surprise or deception has evaporated like the plumes of smoke dispersing over Falluja.

What the heck do they expect? When they destroy a man’s home and kill and disgrace his friends, that man will surely fight back. And, when they rob a man of everything he has, including his dignity, they leave him with one, solitary passion… rage. This rage is now fueling the resistance in Iraq in ways that no one had previously anticipated. Good for Iraq. Bad for the Yankees!

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=7030
 
With due respect, guyabano I'm not blind with hatred with the American people. It's only limited to the American government and the American Armies when they started invading other countries in the world! When they started to act as the Judge, the Jury and the Executioneer where foreign policies and nations are concerned. Damned the Yankees for that.

I've seen your postings. So what? What are you trying to impose? I'm not denying that at one time, the Iraqi's really give a BIG welcome to the American troops who came into Iraq. But, that is then.... Now is a different matter altogether? What went wrong? If they have really been fair and impartial in carrying out their duties in Iraq, surely, they will win the support from the public, hands down! But that is NOT the case then, and that is NOT the case NOW...

War is no games! The pains are real. The sufferings are real. The humiliations are real. The rages are real. Pain lead to suffering, suffering led to rage.... What do you expect? Do you take the Iraqi's people as idiots? When the American troops come and conduct their usual raids, things will always get nasty for this ignorance & helpless people. Somehow, they end up with dying relatives. Parents, wife, children, friends, properties..... The lists goes on. So, if they choose to fight back, is it their fault? If I choose to hate the Yankees for that, is it my fault too? What else will I call it? A spade is a spade! A Yankees will always be a Yankees. PERIOD.
 
Last edited:
Covering up Napalm in Iraq
by Mike Whitney
June 28, 2005

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=8186

Two weeks ago the UK Independent ran an article which confirmed that the US had “lied to Britain over the use of napalm in Iraq”. (6-17-05) Since then, not one American newspaper or TV station has picked up the story even though the Pentagon has verified the claims. This is the extent to which the American “free press” is yoked to the center of power in Washington. As we’ve seen with the Downing Street memo, (which was reluctantly reported 5 weeks after it appeared in the British press) the air-tight American media ignores any story that doesn’t embrace their collective support for the war. The prospect that the US military is using “universally reviled” weapons runs counter to the media-generated narrative that the war was motivated by humanitarian concerns (to topple a brutal dictator) as well as to eliminate the elusive WMDs. We can now say with certainty that the only WMDs in Iraq were those that were introduced by foreign invaders from the US who have used them to subjugate the indigenous people.

“Despite persistent rumors of injuries among Iraqis consistent with the use of incendiary weapons such as napalm” the Pentagon insisted that “US forces had not used a new generation of incendiary weapons, codenamed MK77, in Iraq.” (UK Independent)

The Pentagon lied.

Defense Minister, Adam Ingram, admitted that the US had misled the British high-command about the use of napalm, but he would not comment on the extent of the cover up. The use of firebombs puts the US in breach of the 1980 Convention on Certain Chemical Weapons (CCW) and is a violation the Geneva Protocol against the use of white phosphorous, “since its use causes indiscriminate and extreme injuries especially when deployed in an urban area.”

Regrettably, “indiscriminate and extreme injuries” are a vital part of the American terror-campaign in Iraq; a well-coordinated strategy designed to spawn panic through random acts of violence.

It’s clear that the military never needed to use napalm in Iraq. Their conventional weaponry and laser-guided technology were already enough to run roughshod over the Iraqi army and seize Baghdad almost unobstructed. Napalm was introduced simply to terrorize the Iraqi people; to pacify through intimidation. Cheney, Rumsfeld and Negroponte are old-hands at terrorism, dating back to their counterinsurgency projects in Nicaragua and El Salvador under the Reagan Administration. They know that the threat of immolation serves as a powerful deterrent and fits seamlessly into their overarching scheme of rule through fear. Terror and deception are the rotating parts of the same axis; the two imperatives of the Bush-Cheney foreign policy strategy. Napalm in Falluja

The US also used napalm in the siege of Falluja as was reported in the UK Mirror (“Falluja Napalmed”, 11-28-04) The Mirror said, “President George Bush has sanctioned the use of napalm, a deadly cocktail of polystyrene and jet-fuel banned by the United Nations in 1980, will stun the world…. Reports claim that innocent civilians have died in napalm attacks, which turn victims into human fireballs as the gel bonds flames to flesh…Since the American assault on Falluja there have been reports of ‘melted’ corpse, which appeared to have napalm injuries.”

