PDA

View Full Version : Marine General Says Fallujah Quieter



thedrifter
01-19-05, 06:57 AM
Marine General Says Fallujah Quieter
Associated Press
January 19, 2005

WASHINGTON - The former insurgent stronghold of Fallujah has calmed somewhat, with signs of commerce reappearing on the streets and no shots fired over the past 10 days at U.S. or Iraqi forces, the Marine general overseeing U.S. troops in the city said Tuesday.

About 140,000 residents have been allowed past checkpoints back into the city, Lt. Gen. John Sattler, commander of the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force, said from Iraq in a teleconference with reporters at the Pentagon. Some have left again because of damage to their homes, but he lacked figures on how many.

"We're seeing more lights on every night," he said. "We're starting to see commerce reappear on the streets."

Fallujah had about 300,000 residents, but most fled before or during the assault by U.S. and Iraqi forces that started Nov. 8 to clear out the insurgent presence in the city. A week ago, the office of the U.N. high commissioner for refugees refugee said 85,000 people had returned to the city, but only 10 percent - 8,500 - remained; the rest had left after inspecting their homes.

Still, Sattler portrayed an improving security situation in the city.

Electric power remains a problem, however. Except at hospitals and other essential buildings, where lights are powered by portable generators, it is simply too dangerous to turn on the power with so many downed lines around the city that could injure or kill people, Sattler said. Rewiring the city will take months.




Between 32,000 and 34,000 heads of household in Fallujah will receive $200 in humanitarian assistance soon, he said, and money to rebuild homes will come later.

He said Fallujah residents will be able to vote in the Jan. 30 national election, but he would not specify where polling sites would be. He said voting locations are being kept secret until just before the election to prevent insurgents from preparing attacks for those sites.

"Right now the enemy is trying to figure out where they're going to be, how many there are going to be, where will they be located, so that he can, in fact, take the scarce resources that he has, and he can start planning now," Sattler said.

The general also offered rare praise for Iraq's neighbor Syria, a frequent target of criticism from the Bush administration. Sattler's area of command stretches west from Fallujah, to the border with Syria, which has been a crossing point for fighters, money and weapons destined for the insurgency.

"The Syrians have really stepped up on their side of the border," he said, crediting the State Department's efforts with Damascus. He said the Syrians have increased patrols and filled in breaks in a berm that runs along the border.

Ellie

thedrifter
01-19-05, 06:57 AM
Rice Vows Prompt Review Of Iraq Policy
Associated Press
January 19, 2005

WASHINGTON - Senate approval apparently assured, Secretary of State nominee Condoleezza Rice is promising a prompt review of Iraq policy after Iraqi elections scheduled for the end of this month.

But she won't estimate when even some of the 150,000 U.S. troops may return home.

"I am really reluctant to try to put a timetable on that, because I think the goal is to get the mission accomplished, and that means that the Iraqis have to be capable of some things before we lessen our own responsibility," she said at a lengthy confirmation hearing Tuesday.

With the 18 members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee eager to quiz Colin Powell's designated successor, and then question her again, the chairman, Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., scheduled a second day of questioning Wednesday, to be followed by a vote.

Committee approval would send the nomination to the Senate where confirmation appears certain - despite unease, especially among Democrats, about reasons Bush, Powell, Rice and others in the administration gave for going to war in March 2003 and how they are dealing with a deadly postwar insurgency.

More than 1,365 members of the U.S. military have died since U.S. troops led an invasion in March 2003, and the growing U.S. casualty tolls shadowed the hearing in the Hart Senate Office Building. All seats in the room were occupied, and visitors lined the walls.




Through it all, Rice stood fast for the administration's decision to overthrow Iraqi President Saddam Hussein by force and for the way Bush is using U.S. troops to try to counter the insurgency. She nevertheless acknowledged the operation was plagued with problems.

The Iraqi security force is doing "relatively well," she testified. "But they do need to address these questions of leadership, which then lead to problems with desertion and the like."

In that vein, Rice said U.S. troops were stepping up the mentoring of Iraqi guardsmen and police.

Her positions on the war did not stem blistering criticism from Democratic Sens. John Kerry of Massachusetts and Barbara Boxer of California.

Kerry, who made Bush's management of postwar Iraq an issue in his losing presidential campaign, told Rice "the current policy is growing the insurgency and not diminishing it."

Boxer, going further, accused Rice of twisting the truth to build up a case for the U.S. invasion, which stirred Rice to counter that the senator was impugning her character.

Democratic Sens. Joseph Biden of Delaware and Russ Feingold of Wisconsin and Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska pursued her with criticism on Iraq, as well.

"This was never going to be easy," Rice said in response. "There were going to be ups and downs."

She said that after the Iraqis have voted on Jan. 30 for a transitional assembly, the Bush administration would conduct a review. She did not waver from assertions the U.S. troops would continue to help prepare Iraqi security forces to protect the country against the insurgency.

"We need to be patient," she told Kerry, who urged the administration, as he did during the presidential campaign, to solicit more support from European and other countries.

She told Hagel, who had urged that an exit strategy be developed after the Iraqi elections, "The Iraqis have to be capable before we leave."

