UNHCR News Stories
Iraq government busses refugees home from Syria

DAMASCUS, Syria, November 28 (UNHCR) – A convoy of buses carrying an estimated 800 Iraqis has left the Syrian capital of Damascus and crossed the border on its way to Baghdad. Iraqi government officials at the Tuesday afternoon departure here said air and land security would be provided all the way to the beleaguered Iraqi capital.

UNHCR staff at the Al Tanf border point saw at least 15 buses, each carrying 30-35 people, pass through Iraq immigration later Tuesday and said they had heard that others had arrived earlier. The convoy was expected to arrive in Baghdad on Wednesday. UNHCR planned to give the refugees a return package.

UNHCR protection officers interviewed many of the returnee families boarding buses in Damascus and most said they were going back to Iraq because they had run out of money and could no longer afford to stay in Syria, which is hosting more than 1.4 million Iraqi refugees. Some said they wanted to check out the situation in Iraq amid reports of improved security across the border.

The refugees were also taking back their possessions, ranging from clothes to fridges. But, while a group of Iraqi men proudly waved off the buses with Iraqi flags, many of those on the convoy appeared subdued and seemed anxious as they prepared to load their bags onto the coaches.

Iraq's Ministry of Transport funded the convoy and Iraqi officials said it was made possible by improved security in Baghdad and its environs in recent weeks, which they attributed to the build-up, or "surge," of United States military forces.

"The convoy is an invitation from the Iraqi Prime Minister [Nouri al-Maliki] to refugees to come home because the security situation is better," said Hassan Abd Al Azeez, chargé d'affaires at the Iraqi embassy in Syria.

Some of the refugees heading back to Iraq said they were convinced that it was now safer. "I want to leave because the security situation in Iraq is much better and the atmosphere is less dangerous," Abu Ali, a refugee from Baghdad, said as he waited to board a bus with his three children.

But many of the refugees said financial considerations, rather than security concerns, were the deciding factor in their decision to return. "The money is finished and my visa has expired," said Ahmed Hussein from Baghdad's Sadr City district. "Of course I want to stay here, but I can't," he said.

Figures compiled by UNHCR suggest that only 14 percent of Iraqi refugees are returning because of improved security conditions. Around 70 percent say they are leaving because of tougher visa regulations and because they are not allowed to work and can no longer afford to stay in Syria.

Posters announcing the return convoys were displayed mainly in the Damascus neighbourhood of Seida Zeinab, where an estimated 350,000 Iraqi refugees live. The UN refugee agency has not been assisting in the operation and remains concerned about the situation in Iraq.

"For the first time some Iraqi refugees are considering returning to Iraq," said Laurens Jolles, UNHCR representative in Syria, before adding: "UNHCR is not in a position to recommend return at this time but recognizes the Iraq government's effort to support people who are returning."

During the past week, the UNHCR estimates that around 600 Iraqis have left Syria each day this week, although not all are refugees. The Iraqi government, meanwhile, says that 45,000 Iraqis have returned from Syria in October.

UNHCR will continue to help many of those remaining in Syria. The refugee agency will next month provide around 7,000 families with financial support and distribute food for some 51,000 people. UNHCR also provides subsidized health care to Iraq refugees who seek it.

Of the small trickling of those who are presently leaving Syria and returning to Iraq, 70% are leaving because they have no alternative. They do not wish to return to Iraq and yet the robust Information Operations (Propaganda) Section at Petraeus and Odierno's Commands are hard at work spreading mistruths to feed their agendas. This is going to have dire consequences. Their arrogance and opportunism will likely ultimately backfire. Tragically, it is at the expense of the Iraqi people, our service members and our National Security. ~Luis

Dear friends,

This post is an expression of my heartfelt thanks to you for your kind support. More importantly, however, it is humbly gratifying that you have taken an interest in doing something about the lies and incompetence propagated by Unscrupulous Leaders and Corrupt Organizations who have effectively hijacked our nation's interests and compromised our values.

The True heroes are those who have (and continue to) placed themselves in harms way for the sake of our way of life - our Constitution and our Beliefs. That said, that isn't enough; to the contrary, it is far from being enough to simply serve and not do what is right. And, what is right, is expressing the Truth and holding those who have perpetrated various acts of Dereliction, Ineptitude and Malfeasance, accountable for their actions.

Make no mistake, this War was born out of no accountability rendered after Vietnam. And, if we allow this pattern to continue, the 21st Century will not end up in our favor. Moreover, Millions will suffer far worse than is currently happening as a result of this misguided enterprise.

So, it is the Duty of our Citizenry and those who know the Truth, to Stand and Speak lest we become what we abhor.

Very best regards,
Luis

Blackwater lawsuit says order ignored By LARA JAKES JORDAN, Associated Press Writer
19 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - A lawsuit against government contractor Blackwater Worldwide accuses its bodyguards of ignoring a direct order and abandoning their post shortly before taking part in a shooting in Baghdad that killed 17 Iraqi civilians.