“Human fireballs” and “melted corpses”; these are the real expressions of Operation Iraqi Freedom not the bland platitudes issuing from the presidential podium.

Dr. Khalid ash-Shaykhli, who was the head of the Iraqi Ministry of Health in Falluja, reported to Al Jazeera (and to the Washington Post, although it was never reported) that “research, prepared by his medical team, prove that the US forces used internationally prohibited substances, including mustard gas, nerve gas, and other burning chemicals in their attacks on the war-torn city.”

Dr Shaykhli’s claims have been corroborated by numerous eyewitness accounts as well as reports that “all forms of nature were wiped out in Falluja”…as well as “hundreds, of stray dogs, cats, and birds that had perished as a result of those gasses.” An unidentified chemical was used in the bombing raids that killed every living creature in certain areas of the city.

As journalist Dahr Jamail reported later in his article “What is the US trying to Hide?”, “At least two kilometers of soil were removed……exactly as they did at Baghdad Airport after the heavy battles there during the invasion and the Americans used their special weapons.”

A cover up?

So far, none of this has appeared in any American media, nor has the media reported that the United Nations has been rebuffed twice by the Defense Dept. in calling for an independent investigation into what really took place in Falluja. The US simply waves away the international body as a minor nuisance while the media scrupulously omits any mention of the allegations from their coverage.

We can assume that the order to use napalm (as well as the other, unidentified substances) came straight from the office of Donald Rumsfeld. No one else could have issued that order, nor would they have risked their career by unilaterally using banned weapons when their use was entirely gratuitous. Rumsfeld’s directive is consistent with other decisions attributed to the Defense Secretary; like the authorizing of torture at Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib, the targeting of members of the press, and the rehiring of members of Saddam’s Secret Police ( the Mukhabarat) to carry out their brutal activities under new leadership. Rumsfeld’s office has been the headwaters for most of the administration’s treachery. Napalm simply adds depth to an already prodigious list of war crimes on Rumsfeld’s resume’. Co-opting the Media

On June 10, 2005 numerous sources reported that the “U.S. Special Operations Command hired three firms to produce newspaper stories, television broadcasts and Internet web sites to spread American propaganda overseas. The Tampa-based military headquarters, which oversees commandos and psychological warfare, may spend up to $100 million for the media campaign over the next five years.” (James Crawley, Media General News Service) It’s clear that there’s no need for the Defense Dept. to shore up its “strategic information” (propaganda) operations in the US where reliable apparatchiks can be counted on to obfuscate, omit or exaggerate the coverage of the war according to the requirements of the Pentagon. The American press has been as skillful at embellishing the imaginary heroics of Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman as they have been in concealing the damning details of the Downing Street Memo or the lack of evidence concerning the alleged WMDs. Should we be surprised that the media has remained silent about the immolation of Iraqis by American firebombs?

The US “free press” is a completely integrated part of the state-information system. Its meticulously managed message has been the most successful part of the entire Iraqi debacle. By providing the requisite cheerleading, diversions and omissions, the media has shown itself to be an invaluable asset to the men in power; perpetuating the deceptions that keep the public acquiescent during a savage colonial war. Given the scope of the media’s culpability for the violence in Iraq, it’s unlikely that the use of napalm will cause any great crisis of conscience. Their deft coverage has already facilitated the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent people; a few more charred Iraqis shouldn’t matter.
 
Last edited:
On 16 March, Reuters reported the arrest of an American "security contractor" who was found with weapons and explosives in his car. Last year, two Britons disguised as Arabs were caught with a car full of weapons and explosives; British forces bulldozed the Basra prison to rescue them. The Boston Globe recently reported: "The FBI's counter-terrorism unit has launched a broad investigation of US-based theft rings after discovering that some of the vehicles used in deadly car bombings in Iraq, including attacks that killed US troops and Iraqi civilians, were probably stolen in the United States, according to senior government officials."
salam
very interesting.... i knew about the british being cuaght but not others
any other source for that FBI investigation?
 
