War on Terrorism – the Forgotten War?

september-11-attack-building-explosion

Former US President George W. Bush will always be remembered for the War on Terrorism, a war he brought America and the rest of his allies on after the September 11 attacks. Whether what it brought was good or bad is still is for debate and probably will never be answered unless it’s in hindsight. The question is, when will we be starting to look at it on hindsight? Where are we in the War on Terror? Are we winning? What does winning look like? When will it end?

Much of these questions were brought about by the fact that the end was never defined to us by those who propagated it. Up to now we don’t know what the final goal is and where we are right now in our quest to reach it. If you ask people down the street what successes of the War on Terror they know of they would probably mention Saddam Hussein’s capture and subsequent execution. This is exactly the convoluted thinking we are in right now. The War on Terror should not be equated with the War in Iraq but the two have been so intertwined that everybody has been confused.

Since Bush left office, things became clearer in the sense that it is clear that we do not know where we are. The scheduled pull out from Iraq shows that Iraq is not the be all and end all of the War on Terror. While it is welcomed that things in Iraq are being cleaned up, we still need to know what the ending should look like. If they do not define it soon, people will soon be thinking that the goal is actually to totally eradicate evil in this world which would mean that there is no end save for Judgment Day.

The question in the beginning of the war was that the war is not properly defined. In fact, at that time, Terrorism itself was not defined. So if you are confused about things, don’t worry because it has always been confusing from the beginning. Where are we in the War on Terror? I can tell you, but it wouldn’t do much help.

Bush Will Be Remembered for his Wars








bush

 

 

 

In a few days, the most powerful man on earth is stepping down for good. For almost a decade, he maneuvered America toward tough, record-breaking economic challenges,  post-9/11 recovery, and of course two historic wars.

For most Americans, George W. Bush leaves with a legacy that is highly questionable mainly because the superpower country is less prosperous and more problematic now than Bill Clinton’s or any other recent administration. It may be hard to condemn or judge him as he faced a lot tougher choices than his predecessor but those choices will forever be carved in history as some of the most unimpressive choices of a US President.

Bush will be remembered more for the two major wars he waged against suspected terrorism-embracing countries than for working to make the world a better place. He insists  that he made the planet safer with his actions most especially America, but do we believe in him? Does America believe in him?

Whatever his reasons are, the point is what did America get from Afghanistan? What goodness did the Iraq War serve? If it’s human life that he defended, why did we see thousands of innocent civilians soaking in blood and why is the world still unsafe up to now?  

I want to know the answers Mr. President.

 

John McCain and War

John Mc'Cain

Above: Republican Presidential Candidate John McCain (Photo: Charles Dharapak/AP)

Presumptive Republican Presidential candidate John McCain, like his President in Washington, does not want to softly deal with suspected Bin Laden-embracing or nuke-developing countries. For him, talking to possible terrorists is a big waste of time. He even criticizes presumptive Democratic Presidential Candidate Barrack Obama for planning a friendly stance toward those hostile countries.

Barrack Obama

Above: Democratic Presidential Candidate Barrack Obama (Photo: nativenotes.wordpress.com)

Once again, McCain is certain with what he is saying as if Bush’s war strategy yielded positive results – a war that he strongly encouraged and supported. Years after the United States started a war in Afghanistan, al-Qaeda still remains a hot news item and its leader still speaks confidently on camera against America. McCain’s irony does not just end there as the War on Iraq which he favored and still favors, continues to defeat its purpose.

John Mc'Cain

Above: McCain in Iraq (Photo: www.defendamerica.mil)

Obama may have erred in his stance on Afghanistan years ago, but he saw wisdom in voting against the War on Iraq. If he plans to learn from the mistakes that he saw, then such a plan is expected of a man who uses his mind. McCain simply looks beyond what he sees, but the problem is that such “beyond” sights of this veteran senator are clearly unreal. Logic simply dictates us to learn from our past failures. If we listen to McCain and believe that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq which destroyed more innocent lives than 9/11 are not a failure, then this world would be far worse than too much.