Filed this week in U.S. District Court in Washington, the complaint also accuses North Carolina-based Blackwater of failing to give drug tests to its guards in Baghdad — even though an estimated one in four of them was using steroids or other "judgment altering substances."

A Blackwater spokeswoman said Tuesday its employees are banned from using steroids or other enhancement drugs but declined to comment on the other charges detailed in the 18-page lawsuit.

The lawsuit was filed Monday on behalf of five Iraqis who were killed and two who were injured during the Sept. 16 shooting in Baghdad's Nisoor Square. The shootings enraged the Iraqi government, and the Justice Department is investigating whether it can bring criminal charges in the case, even though the State Department promised limited immunity to the Blackwater guards.

The three teams of an estimated dozen Blackwater bodyguards had already dropped off the State Department official they were tasked with protecting when they headed to Nisoor Square, according to the lawsuit filed by lawyers working with the Center for Constitutional Rights.

Blackwater and State Department personnel staffing a tactical operations center "expressly directed the Blackwater shooters to stay with the official and refrain from leaving the secure area," the complaint says. "Reasonable discovery will establish that the Blackwater shooters ignored those directives."

Additionally, the lawsuit notes: "One of Blackwater's own shooters tried to stop his colleagues from indiscriminately firing upon the crowd of innocent civilians but he was unsuccessful in his efforts."

The civil complaint offers new details of the incident that has strained relations between the United States and Iraq, which is demanding the right to launch its own prosecution of the Blackwater bodyguards.

The Justice Department says it likely will be months before it decides whether it can prosecute the guards, and it is trying now to pinpoint how many shooters in the Blackwater convoy could face charges. A senior U.S. law enforcement official confirmed Tuesday that government investigators are looking at whether the Blackwater guards were authorized to be in the square at the time of the shooting. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because of the ongoing investigation.

In an interview, lead plaintiff attorney Susan L. Burke said private investigators turned up the new evidence through interviews with people in Iraq and the United States "who would have reason to know." Those people do not include government officials, Burke said, and she declined to comment when asked if they include Blackwater employees.

The civil lawsuit does not specify how much money the victims and their families are seeking from Blackwater, its 11 subsidiaries and founder, Erik Prince, all of whom are named as defendants.

"We're looking for compensatory (damages) because the people who were killed were the breadwinners in their families," Burke said. "And we're looking for punitive in a manner that suffices to change the corporation's conduct. We have a real interest in holding them accountable for what were completely avoidable deaths."

The lawsuit also accuses Blackwater of routinely sending its guards into Baghdad despite knowing that at least 25 percent of them were using steroids or other "judgment-altering substances." Attorneys estimated that Blackwater employs about 600 guards in Iraq. The company "did not conduct drug-testing of any of its shooters before sending them equipped with heavy weapons into the streets of Baghdad," the lawsuit states.

Blackwater spokeswoman Anne Tyrrell said Blackwater employees are tested for drug use before they are hired and later given random quarterly tests. She said use of steroids and other performance enhancement drugs "are absolutely in violation of our policy."

"Blackwater has very strict policies concerning drug use, and if anyone were known to be in violation of them they would be immediately fired," Tyrrell said.

She declined comment on whether the bodyguards ignored their orders and abandoned their posts, or on other details outlined in the lawsuit.

Blackwater's contract with the State Department to protect diplomats in Iraq expires in May, and there are questions whether it will remain as the primary contractor for diplomatic bodyguards. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has said his Cabinet is drafting legislation that would force the State Department to replace Blackwater with another security company.

The State Department declined to comment on the case Tuesday, citing standard policy on pending legal matters. Deputy spokesman Tom Casey referred questions on the matter "to those involved in the lawsuit."
___

Associated Press writers Matthew Lee and Matt Apuzzo contributed to this report.

How much has Eric Prince's net worth gone up since 9-11? How much has L. Paul Bremer's gone up? L. Paul Bremer is responsible for crafting and approving Iraqi "legislation" that rendered contractors "untouchable" for crimes and offenses committed. That "legislation" has allowed billions of taxpayer dollars to go to unscrupulous contractors without oversight and accountability.

When will the American people and our government hold perpetrators responsible for gross negligence and malfeasance? The longer this takes, the more harm shall befall our nation and the world. ~ Luis

Commentary: Good riddance to them all
Joseph L. Galloway | McClatchy Newspapers
There was little for the unindicted co-conspirators of the Bush administration to give thanks for this week as the clock winds down on the 14 months they have left in power.

With former White House press secretary Scott McClellan spilling the beans on who told him to lie to the American people and cover up the White House's responsibility for the criminal act of revealing the identity of a covert CIA officer, it clearly was time for some folks to begin drafting their requests for presidential pardons.