War is no games! The pains are real. The sufferings are real. The humiliations are real. The rages are real. Pain lead to suffering, suffering led to rage....

Agreed! , but these pains are for both sides. Also american soldiers have parents who suffer pains, so do the soldiers.

Funny also to see, how the medias can twist stories or videos to their advantage. I saw the same little girl in your video crying, but in the one I posted, she's smiling where she get something from a US-soldier.

Do you take the Iraqi's people as idiots?
Not at all! Just the one who play suicide bombers and still think, the US are the agressors.
 
Called it whatever that u wanted to call. In these terms, the american media must be presented with an award for inventing all of those unimaginable jargons, such as Freedom of choice, Democracy for all.... Yeah right! Freedom of choice, through forces! Democracy, through forces! Called it what u want! Unfortunately the average Iraqi's dont seems to think so! No wise man will called the current Iraqi government as a valid government as long as it is under the occupation forces. That government is a farce as long as they dont have their sovereignity, as long as the occupying forces is operating inside Iraq as if it is nobody's business!

But who are you to decide this government and this political regime must be removed. Again the following appears to be the case:
1. Iraqis accepted this political regime by overwhelmingly voting in favour of the new constitution.
2. Iraqis have legitimized the current government by overwhelmingly voting in the elections.
3. All opinion polls indicate Iraqis support the new Iraqi Police and new Iraqi army. All indications are that they do not support attacks on the government, nor it's security forces.
4. Shia religious leaders support this government and the political process. Heck even strongly anti-American Shiite leaders, such as al-Sadr and his militia suppor the political process.

Who are you to decide this political regime must go? Do you have alternative data or at least indications that could prove to me the insurgents have popular support? You want to bring down this government while the Iraqis apparently do not!

What Iraq needs now to achieve stability is first and foremost the rule of law and strong political and governmental institutions! Yet it is the stated goal of many resistance forces to overthrow exactly these insitutions. But do they offer an alternative regime? No, because they are mostly rooted in just the Arab-Sunni community. The only thing their actions will lead to is anarchy.

Why must I condemned the insurgents? History have told us so many times, for example at the age of colonialisms, those who fights against the occupying forces is labelled as traitors, insurgents and even terrorists (sic).

Yes, by the colonial powers! Again, what makes you believe the Iraqis support the insurgents? Despite the fact that they openly and verifiably supported the creation of the current government? The same government these insurgent vow to overthrow.

Those colonial masters have one thing in common, that is to installed a puppet ruler, a puppet government to take care of their own interests in plundering the riches of the country that they have colonised. So, why must i condemned the insurgents? On the contrary, i do think that i must have the duty of condemning the occupying forces instead. Their pretext of invading Iraq is a farce! Their very continued presence there is a farce! Everything about the US in Iraq is a farce. PERIOD. :rant:

There has been no country in the arab world which has had elections as free as those in Iraq earlier this year. Again, noone could have forced the Iraqi electorate to go out and vote in these three elections. This government is a product of that political process. A collapse of the current government will only lead to even more anarchy and sectarian strife, since you know as well as I do that nor Shiite nor Kurds will accept to be controlled again by sunnis, which form the overwhelming majority of the Iraqi resistance. You and the insurgents have nothing to offer to the Iraqi people by your attempt to overthrow the government and the political institutions.
 
Last edited:
Iraq is not in a civil war, Iraq is under OCCUPATION!

Civil war is and always has been the favoured alternative should the US fail to dominate Iraq politically. The violence we currently see is an indication that the option to destroy Iraq is constantly being cultivated. What we have is the importation of ex-patriots lifted to power by the US who have been imposing a sectarian framework on the country. Iraq is not in a civil war, Iraq is under OCCUPATION!

http://www.cryingwolf.deconstructingiraq.org.uk/scenes/nomoredeathsquads_Scene 20.swf
http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m23261&l=i&size=1&hd=0
http://www.newstatesman.com/200605080016
 

Similar Threads

Back
Top