How’s your war, Uncle Sam?

Baghdad Under Attacks

Above: US raid on the Iraqi capital Baghdad (Photo: www.thewe.cc)

Okay, so it’s a no-brainer that one of the most powerful nations at present is America and George W. Bush, being its president, inevitably makes him one of the most powerful persons on earth.

At present, the world is having two major wars – in Afghanistan and Iraq. But is this really an inevitable war between or among countries or is it a war that America wanted and started? What exactly is the role of the US in these difficult times?

The planet used to be a better place than its present state, but the 9/11 bombings changed it all. The United States was attacked and hundreds died. It was a carefully-designed terrorist act which gave America sufficient reason to demand for justice.

George W. Bush

Above: How’s your war Mr. Bush? (Photo: www.greenpeace.org)

George Bush was supposed to be on the right track until he insisted on waging war against suspected countries that embrace Bin Laden. Bush initiated War in Afghanistan immediately after 9/11 to dissolve al-Qaeda and its connections, but to this date not a shadow of Bin Laden was found and the terrorist group still operates actively. The Taliban government was overthrown but still remains a headache to George Bush. The reality in Afghanistan continues to haunt and compels us to ask – Did the United States after all achieve its purpose for the War it started in 2001?

To make the situations worse, Bush then engaged in a massive propaganda linking Iraq to al-Qaeda and the country’s weapons of mass destruction. America took its case to the United Nations but to the dismay of George Bush, the U.N. disapproved. Irritated and impatient, Bush and America waged War on Iraq, overthrew its government, captured and executed Saddam Hussein, and eventually missed its purpose. Iraq has become a more hostile country than ever and not a single mass destruction weapon has been uncovered.

Condoleza Rice

Above: US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in Afghanistan (AP Photo)

Yes, America suffered the 9/11 attacks and hundreds of lives were taken by the merciless terrorist act. On the other hand, we know that many more innocent people died of George Bush’s retaliatory wars – to date, there must be already about not less than 840,000 people that have been killed and over 1.5 million seriously injured in the Afghanistan and Iraq wars and the numbers are still on the rise. Now, we simply stare at these two nations paying the price for being not America.

Koran Used for Target Practice

Ruins After Bombing

Above: Ruins after bombing
A United States soldier has been accused of using a Koran for target practice. This AP file photo shows a Koran shot through during an assault by United States forces.

United States President George W. Bush has already apologized by telephone call to Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki. He also promised prosecution of the said United States soldier. PM al-Maliki told the United States president about the incident, saying that is had humiliated and angered Iraq’s largely Muslim population.

You think? No one in their right mind would disrespect anybody else’s religion – and doing it in such a way is humanly unthinkable.

“The American president apologized on behalf of the United States … promising to present the soldier to the courts,” said a statement from the PM to the Iraqi cabinet.

According to United States embassy sources, the United States president was deeply sorrowed by the “completely unacceptable conduct of an American soldier.” A copy of the Koran was found at a shooting range at the Radhwaniya police station near Baghdad, Iraq. It was almost completely destroyed from bullet holes. The Iraqi policeman who recovered the book said a target was written in the middle of the Koran. Some tribal leaders who saw the book said that the United States soldier even wrote offensive remarks on the book. The leaders consider this a “criminal act.”

United States military commanders based in Iraq held a ceremony after they found out about the incident. As a sign of apology and dismay over the event, the United States leaders presented a new Koran to the tribal leaders in the area. The military has described the incident as “serious and deeply troubling.”

“I come before you here seeking your forgiveness,” Maj. Gen. Jeffery Hammond said during the ceremony. “In the most humble manner I look in your eyes today and I say please forgive me and my soldiers.”

The soldier issued a letter of apology stating: “I sincerely hope that my actions have not diminished the partnership that our two nations have developed together.” The soldier describes his own actions as “shortsighted, very reckless and irresponsible.”