McClellan, in a forthcoming book that will tell some, if not all, reveals that his 2003 statements absolving top White House aides Karl Rove and I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby of any involvement in leaking the identity of CIA officer Valerie Plame were untrue — and that the orders to make those statements came from President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, White House chief of staff Andrew Card, Rove and Libby.

McClellan's revelation makes it abundantly clear that a subsequent statement by Bush that White House aides had no involvement in outing Ms. Plame, and that anyone who did would be fired was also, shall we say, inoperative.

It also confirms long-held suspicions that the whole despicable affair — an attempt to punish former Ambassador Joseph Wilson for debunking a bit of the bogus intelligence the administration wheeled out to justify invading Iraq — was orchestrated in the offices of Bush and Cheney, and with their knowledge.

It also might shed new light on why Bush quickly commuted Cheney's hatchet man Libby's prison sentence after he was convicted on four counts of lying to federal investigators. It simply wouldn't do to have Libby rolling over on his bosses.

Somehow, I have a strong feeling that this isn't the only or the last revelation of wrong-doing and criminality that we're likely to hear before and after Bush and Co. leave office, or that additional presidential acts of clemency will be needed to spare other top administration officials from prison and buy their silence.

What we've witnessed and endured during seven long years of the Bush presidency is the inevitable consequence of bringing vicious and unprincipled but successful political campaigners — attack dogs — into top White House jobs.

The idea that a political campaign should address any and all criticism by going for the throats of those who dare to question it may work on election day but it doesn't work, or shouldn't, when the full weight and power of the federal government is put behind it.

We are a better people and this is a better country than that, and this is why, when it's weighed and judged, the Bush presidency will be found to have perverted not only our system but also the very principles on which our nation was founded.

We don't rush into a war that has cost so many lives and so much national treasure, and has so damaged our standing in the world, based on a tissue of lies. But under the leadership of George W. Bush, that's what we did in Iraq.

We don't stand idly by, backs turned and eyes closed, while in wartime our friends and political contributors loot the national treasury of billions of taxpayer dollars. But the Bush administration and a Republican-controlled Congress did just that.

We don't send our soldiers and Marines into combat without enough of everything they need to fight, survive and win. But that's what this administration and its political operatives in charge of the Pentagon did.

We don't turn the office of the attorney general and key parts of the Justice Department into a branch of a partisan political campaign — gutting offices charged with protecting the civil rights of minorities and directing the prosecution of those of a different political party — but this administration did.

We don't declare war and then expect that the entire sacrifice will be borne by the half a percent of our population who wear uniforms. We don't fight a long and costly war by cutting taxes on the wealthiest Americans and borrowing trillions of dollars to finance it from foreign competitors such as China. But this administration did.

We don't prosecute a war to spread democracy by curtailing democracy and suspending the Bill of Rights at home. We cannot promote our principles abroad by denying the same principles — the right to a lawyer, the right to a fair trial, the right to be secure in our homes — to ourselves. But this administration did.

We don't beat or torture confessions out of prisoners in violation of our laws and the laws of the civilized world. We don't lock people up and hold them incommunicado for years without charges or trials. But this administration did and does.

We don't applaud and cheer an administration and a Congress that make the rich vastly richer, the middle class less secure and the poor even poorer. But this administration has done just that, in violation of our principles and the principles of love, peace and charity that are engrained in the Christianity that these rogues and charlatans embrace so publicly but violate every day.

It will be a good day when they are gone, and good riddance to them all.

McClatchy Newspapers 2007

U.S. to reduce Iraq troop levels by 5,000 By Missy Ryan
2 hours, 14 minutes ago

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Overall U.S. troop levels in Iraq will fall by about 5,000 when a combat brigade completes its pullout from the country's volatile Diyala province next month, U.S. military officials said on Saturday.

The 3rd Brigade, 1st Cavalry Division is the first brigade not be replaced by fresh troops from the United States since the U.S. commander in Iraq General David Petraeus announced plans to cut forces by some 20,000 by July 2008 as violence ebbs.

There are now about 162,000 U.S. soldiers in Iraq.

While the brigade is leaving, the number of U.S. soldiers in Diyala will actually increase with units elsewhere in the country redeploying to the province northeast of Baghdad.

The 3rd Brigade was not part of President George W. Bush's "surge" of 30,000 troops in the first half of 2007. But its departure marks the first big reversal of a troop build-up ordered to pull Iraq back from the brink of all-out civil war.

"The redeployment without replacement reflects overall improved security within Iraq," military spokesman Rear Admiral Gregory Smith told a news conference.

"If conditions continue to permit, a total of five brigade combat teams will be redeployed over the next eight months," Smith said, putting a full brigade at 5,000-6,000 personnel.

Colonel David Sutherland, commander of the 3rd Brigade, told the news conference Diyala was a different province than when he deployed there 15 months ago.

"Today there is hope in Diyala," he said.

