Blackwater Verus the Iraqi Interior Ministry
I'm waiting to see what facts emerge in the recent news stories about the suspension of Blackwater's license by the Iraqi Interior Ministry for allegedly shooting civilians without justification. Now Blackwater may well be in the wrong although, according to Bloomberg, it denies any wrongdoing in the incident, claiming it was responding to an attack from all directions on a State Department convoy so there will be plenty of witnesses to the proceedings. Those following events in Iraq will know that the Iraqi Interior Ministry as long being accused to being a tool of Shi'ite militias and heavily infiltrated by the Iranians. I think the best thing to do for now is to see what facts emerge.
One question is how long the Interior Ministry will remain under current management. Omar of Iraq the Model at Pajamas describes the steady weakening of the ruling coalition with no apparent replacement.
Nothing follows.
posted by wretchardthecat at 9/17/2007 05:29:00 PM
25 Comments:
It is with deep regret that I feel we ought to concede, while noting the unreliability of an Iraqi Interior Ministry version of events, that it is also far from clear how reliable testimony from 'State Department witnesses' might turn out to be, even in relation to an attack on their own convoy.
The Iraqi Government is sovereign, or not.
The Interior Ministry is, or not.
If not, the US has failed in the primary mission.
So sad, but seeming true.
5,700 Troops Home by Christmass!!
Stay the Course!
DR: The Iraqi Government is sovereign, or not.
It is not.
"Iraqi courts do not have jurisdiction to prosecute contractors without the permission of the relevant member country of the Multi-National Forces in Iraq."
Then those "Contractors" will have to go, or US policy declared a failure.
The Occupation Authorization Treaty is up for renewal in Dec07
Decision time, all around
5,700 US Troops, Home for Christmass
The Bush Doctrine requires Iraqi Sovergienty to succeed.
Blackwater's gotta go
Or the US will have failed in the primary Mission, can't ge havin' that.
Time to renegotiate
So, then, really, what the bottom line is is that the militia's can't even take on and defeat paid soldiers of fortune, let alone American troops? That they have to lower themselves to running them out of town on a political lie?
I thought jihadists and ARabs were easily humiliated, but it seems like they just toddle around doing stuff that is guaranteed to humiliate the hell out of them.
Like General P says nahncee, the War in Iraq cannot be won, miltarily. Only politically.
The Iraqi believe him, in the US both sides of the asile reject his wisdom but acceptted his advice.
30,000 Troops, home for the 4th of July!
What a Parade we'll have!
Desert Rat,
Saying the solution is political, not military is not meaningful. The military situation influences any political "solution." Iran is ready to sign a political solution right now that gets the US out and allows them follow the Hezbollah model in Iraq. With the US Military ithere they can't do that b/c they will lose any massed battle. The Kurds have always understood this and wanted us there, now the Arab Sunnis do as well.
Desert Rat knows nothing...
Oh wait the complete sentence was Desert Rat knows nothing about Clauzwitz. Gosh, when you cut a quote in half, it changes the meaning doesn't it.
With all thanks to Desert Rat, I'd prefer to see what Petraeus said in context -- Wouldn't we all?????::::::
GEN. PETRAEUS: With respect, again, to the -- you know, the idea of the reconcilables and the irreconcilables, this is something in which the Iraqi government obviously has the lead. It is something that they have sought to -- in some cases, to reach out. And I think, again, that any student of history recognizes that there is no military solution to a problem like that in Iraq, to the insurgency of Iraq. Military action is necessary to help improve security, for all the reasons that I stated in my remarks, but it is not sufficient.
A political resolution of various differences, of this legislation, of various senses that people do not have a stake in the success of the new Iraq, and so forth, that is crucial. That is what will determine in the long run the success of this effort. And again, that clearly has to include talking with and eventually reconciling differences with some of those who have felt that the new Iraq did not have a place for them, whereas I think, again, Prime Minister Maliki clearly believes that it does, and I think that his actions will demonstrate that, along with the other ministers....
Hmmmm, is that exactly what rat has been saying?
Military action is necessary but not sufficient. That is common strategic thought, especially from a General who has written our doctrine for the confict we are in. Yes, this particular war, technically known as a counterinsurgency relies on politics as much as bullets.
Desert Rat sounds like he longs for defeat. You won't get it rat.
See both are necessary..
The general also said this....
We cannot allow mass murderers to hold the initiative. We must strike them relentlessly.
General Petraeus - from his first message to the men and women of his new command:
Together with our Iraqi partners, we must defeat those who oppose the new Iraq. We cannot allow mass murderers to hold the initiative. We must strike them relentlessly. We and our Iraqi partners must set the terms of the struggle, not our enemies. And together we must prevail.