The United States military officials also reiterated that United States soldiers respect Islam and the Koran.

Do they really? Is that tiny ceremony even enough? Is an apology even enough? We think this tiny incident, although isolated, reflects the sentiment of most United States soldiers in Iraq.

Iraqi government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh believes so. “We need to try this soldier since he committed a grievous crime. This is what the Iraqi government wants. It is not satisfied with just an apology.”

Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi and his Iraqi Islamic Party called the incident a “blatant assault on the sanctities of Muslims all over the world.” The party wants the “severest of punishments” for the crime.

“What truly concerns us is the repetition of these crimes that have happened in the past when mosques were destroyed and pages of the holy Koran were torn and used for disgraceful acts by U.S. soldiers,” al-Hashimi said.

“I have asked that first this apology be officially documented; second a guarantee from the U.S. military to inflict the maximum possible punishment on this soldier so it would be a deterrent for the rest of the soldiers in the future.”

The soldier, a staff sergeant and sniper section leader, has already been removed from Iraq. He was relieved of his duty as section leader, was dismissed from his regiment and was redeployed back to the United States.

Is that it? I hope this is not the last we heard of his “punishment.”

Needless to say, this is an embarrassment to the United States and their supposedly “superb” military. Thankfully, there has been no violent (and I mean violent) reaction in Iraq, as there is no question as to how passionate the Islamic community is about their religion. There is no doubt that Muslims from all over the world are angered. Someone has to pay for this.

One of the main reasons why the United States military is still present in Iraq is to help the Iraqi people in their fight against the terrorist group al-Qaeda. But how can you say that you are there to help if in the outset you don’t even respect the people you are helping? Is that genuine help? Perhaps we must ask the question: are they really helping at all?

Iraqis Arrest a Man CLAIMING to be an al-Qaeda Leader

Abu Hamza Al-Muhajir

Above: Abu Hamza al-Muhajir

An al-Qaeda member was arrested in northern Iraq – and the arrested man says he is the head of the organization for the entire country.

Major General Abdul Karim Khalaf told Iraqi television network al-Iraqiya that the detained man claimed that he was Abu Hamza al-Muhajir. His captors are still investigating on his true identity as these matters need factual proof. The picture above is a file photo of al-Muhajir.

Abu Hamza al-Muhajir is a Sunni militia leader. According to reports, on June 12, 2006, he was announced on an unnamed Islamist website as the new leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq. This was made days after former leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was killed from a U.S. air strike only five days before.

The name Muhajir is believed to be a pseudonym. Experts from the FBI and the U.S. State Department does not support the claim that we has named as new al-Qaeda leader. According to their intelligence, the name Muhajir is the pseudonym of an Egyptian militia leader whose real name is Abu Ayyub al-Masri. Al-Masri trained in Afghanistan and was responsible for forming the al-Qaeda’s first cell in Baghdad. There is truth, however, that he was pursued as an aide to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. His identity was confirmed three days after the said announcement of change in Iraqi al-Qaeda leadership.

But a month later, on July 6, 2006, an Egyptian newspaper released a report that Egyptian lawyer Mamduh Ismail claims that Sharif Hazaa, also known in Egypt as Abu Ayyub al-Masri, has been locked up in a Cairo prison for the last seven years running. Other American and Jordanian officials, however, claims that Abu Ayyub al-Masri is not the same person as Sharif Hazaa, and that Sharif Hazaa is actually the pseudonym of a certain Yusuf al-Dardiri. While others claim that all these names are being used by one and the same person.

“He was arrested in Wad al-Hajar region of Nineveh during a raid (Wednesday),” Major General Khalaf said. “Now we are conducting more investigations to confirm whether he is Abu Hamza. The police raided the area and captured the man who said ‘I am Abu Hamza al-Muhajir.’”