Sutherland painted a grim picture of Diyala's recent past: a province in the grip of al Qaeda militants, where Iranian-backed militias plotted violent attacks and remnants of Saddam Hussein's Ba'ath party vied to regain power.

A dysfunctional government "afraid to come to work" and plagued by rampant corruption further undermined order, he said, while hapless residents were starved of basic services.

SUICIDE ATTACKS

But killings, kidnapping and suicide attacks had decreased in Diyala by over 68 percent since April, he said.

Sutherland said U.S. troops had particular success against Sunni Islamist al Qaeda.

He also credited much of the improvement in Diyala to more effective Iraqi police and army, and to around 3,000 local men who had joined neighborhood watch patrols.

Some 700 of the so-called "concerned local citizens" had since signed up to join the Iraqi police, he added.

Sutherland said progress was also being made in cobbling together a measure of political consensus in the ethnically diverse province, home to more than two dozen major tribes.

But Diyala remains a dangerous place.

A suicide bomber killed at least 30 Iraqi policemen in the provincial capital Baquba in late October, while suspected al Qaeda militants beheaded a school guard and his wife on Friday in front of the victims' children.

U.S. officials insist they are not abandoning Diyala. Beginning on November 27, troops from the larger 4th Striker Brigade Combat Team, 2nd Infantry Division, located near Baghdad, will take over the area, military officials say.

(Editing by Dean Yates and Charles Dick)

Rather than execute a protracted withdrawal, the hard decision must be made to withdrawal 130,000 troops immediately rather than these ultra-small sized downshifts. This type of "reposturing" is only going to serve to get a lot of Americans killed and isn't going to force the hand of Iraqi leaders to do anything substantive in the way of taking control of their situation. When will common sense prevail?! ~ Luis

Washington Post
November 22, 2007
Pg. 23
Former Iraq Commander Backs Democrats On Pullout
By Josh White, Washington Post Staff Writer

Retired Lt. Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez, who commanded U.S. troops in Iraq from 2003 to 2004, is scheduled to speak on behalf of the Democratic Party this weekend in support of a House war funding bill that would require President Bush to bring the bulk of U.S. troops home from Iraq by the end of next year.

Sanchez, who has spoken out against the Bush administration's handling of the war and has assailed current war strategy as doomed to fail, plans to argue that the United States cannot win in Iraq with the military alone and that it is prudent to bring troops home to bolster national security.

In portions of Saturday's expected Democratic radio address in response to weekly White House remarks, Sanchez says that recent improvements in security in Iraq "have not been matched by a willingness on the part of Iraqi leaders to make the hard choices necessary to bring peace their country." According to the prepared remarks, he plans to say that there is no evidence that the Iraqis will do so in the near future.

Sanchez also plans to argue that U.S. armed forces have been stretched thin by bad war policy and that the House war funding bill, which requires the redeployment of U.S. troops and other measures for the Pentagon to secure $50 billion in funding, is the appropriate approach. Sanchez is expected to say that the war has significantly hurt the military. The White House has threatened to veto any bill that attaches strings to the war funding.

"Our Army and Marine Corps are struggling with changing deployment schedules that are disrupting combat readiness training and straining the patience and daily lives of military families," according to a portion of Sanchez's speech released last night. "It will take the Army at least a decade to repair the damage done to its full spectrum readiness, which is at its lowest level since the Vietnam War. In the meantime, the ability of our military to fully execute our national security strategy will be called into doubt, producing what is, in my judgment, unacceptable strategic risk."

Sanchez has been a controversial figure since 2004, when he was linked to the investigation of detainee abuse at the Abu Ghraib prison west of Baghdad. His alignment with the Democratic party comes amid reports that Sanchez is preparing to write a book about his experiences.

It is tremendously enfuriating that retired Gen. Ricardo Sanchez is "making the rounds" in Washington and elsewhere. It's unbelieveable that the Democrats are paying him attention and using him at all. This man was so utterly incompetent in Iraq and the extent of his dereliction of duty is well-known to those who have an informed understanding of the War.

What an injustice! Where is the outrage?! He should be placed back on active duty and court martialed!!!

18 die in clash with al-Qaida in Iraq
By SINAN SALAHEDDIN, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 14 minutes ago
Associated Press
November 22, 2007

BAGHDAD - Suspected al-Qaida fighters killed three Iraqi soldiers early Thursday, then stole their Humvees to ambush rival Sunnis south of Baghdad, police said, a brazen example of the challenges still facing Iraqis despite a lull in violence.

A series of mortars later struck the U.S.-protected Green Zone, Iraqi police said. The attack coincided with the celebration of Thanksgiving but there were no immediate reports of casualties in the heavily fortified area, which houses the U.S. Embassy, thousands of American troops and contractors, and Iraqi government headquarters.

About 10 blasts were heard in central Baghdad just before 5 p.m., and a huge plume of black smoke rose into the sky as the sun was setting. The U.S. government public address system in the Green Zone also warned people to "duck and cover" and to stay away from windows.