The way ahead will not be easy. There will be difficult times in the months to come. But hard is not hopeless, and we must remain steadfast in our effort to help improve security for the Iraqi people. I am confident that each of you will fight with skill and courage, and that you will remain loyal to your comrades-in-arms and to the values our nations hold so dear.
In the end, Iraqis will decide the outcome of this struggle. Our task is to help them gain the time they need to save their country. To do that, many of us will live and fight alongside them. Together, we will face down the terrorists, insurgents, and criminals who slaughter the innocent. Success will require discipline, fortitude, and initiative--qualities that you have in abundance.
You are new to the game, george.
I pine for the US to fight a war or to leave it to others to fight.
It was 2003 when the War stopped and nationbuilding began, before the enemy was defeated.
Now we have decide to withdraw, starting in November, a date I forecast, back in April and May of '05.
There is no War on Islam, there is only the War of the Authorization, which has now been won.
General Oderino said as much to Ralph Peters. On 16 Aug07
In a forthright interview with The Post yesterday, the commanding general of the Multinational Corps-Iraq - the man who leads the day-to-day fight in support of Gen. David Petraeus - noted that, while foreign terrorists remain a threat, al Qaeda's been wounded so deeply by the Sunni Arab shift against them that he now feels other issues take priority.
"First, I worry about Shia extremism and Iranian interference, which is increasing. In the long term, Iraqis won't allow Iranians to take over their country - but, in the short term, I'm worried about Basra and the Port of Um Qasr."
Odierno, whose limbs stretched out from a big, black-leather chair, folded his hands. "Second, I'm worried about the development of the government of Iraq. They have to solve their own problems - we can't solve them."
General Simmons, he said much tthe same on Hugh Hewitt. But that the situation in Basra is, was, a success. On 29 Aug 07
HH: Now there were reports out of Basra a couple of weeks ago that after the Brits have withdrawn that the radicals had taken control of the city. Are those reports accurate?
JS: They are not accurate, and that is a fabrication at best. This was a planned turnover of the Palace and the PJCC to Iraqi control, to the Iraqi legitimate government forces. It was done to standard with, and to well-trained, well-equipped Iraqi Security Forces. There were some peaceful demonstrations that were celebratory in nature, but at no time was any Coalition forces threatened, and the local Iraqi officials under General Mohan, kept a good handle on the situation in Basra.
HH: So what is the situation then in Basra, because that Washington Post story made it sound like the Wild West without the saloons.
JS: It was a demonstration of OMS, or Shia people there that were celebrating, to the best of my knowledge, the return of an Iraqi landmark to the Iraqi government.
We've already won, george. I pine for the Law to be followed. Which has now begun.
30,000 US troops home for the 4th of July!
BECAUSE WE'VE WON!!
Which whereas of the Authorization has not been completed?
Easy enough question, george.
Look to General Oderino for confirmation of the threat, if there is one. aQ not being the Commander of MNFIraq highest priority of concern.
If aQ is not the Commandrs "priority of concern" , but the POLITICS of nationbuilding is
BECAUSE WE'VE WON!!!
There is not n "Regional War", for the US, that issue was debated and decided in 2002, decided wrongly by the GOP controlled Congress, I think, but decided it was. Authorization for Use of Force, limited to Iraq. After debate on the matter.
This is the new mission, per General P
From the thread at Mudville's Gazette
But Galula’s book--a number of others all certainly and you can certainly debate whether the percentage is 20/80 or 30/70 or who knows what but--but clearly there has to be a primacy of the political aspects. At the end of the day that’s what this is about--it is about helping another nation in this case forge a sense of political community, of unity, of moving forward together and then improving in the economic realm, improving in the realm of basic services, improving in terms of--of security, of justice, and all of the other aspects that any society aspires to enjoy.
Which is a nationbuilding and Peacekeeping Mission that is not amongst the Wheras's I read in the Authorization
This comment has been removed by the author.
And we are withdrawing, because the primary mission is complete
General Jones reports the Iraqi Army will be ready, 18 to 24 more months. That'll have been 7 years from the start. Time enough to build that vaunted NCO Corps.
Jan09, 100,000 US troops deployed.
12 to 18 months to Iraqi capacity.
Sep 09, 70,000 US troops deployed
4 to 9 months to Iraqi capacity.
Dec09 62,000 US troops deployed
Iraqi Army capable or within 90 days
Mar10 55,000 US troops deployed
Iraqi Army fully capable
What is the "Stay Behind" Force structure to be?
We'd better get that negotiated, with the Iraqi Government. While they are still beholdin', such as they are.
The description of the incident sounds like an attempted kidnapping. Blackwater may have felt that their clients were threatened even if the Iraqi’s surrounding them had “official” uniforms. It has happened before:
Five Brits kidnapped by men in police uniforms:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/29/world/middleeast/29cnd-Iraq.html?ex=1190174400&en=ea5508d5a466a681&ei=5070
and of course the Karbala attacks:
http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2007/01/the_karbala_attack_a.php
In that situation would you feel comfortable surrendering to Iraqi “police”?