The U.S. State Department had posted a $5 million reward for information leading to his arrest. The man being pursued is a car bomb expert and is surely a member of al-Qaeda. The only problem is that the truth about his real identity has been debated among Iraqi and U.S. military officials. Abu Hamza al-Muhajir translated means the Father of Hamza (the eldest) the immigrant, while Abu Ayyub al-Masri translated means the Father of Ayyub (the eldest) the Egyptian.

Some experts believe that al-Masri carried out attacks in Egypt from the 80s to the 90s, and then later moved to Afghanistan to join al-Qaeda. As an explosives expert specializing in the construction of car bombs, he was a key addition to their movement. Experts believe that he made his way to Iraq from Afghanistan after the March 2003 invasion. While some believe he came earlier in 1999, and met Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in the al-Faruq training camp in Afghanistan where he became an explosives expert.

Should we believe a man who upon his arrest came yelling that his name was that of an al-Qaeda leader? The answer is no. If we do believe that the man named al-Muhajir is the real al-Qaeda leader in Iraq, then this man they just arrested is not al-Muhajir; but then again al-Muhajir could just be a random name given to a non-existent figure that the terrorist group used as the face of the organization for the U.S. military.

“Thus one who is skillful at keeping the enemy on the move maintains deceitful appearances, according to which the enemy will act.” – The Art of War by Sun Tzu

Another Shiite Cleric Assassinated

Riyadh Al-Nouri Assasinated

Above: Riyadh al-Nouri assasinated

Riyadh al-Nouri, director of al-Sadr’s office in Najaf, was assassinated by yet an unknown number of gunmen near his home.

Muqtada al-Sadr blamed the Americans and the U.S.-backed Iraqi government for the killing.

In his statement Friday, al-Sadr blamed the killing on “the hands of the occupiers and their stooges reaching out traitorously and aggressively against our dear martyr.”

But ironically, the Shiite leader called for calm.

“I call upon Sadrist followers to be patient.”

Even though we all know that there will be retaliation, their numbers are simply limited and most of his Mahdi Army are already fighting U.S. and Iraqi troops in Baghdad and southern Iraq. Their leader has been under extreme pressure from all Iraqi political parties to disband their army.

“The occupiers will not rest in our land as long as I am alive,” said al-Sadr. “We demand the government open an investigation and punish the criminals. We call upon all political and religious groups to work toward ending the killing of clerics.”

Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, also a Shiite and now a sworn enemy of al-Sadr and his Mahdi Army, condemned “this savage crime” and ordered an investigation “to pursue and arrest the killers.”

The same kind of support was not given the PM during al-Nouri’s funeral (pictured above: family members and supporters raise his coffin in their funeral march). Al-Sadr’s supporters in Najaf chanted “al-Maliki is the enemy of God,” together with other slogans against al-Sadr’s Shiite political rivals.

To say that this assassination will increase tension in the entire country is an understatement. Najaf is a theological place. Al-Nouri was killed just right after prayer service. He is an influential Sadrist figure. Several prominent Sadrists look up to al-Nouri as their voice of moderation within the movement. He is one of those who constantly argued against armed confrontation with the Americans, the Iraqi government, and al-Sadr’s other Shiite rivals. He opposed their group’s decision to withdraw from al-Maliki’s government.

All signs point to condemnation!

The 41 year old leader was one of al-Sadr’s closest aides – he is part of the family (his sister is married to one of al-Sadr’s brothers). As I said earlier, Najaf is a theological place and as director of the city’s office, al-Nouri was al-Sadr’s representative in the world’s most prestigious center of Shiite learning.

Tension between al-Sadr and other Shiite parties turned into violent gunfights last month when PM al-Maliki launched an armed offensive against Shiite militias and gangs in Basra City. In retaliation, al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army launched attacks throughout southern Iraq and Baghdad. His militia showered the U.S.-controlled Green Zone with rockets and mortars.

One of al-Sadr’s rivals for Shiite control is the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council. They control the security services in Najaf City and according to Sadrist officials, when al-Nouri was attacked it took the police longer than usual to respond to the gunfire – when they were just 300 yards away in a security checkpoint.