The attack by the al-Qaida fighters south of Baghdad began when they targeted an Iraqi army patrol near the rural area of Hawr Rijab, killing three soldiers and commandeering two Humvees, according to a local police report.

The militants then drove in the Humvees to the nearby headquarters of a group of Sunnis who have turned against the terror network and formed a so-called Awakening Council. Fierce clashes broke out and the police said at least 15 people were killed, including members of the Awakening Council and gunmen.

Associated Press Television News footage showed Iraqi police and soldiers forming a protective cordon around wailing women and children as they loaded wooden coffins onto the cars for funeral processions of those killed.

Northeast of the capital, Iraqi security forces killed 19 al-Qaida fighters in Baqouba, police said, adding that two civilians also died and two others were wounded in the crossfire.

The U.S. military has claimed a large measure of success in quelling the violence in Baqouba, which was an al-Qaida stronghold some 35 miles northeast of Baghdad. But pockets of resistance remain there and elsewhere, underlining fears about the fragility of security gains made in recent months with the influx of troops and the swelling of popular movements against extremists.

In another example, a suicide car bomber blasted a police checkpoint outside a courthouse on Wednesday, killing up to six people and wounding as many as 22 in Ramadi, the capital of Anbar province and the site of the genesis of the anti-al-Qaida sentiment among Sunni tribal leaders and even some former insurgents.

Iraqi security forces also found 40 decomposed bodies on Wednesday, including women and children, north of Ramadi near Lake Tharthar in an area controlled until recently by al-Qaida in Iraq.

The victims had been shot and did not have ID cards with them, although it could not be determined when they were killed, an Iraqi army officer said, also declining to be identified because the information was confidential.

The mass grave unearthed near Ramadi was the latest in a series of such finds as Iraqis from both Islamic sects step up patrols of areas after ousting extremists.

Nationwide, the U.S. military maintains attacks have fallen 55 percent since a troop buildup over the summer because stepped up American military operations have driven Sunni and Shiite extremists from most of their longtime strongholds around the city.

But U.S. commanders have been careful to avoid declaring victory over al-Qaida in Iraq and other extremist organizations, acknowledging militants have fled the security crackdowns to other parts of the country.

Several Iraqi refugees returned home to Baghdad from Syria on Thursday, saying they felt confident about the dramatic drop in the level of sectarian attacks.

"Thanks to be for God that we arrived here today. We have learned that the security situation improved and we hope all Iraqis will get back to Iraq," Muhanad Ibrahim said as he arrived in the western neighborhood of Mansour.

Thousands of Iraqis living in Syria have headed back home in the past weeks.
A bus bound from Syria with heaps of luggage tied to the roof was one of two that were greeted by relatives who cheered and hugged the returned refugees as they got off.

While many are relieved about the improved security situation, the move also has been attributed to harsh visa requirements imposed by Syria since last month that make it more difficult for Iraqis to stay in the neighboring country.

The Iraqi government also has started to organize free trips for those who want to return home, offering protected convoys and even flights.

The New York Times, meanwhile, quoted senior American military officials as saying that Saudi Arabia and Libya were the source of about 60 percent of the foreign fighters who came to Iraq in the past year to serve as suicide bombers or to facilitate other attacks.

The report said that data came largely from documents and computers discovered in September, when a U.S. raid near the Syrian border targeted insurgents believed to be responsible for smuggling the vast majority of foreign fighters into Iraq.

A key discovery was a listing of hometowns and other details for more than 700 fighters brought into Iraq since August 2006, the newspaper said, according to the U.S. officials who were not further identified. Saudis accounted for the largest number of fighters listed with 305, followed by Libyans with 137. United States officials have previously offered only rough estimates of nationalities of such fighters.

Coalition Forces in Iraq continue to tout "successes" based upon assumptions. The reality of the situation, is that Americans can almost never differentiate al Qaeda fighters from insurgents and other terrorists. Most often, they simply take the the word of Iraqi Security Forces commanders who are quick to tell Coalition Forces what suits their agendas (tribal, ethnic, sectarian, etc.).

Sunnis in Al Anbar have been incredibly quick to decry al Qaeda and "wage war" on them. Why? Because, it suits their agenda. For nearly five years, the Sunnis have consistently lost battle after battle in Iraq's Civil War. In an effort to regroup, they have aligned themselves with us, only temporarily and really only partially.

The over-inflated "successes" in Iraq will be the undoing of many - sadly, the lives of untold American service members and millions of Iraqi people. The Winter and Spring will assuredly bring great catastrophes to Iraq and throughout the region.