If you guessed wrong and they were Qods force or Mahdi Army you would have a brief but painful movie career involving electric drills and decapitation.
What makes you think the current Iraqi government, beholdin' or not, is gonna be around too much longer?
My bet is that American troops will be in Iraq longer than Maliki is, and I'm hoping that very very soon Mookie will also meet his Waterloo, which will impact the "ministers" who do things like refuse to send food to Anbar and fire Blackwater bodyguards.
Because, nanchee, the US has stake it's succuess on that Givernment or it's democraticly chosen replacement, under the US approved Constitution.
The cornerstone of US strategic policy. What would make you think Mr Bush would abandon Maliki, after warning of the lessons of Vietnam. Mr Diem's demise was the beginning of the end. We lost the ideological war, with the Coup and the killing.
Same with the Shah. To follow on with Mr Maliki, abject failure for US, Mr Bush wouldn't go for it.
Through the next Iraqi election, which will come in '09.
First: The electoral term of the Council of Representatives shall be limited to four calendar years, starting with its first session and ending with the conclusion of the fourth year.
Second: The new Council of Representatives shall be elected forty-five days before the conclusion of the previous electoral term.
They choose a new {rime Minister, or there is a no confidence vote, and another Government is chosen, a new PM, but same Constitutional Government.
DR is a process guy. A 5-4 game is not a really a win because the other side scored runs and because the manager said before the game that his staring pitcher would go 6 innings but got pulled after 4. The manager is a liar and the game plan a failure.
The outcome is irrelevant. What people said about the game plan is the only thing of importance. This form of analysis is not any different from that of the most virulent collectivist.
Well, peter, not accurate.
Answer the question posed to george.
Which whereas is uncompleted from the Authorization for Use of Force?
Not to hard.
You folks just cannot take YES for an answer.
The Generals say the war is over, but for the politics
20/80 military to politics or 30/70
military to politics. That is the "range" of ratios that General P used.
That's not war, that's Peacekeeping. The US does not need 162,000 Peackeepers in Iraq, Thus, the withdrawals will start in November.
Celebrate! Velebtate!
Dance to the music!
30,000 US Troops Home for the 4th of July!
Listen to the Generals, unless you think they are lying. Do you?
It is a kick, to talk about little old me, while ignoring the Generals and the Law.
Just to defend the idefensable, like typical BDS sufferers. Typical Democratic leftists that attack the messenger, while ignoring the meaasge and the realities it delivers.
You all got spurs that jingo
but do not support the President or current US Policies.
No more than the MoveOn folk or the DailyKos. Little wonder that most of the old crew of intellectual thinkers have moved on. Leaving the jingoists loose with keyboards.
Mt Totten reports
Combat operations are finished in Ramadi. The American military now acts as a peacekeeping force to protect the city from those who recently lost it and wish to return.
Peacekeeping is not War!
Celebrate! Celebrate!
Whether Anbar Province is freshly christened pro-American ground or whether the newly founded Iraqi-American alliance is merely temporary and tactical is hard to say. Whatever the case, the region is no longer a breeding ground for violent anti-American and anti-Iraqi forces.
“As of July 30,” Major Peters said in early August, “we’ve have 81 days in the city with zero attacks since March 31.”
“We’ve had only one attack in our area of operations in the past couple of months,” said Captain Jay McGee at the Blue Diamond base. He was referring to the Jazeera area immediately north of the city and including the suburbs. “And we haven’t had a single car bomb in our area since February.”
What is "Victory" or "Success" gonna' look like, if not what is on the ground, bow.
Local security, National Government, Regional Autonomy?
What "end state" are you fighting to achieve, basd upon US Law?
Who or what did you all think that the Iraqis are, were, if not Muslims? Who do you all think we fought and died to empower, if not al-Sadar and the SCIRI?
What fantasy are you empowering?
90% of governing, anywhere in the world involves being seen to be addressing problems. The fact that someone is taking an action, whether or not it will fix the problem, is more important than the actual action.
Whether or not Blackwaters license will remain suspended is a question.
But for the Iraqi public, their Government took "Swift Action".
Desert Rat - lots of stories about ground-up democracy happening in Iraq, bypassing the elected government. So many stories, in fact, that I think maybe Bush/White House is putting them out.
What would be better for democracy in Iraq than if Maliki was toppled by the tribes that elected him in the first place? And you can bet the farm that Bush AND Howard have both told him that unless he gets his act together, he is very topple-able.
I just don't see Bush betting his legacy on Maliki, which is what he'd be doing if he backed that corrupt sweating bald-headed SOB to an explosive end.
http://www.blackwaterblogger.com/
Post a Comment
<< Home