Drawdown of Iraq troop is likely to stop in July

Soldier in Iraq

Above: US Soldier in Iraq

Gen. David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker are the two top officials in Iraq located on Capitol Hill this week to report on the know about in the Iraq war, thou there is not much to expect that the US policy will probably have so little change before the year ends and before the arrival of America’s next president.

It is not due to the reason that General Petraeus has pointed out he will recommend regarding further drawdown of US forces that surpasses the level that they were supposed to be programmed to hit at midsummer. This is the same case due to despite security gains of the past year, Iraq is expect to be stagnant in a fragile state for as long as President Bush’s term.

There are several factors that can lead to unstable conditions on the ground:

  • US and Shiite-dominated government was a disappointment to Sunni over the rate which Sunni are being incorporated into the Iraqi Army with the jobs provided.
  • There had been a power struggle amongst militias and Iraq’s dominant Shiite groups, most probably in the south. Recent in Basra can also be a matter in the case.
  • Not being ready to take over military operations coalition forces and US on the side of Iraqi security.
  • Diversifying political jockeying un the run-up to provincial elections that is being readied for fall.
  • There’s a strong hold in the north where signs that Al Qaeda in Iraq and affiliated Islamic extremists are standing and established. There are also expectations especially on the side of that Al Qaeda in Iraq will make or announce violent statement that will occur during and within the US elections.
  • As Iraq and the US cross electoral periods, questions had been raised regarding how Iran will make use of its influence in Iraq.

An Iraq specialist at the National Defense University by the name of Judith Yaphe said, “We’re definitely going to hear a lot from [Petraeus and Mr. Crocker] about what our military strategy has accomplished and how there still needs to be more political progress,”

“But there’s a lot of risk and uncertainty – for the Iraqis, for our role in Iraq, for our elections, so I don’t see it as a period when we’re going to see much change in the way of strategy.”

With Congress, the status quo may not be as well, but the Democrats may not have that much ability then they did compared to fall when to force changes with the last Patraeus-Crocker hearings. Some Democratic strategists are also expecting so little to come out in this upcoming week’s Iraq hearings since the focus is more on the next administration.

Even though Iraq was America’s top concern, the holding for the next 10 consecutive months is not acceptable for US interests, for the region, for Iraq, or for the troops as some lawmakers state.

Mocratic Sen. Joseph Biden asks, “What is the policy from here?”, a chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee that will take not of Petraeus and Crocker’s announcement. “Is [the Bush administration] intending to bind the next administration? … I truly believe the president’s plan is to muddle through and to hand it off to the next president,” he adds. “I don’t think they know what to do.”

There are over 35,000 US troops is pointing out on what the US should do in Iraq, some experts say that it protects civilians even more and sway them from militias, in example. However, even if there are those who implement troop reduction due to the term note and political climate pertaining that the US is not going to be involved in it for that long.

A former National Security Council Persian Gulf expert by the name of Ken Pillack who is not located at the Brooking Institution says that the US having had stabilized the north and the Sunni Anbar Province, should to in where Iraq’s dominant Shiite communities are in great flux which is in the south.

He says, “The surge has actually encouraged a fair percentage of the Shia population,” Quietly, the Shia communities have begun to come over and are saying, ‘We don’t really like’ ” the multiply political-party-affiliated militias that have divided them. If the US does not grab hold of the moment with the Shiite population he says, it will only weaken as it does not try to be associated with the same powerful militias.

Any act of pushing at Iraq’s south would bring the US close feud and confrontation with Iran, where the Iran’s influence there are growing strongly. Some analysts say that the US would do well to addressing the issue in a larger and more context manner. Ms. Yaphe said, “If you want peace in Iraq, if you want America to be able to have an exit strategy, the road goes through Tehran,” former CIA Middle East analyst.