Incidentally, someone ought to tally all of the mass graves found in Iraq since the War began so that those statistics can be discussed ~ Luis

Wall Street Journal
November 21, 2007
Pg. 6

For Petraeus, A Balancing Act
Commander in Iraq Sees Gains, But Deep Troop Cuts May Have Price
By Yochi J. Dreazen

BAGHDAD -- U.S. and Iraqi forces have made significant progress against al Qaeda in Iraq in recent months, contributing to a sharp improvement in the country's security, the top U.S. commander in Iraq said.

Gen. David Petraeus, in an interview yesterday, cautioned that it was too soon to conclude that al Qaeda in Iraq, which has focused its attacks on Shiite Muslim targets, has been defeated. But he said the group had been weakened by a U.S. and Iraqi campaign to kill or detain its leaders and cut off its supplies of weapons and ammunition.

Another factor, he said, has been unexpected, "robust" measures by Syria to reduce the number of foreign militants crossing into Iraq to carry out suicide attacks. Gen. Petraeus estimated that the number of foreign fighters coming into Iraq through Syria has fallen by at least one-third.

"Al Qaeda has been dealt substantial blows," Gen. Petraeus said. "It certainly still remains dangerous...but it is a threat that has been diminished."

Gen. Petraeus, who is serving his third tour in Iraq, said the situation could change if al Qaeda in Iraq were to begin a new wave of attacks or if the Shiite militia led by cleric Moqtada al Sadr were to resume its guerrilla war against U.S. forces.

The security improvements have sparked speculation that the Bush administration may order a significant troop withdrawal next year in advance of the 2008 presidential and congressional elections. The White House, drawing on initial recommendations by Gen. Petraeus, already has announced plans to bring the 30,000 troops who were part of this year's "surge" out of Iraq by next July. The question now is whether the U.S. will go beyond those plans, and if so, how quickly.

Gen. Petraeus's comments come at a moment of cautious optimism for U.S. commanders in Iraq. They believe the surge has contributed to a decline in violence across the country.

U.S. commanders said this week that major attacks have dropped 55% since June, while U.S. military and Iraqi civilian deaths also have fallen sharply in recent months. The overall level of violence in Iraq is roughly what it was in January 2006, shortly before al Qaeda in Iraq destroyed a Shiite shrine, according to the U.S. military. That attack sparked a wave of reprisal killings that left tens of thousands dead.

Gen. Petraeus said the major combatants in Iraq's sectarian strife are no longer fighting with the same intensity. Mr. Sadr's Mahdi army, Iraq's largest Shiite militia, is generally honoring a cease-fire. Many Sunni Arabs, including nationalist insurgents who once fought U.S. troops, have begun to work with the U.S. against extremist groups like al Qaeda in Iraq. They have helped push the militants out of formerly restive parts of the country like Anbar province.

Anthony Cordesman, an analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, agreed with Gen. Petraeus that the U.S. has scored a major success against al Qaeda in Iraq, but he warned that this is "only part of the problem." He said sectarian violence and political disarray remain challenges.

"The risk is that the U.S. will win a military victory, and almost by default, the Iraqi government will create a political defeat because they don't do enough to move towards political accommodation," Mr. Cordesman said. He cited the need for Iraq's Shiite-led government to assist Sunni areas and incorporate Sunnis into Iraq's security services.

Gen. Petraeus said he hasn't begun to work on recommendations to the White House for the pace and scale of any additional troop reductions. Still, he offered some insight into his thinking on troop withdrawals, a sensitive political issue in Iraq and the U.S.

The commander said any future drawdown would be designed to ensure the U.S. maintained its recent security gains and could prevent insurgents from returning to areas vacated by U.S. forces.

The U.S. would seek to pull out of areas only that are free of violence or protected by capable Iraqi security forces or tribal allies, he said. U.S. forces would likely remain -- albeit, in smaller numbers than today -- in restive parts of the country or in areas that lack strong Iraqi military or police units.

"We want to maintain the gains that have been made and, in fact, to build on them," he said.

Gen. Petraeus offered another note of caution on Iran, saying it continues to represent a major source of instability. Senior U.S. officials have long alleged that Iran has funneled advanced weaponry into Iraq, including sophisticated roadside bombs capable of punching through U.S. armored vehicles. These are known as explosively formed penetrators, or EFPs.

Iran has denied its government has knowingly funneled weapons into Iraq or trained Shiite militants there. This month, senior Iranian officials told their Iraqi counterparts that Tehran would take steps to reduce the amount of Iranian armaments flowing into Iraq.

The number of attacks involving EFPs has since fallen sharply, and Iraqi officials recently praised Iran for honoring its promise. Yesterday, Iraq said that it would hold a new round of low-level security talks with Iran and the U.S.

Gen. Petraeus said the U.S. hasn't found any large-scale caches of EFPs since the Iranian-Iraqi accord was announced several weeks ago. But he said it was too soon to tell how much credit, if any, Iran deserved for the recent falloff in EFP attacks.

Iran made "unequivocal pledges to stop the funding, training, arming and directing of militia extremists in Iraq," he said. "It will be hugely significant if that's the case.

"Having said that, there is very much a wait-and-see attitude by everyone involved to see if Iran will live up to those commitments," Gen. Petraeus said.

He said he was disappointed that Iraq's central government hasn't passed legislation giving more power to Iraq's provinces and allowing tens of thousands of Sunni Arabs formerly in Saddam Hussein's Baath Party to return to their state jobs.

Still, he expressed cautious optimism the country had seen a change for the better. "You don't go from bad to good. You go from bad to less bad," he said. "Progress accumulates over time, and you try to build on momentum as it is established."

It never ceases to amaze and anger just how many fallacious assumptions have been made by military officers, policy makers and pundits to derive purported "Surge" success in Iraq. But then again, it is very much in the interests of quite a number of generals and others, who were derelict in their duties earlier in War, to attempt to shift American perception now, on the eve of withdrawal, loss and a presidential election. ~ Luis

http://video.on.nytimes.com/?fr_story=85134a54985fb1c9fa653abd9272b6686410b3b2

Blackwater and other security and logistical contractors must be brought to Justice. On a number of occassions, I felt significantly uncomfortable - even threatened - by the reckless cowboy whores working for security firms. Even worse, are the logistical contractors whose fraud, waste and abuse squandered billions of American and Iraqi taxpayer dollars and directly contributed to the development of the insurgency and the terrible Civil War.

Washington Post
November 15, 2007
Pg. 25
Strategic Drift
Where's the Pushback Against the Surge?
By John Podesta, Lawrence J. Korb and Brian Katulis

With apparent disregard for the opinion of the American people, the debate over whether the large U.S. military presence in Iraq threatens our national security has been put on hold. Both political parties seem resigned to allowing the Bush administration to run out the clock on its Iraq strategy and bequeath this quagmire to the next president. The result is best described as strategic drift, and stopping it won't be easy.

President Bush claims that his strategy is having some success, but toward what end? He argued that the surge would provide the political breathing space needed to achieve a unified, peaceful Iraq. But its successes, which Bush says come from a reduction of casualties in certain areas, have been accompanied by massive sectarian cleansing. The surge has not moved us closer to national reconciliation.

Strategic drift is being aided by many in the legislative and executive branches (in both political parties), most of the foreign policy elite, and several policy research institutions. Conservatives continue to align themselves with Bush's Iraq strategy; some have offered muted criticisms of the implementation and handling of the war, but there has been no call to change direction.

Progressives must be careful not to repeat the mistakes made in 2002 and 2004, when they failed to offer a clear challenge or choice on Iraq. Splitting the difference and hedging on positions helped get America into this quagmire. But during the Democratic presidential debate in Philadelphia last month, Iran, not Iraq, was at the forefront. Iraq is the issue of greatest concern to voters. Progressive candidates should be offering clarity on Iraq and pushing for a real change in course.

The many dangers of allowing our Iraq policy to drift include undermining our ability to respond effectively to other contingencies, such as the ongoing fight in Afghanistan. Not only do we no longer have a strategic ground reserve, but the Army has been forced to lower its recruiting standards to unprecedented levels. The war's human and financial costs continue to rise: More Americans have died in Iraq so far in 2007 than in all of 2006, and the direct financial cost has exceeded $600 billion.

Proponents of the current path claim that, after four years of failed strategies, the surge was needed to get Iraq on track. They point to recent declines in the overall level of violence and cooperation at the local level between some Sunni insurgents and U.S. forces. But the progress being made at the local level often undermines the stated goal of creating a unified, stable, democratic Iraq.

Rather than push for a realistic end to U.S. engagement, the Bush administration claims doomsday scenarios would become reality if a phased U.S. withdrawal began. Iraq, it says, would become a terrorist sanctuary, incite regional war or be the scene of sectarian genocide. These arguments are as faulty as those that led us into Iraq, and progressive leaders must push back. Strategic drift only forestalls the hard work needed to avoid these dangers.

The real security problem in Iraq is a vicious power struggle among competing militias and factions. Foreign terrorists are mainly Sunni and represent only a small percentage of the problem. The Sunni foreign terrorists united with Sunni Iraqis are strongly opposed by Iraq's Shiites and Kurds. And in Anbar province, Sunni tribal leaders rose up against the pro-al-Qaeda Sunni elements well before the surge began. Drifting along the current path actually enhances the al-Qaeda narrative of America as an occupier of Muslim nations.

Similarly, the presence of a large U.S. combat force contributes to regional instability. Since the surge began, the number of internally displaced Iraqis has more than doubled. The U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees has said that more than 2 million Iraqis have left the country, and tens of thousands flee every day, often to squalid camps in Syria and Jordan.