Still other analysts say, the gesture was supposed to inflict and facilitate a political reconciliation in Iraq, and so far it has not done that.

An example of this would be 90,000 Sunnis may now be armed to help fighting againsts AL Qaeda in Iraq, However most of these had not been integrated in the Iraq security forces by the Shiit-led government.

Wayne White , a former Irraq expert together with the State Department Policy Planning Staff and is now in the Middle East institute says, “If you are on the fence as a tribal sheikh …, wondering if you want to join in on this movement, what the government has been doing in terms of who they are and aren’t taking into the security personnel has not been encouraging,”

Some experts that are more on the Provincial rather than the national level and not according to US “benchmarks”, in Iraq share a little hope of any reconciliation to be occurring.

But other share the fine points and advantages of a political reconciliation, whether or not it is happening and how fast it can occur, are not at all in connection with the US political context.

Ivo Daadler who is a US foreign-policy specialist at the Brookings instituted shared, “The realistic timetable for [stabilizing Iraq] may be 10 years, but the political timetable is 10 months,”. Believing that the congressional effort wont be as strong as to push in changing Iraq policy.

Mr. Daalder added, “The political debate will no longer be on the Hill, but what you do in ’09.”

Iraqi Ethnic Groups Map and Population Statistics

Ethnic Map of Iraq

Above: Iraq Ethnicity Map

Ethnic groups:

Arab 75%-80%, Kurdish 15%-20%, Turkoman, Assyrian, or other 5%

Religions:

Muslim 97% (Shi’a 60%-65%, Sunni 32%-37%), Christian or other 3%

Population:

27,499,638 (July 2007 est.)

Age structure:

Iraq Age Structure
0-14 years: 39.4% (male 5,509,736/female 5,338,722)
15-64 years: 57.6% (male 8,018,841/female 7,812,611)
65 years and over: 3% (male 386,321/female 433,407) (2007 est.)

Median age:

total: 20 years
male: 19.9 years
female: 20 years (2007 est.)

Population growth rate:

2.618% (2007 est.)

Birth rate:

31.44 births/1,000 population (2007 est.)

Death rate:

5.26 deaths/1,000 population (2007 est.)

Net migration rate:

0 migrant(s)/1,000 population (2007 est.)

Sex ratio:
at birth: 1.05 male(s)/female
under 15 years: 1.032 male(s)/female
15-64 years: 1.026 male(s)/female
65 years and over: 0.891 male(s)/female
total population: 1.024 male(s)/female (2007 est.)

Infant mortality rate:
total: 47.04 deaths/1,000 live births
male: 52.73 deaths/1,000 live births
female: 41.07 deaths/1,000 live births (2007 est.)

Life expectancy at birth:
total population: 69.31 years
male: 68.04 years
female: 70.65 years (2007 est.)

Total fertility rate:
4.07 children born/woman (2007 est.)

HIV/AIDS – adult prevalence rate:
less than 0.1% (2001 est.)

HIV/AIDS – people living with HIV/AIDS:
less than 500 (2003 est.)

HIV/AIDS – deaths:
NA

Nationality:
noun: Iraqi(s)
adjective: Iraqi

Languages:

Iraq Languages
Arabic, Kurdish (official in Kurdish regions), Assyrian, Armenian

Literacy:
definition: age 15 and over can read and write
total population: 74.1%
male: 84.1%
female: 64.2% (2000 est.)

“George Bush nearly out of money, in Iraq, Afganistan”, Gates

US Military Iraq

Above: Army underfunded, Iraq War Underfunded

Half of George Bushs’ 140 billion dollars of war funding was passed by Congress, this means that the campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan are seriously underfunded, this puts added pressure for the US to pull out of both countries, this makes a pullout of a large bulk of American troops possible in mid 2008.

Robert Gates

Robert Gates Picture above centre

Robert Gates (US Defence Secetary) stated that the underfunding is seriously effecting the Americans ability to run operations smoothly, he is pushing to secure more funds.