As long as U.S. forces remain in Iraq in significant numbers, regional powers feel free to meddle, knowing that America must bear the consequences. If we clearly state our intent to leave, these states will have incentive to intervene constructively; it would endanger their own security if Iraq were to become a failed state or a launching pad for international terrorism. Even Shiite-dominated Iran, which has become the region's largest power as a result of the war, would not want an Iraqi haven for Sunni-controlled al-Qaeda.

There is one sure way to stop this drift. The United States must set a firm withdrawal date. It is the only way Iraqis and regional leaders will make the compromises necessary to stabilize Iraq and the entire Middle East. This withdrawal can be completed safely in 12 to 18 months and should be started immediately.

President Bush seems content to let Iraq drift until he leaves office, but America can ill afford this policy or, worse, continuing to drift until 2013.

John Podesta, president of the Center for American Progress Action Fund, was White House chief of staff from 1998 to 2001. Lawrence J. Korb, an assistant secretary of defense from 1981 to 1985, and Brian Katulis are senior fellows with the center's National Security Team.

Los Angeles Times
November 5, 2007
Is Maliki's Corruption Worth American Lives?
The Iraqi prime minister is presiding over a government that is stealing us blind.
By Henry A. Waxman

Two truths have emerged from Iraq in recent months. First, corruption is so pervasive in Prime Minister Nouri Maliki's government that political progress in Iraq may be impossible. Second, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and our embassy in Baghdad are inexplicably neglecting this corrosive threat.

Confronting these facts is difficult. Nearly 4,000 American soldiers have been killed and another 28,000 wounded in Iraq since the 2003 invasion. No one wants to believe that these sacrifices were made to establish and support a regime riddled with fraud and graft. But as President Bush asks for an additional $153 billion for the war, we can't shrink from this reality.

Hearings in the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, of which I am chairman, have revealed a devastating cycle of corruption. Rampant theft in Iraqi ministries undermines political reconciliation and diverts billions of dollars from the rebuilding effort. Even worse, the stolen money funds terrorists who attack our troops.

Yet no one in our government is holding Iraqi ministers to account.
The faltering efforts to restore integrity to the Iraqi government suffered a major blow when the chief anticorruption official, Judge Radhi Hamza Radhi, was driven out of Iraq in August and replaced by a Maliki crony. In graphic testimony, Radhi told the oversight committee that 31 of his investigators were assassinated after implicating Iraqi officials in the theft and diversion of $18 billion. The father of one investigator was found hanging from a meat hook. Radhi's own family was targeted in two rocket attacks.

Radhi showed the committee secret orders signed by Maliki's chief of staff that prohibited probes into misdeeds by top Iraqi officials, including the prime minister. He described evidence implicating the ministers of defense, electricity and labor in schemes to steal hundreds of millions of dollars. The oil ministry, he said, is now "effectively funding terrorism." He also reported that Maliki personally blocked an investigation of his cousin, the transportation minister.
Stuart Bowen, the special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction, shares Radhi's alarm. The rising tide of corruption in Iraq is, in Bowen's words, a "second insurgency."

Unfortunately, the U.S. State Department, which should be leading the battle against corruption, is missing in action. Its Office of Accountability and Transparency, which is supposed to support Iraqi anticorruption efforts, has been led by four different directors in the last 10 months. (Incredibly, the most recent acting director previously worked as a paralegal.) The only permanent director of the office, Judge Arthur Brennan, told the committee that there is no "coordinated U.S. strategy to fight corruption in Iraq."

The director of the State Department's Anticorruption Working Group provided a similar assessment, stating: "I would like to be able to say that we've done quite a bit in this area, but unfortunately, we have not. ... [T]o be completely, embarrassingly honest with you, there's not a lot of conversation going on."
Independent audits by Bowen and the Government Accountability Office also have reached disheartening conclusions, finding that the State Department's efforts suffer from poor coordination, lack of overall direction and duplication.

The secretary of State seemed completely unaware of the extent to which her own department's anticorruption efforts are in disarray when she testified before the oversight committee on Oct. 25. Rice acknowledged that there is "a very bad problem of corruption in Iraq. It is a problem in ministries, it is the problem in government, it is a problem with officials." Yet she endorsed Maliki's performance, asserting that "Prime Minister Maliki has made the fighting of corruption one of the most important elements of his program." She promised to cooperate with the committee's investigations, but then insisted that discussions of corruption take place in closed session, which would defeat the purpose of oversight.

The Maliki government is our ally in Iraq, so I understand why she and President Bush find the mounting evidence of fraud and graft inconvenient. But the moral, political and practical implications of this corruption cannot responsibly be ignored.

Military success in Iraq isn't an end unto itself: It is a bridge to the ultimate goal of a lasting peace. If the Maliki government is too corrupt to bring freedom and democracy to Iraq -- and political reconciliation is an illusion -- can we in good conscience continue to ask our troops to risk their lives and our taxpayers to invest hundreds of billions of dollars in this war?

Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Beverly Hills) is the chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

Welcome to the Blog of Luis Carlos Montalvan.