While the committee dwelled at length on Iraq, the Arab-Israeli conflict also drew considerable attention. Referring apparently to the election of Mahmoud Abbas as the new Palestinian leader, Rice said, "This is a moment of opportunity."

She promised to spend a lot of time trying to steer Israel and the Palestinians into an agreement but said the terms to end their conflict had to be determined by the two sides, not the United States.

On another front, Rice identified Cuba, Myanmar, Belarus and Zimbabwe as "outposts of tyranny" that would require close U.S. attention.

Early in Bush's first term, he listed Iraq, Iran and North Korea as part of an "axis of evil" in the post-Sept. 11, 2001, era.

"To be sure, in our world there remain outposts of tyranny, and America stands with oppressed people on every continent, ... in Cuba, and Burma (Myanmar), and North Korea, and Iran, and Belarus, and Zimbabwe," Rice said.

In the meantime, she was not questioned closely about Iran and suggested no shift in U.S. tactics: to apply world pressure to stop nuclear weapons development and to try to end support for Palestinian and other terrorists.

On North Korea, Rice reiterated administration assurances it would not be invaded or attacked and that the United States wants to resume negotiations to halt its nuclear weapons program. "They are a dangerous power," Rice said.

She also told the committee that the administration had heard nothing from Pyongyang about resuming negotiations. The last talks were held in June.

Ellie

thedrifter
01-19-05, 06:58 AM
Bush Salutes Military
USA TODAY
January 19, 2005

WASHINGTON - They didn't shell out money for tickets to presidential balls or write fat checks for skybox seats at the arena where President Bush spoke Tuesday. But the military men and women invited to this week's inaugural festivities have paid a high price.

"Many here today have endured long separations from their families," Bush told more than 5,000 uniformed servicemembers and family members of fallen troops at the first official 2005 inaugural gala, a salute to the military at Washington's MCI Center. "Others have suffered terrible injuries, which you will carry the rest of your lives. Still others have lost loved ones in the struggle -- heroes who gave their lives so that we might live in freedom."

It was an unusually somber speech to kick off what has traditionally been three days of unrestrained hoopla, and it underscored the challenge Bush faces as he heads into his second inauguration Thursday: how to give his supporters the celebration they want while recognizing the sacrifices of the men and women he has sent into harm's way.

His solution: to make sure the troops get a share of the glitz and glamour.

Bush's inaugural committee is going out of the way to put the military front and center in this year's festivities. In addition to Tuesday's gala, which included big-name recording artists and TV stars, inaugural organizers are staging the first-ever Commander-in-Chief Ball, the only one of nine official post-inaugural galas that doesn't cost $150. About 1,000 servicemembers and their dates will attend Thursday night's event, all hoping for a chance to rub shoulders with the president and other VIPs.





Tuesday's MCI gala featured both tears and laughter. The president's father, former president George H.W. Bush, choked up as he read a letter he wrote to his parents after being shot down and rescued in the Pacific during World War II. Other poignant letters from soldiers who didn't make it home were read aloud by some of the stars who came to entertain. Looking on from the arena's corporate skyboxes: 60 veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan who have been recovering from their wounds at Walter Reed Army Medical Center.

"We all know there is nothing free about freedom," said Kelsey Grammer of the TV show Frasier, who emceed the MCI program. But the two-hour gala, which was beamed to troops serving in Iraq and Afghanistan, included lighter moments, too. Comic Darrell Hammond broke up the audience with an imitation of Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, who laughed heartily from a seat in the front row.

The troops attending Thursday's ball were selected by the military services. Most are "lower-ranking enlisted men and women and officers supporting the global war on terror," according to Air Force Capt. Gina Jackson of the Armed Forces Inaugural Committee.

They represent just a fraction of the servicemembers supporting military operations in Iraq in Afghanistan. More than 250,000 members of the Army have gone to Iraq; more than 460,000 members of the National Guard and reserves have been called up for active duty since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

Jackson says the "vast majority" of those attending the ball are from bases near Washington, D.C. The reason: Tickets are free, but the servicemembers have to pay for transportation.

For many, the coach that will carry them to their fairy-tale evening will be Washington's subway. "It seems like the easiest way to get there," says Coast Guard Petty Officer 2nd Class Paul Simpson, who's taking his girlfriend, law student Casey Strosnider. Simpson, 25, was stationed on a heavily armed, high-speed patrol boat that protected offshore oil platforms and escorted humanitarian aid shipments in Iraq. He says his girlfriend has been "shopping all week" for a dress. He's planning to wear a dress uniform with all his medals. "I'll look like a Christmas tree," he grins.

Others are more concerned with how they'll do on the dance floor. "I can fake it," Marine Lance Cpl. Catalina Garcia, 20, says hopefully.

The troops say they've been given orders to wear "service dress," the military equivalent of a nice business suit. But some of the women confide that they'd like Bush to give them permission to be a little more splashy.

"I'd love to wear a gown," says Air Force Staff Sgt. Shante' Arnett, 28, a 10-year veteran.

Her boyfriend, a D.C. policeman, can't go to the ball because he's working inaugural security. But troops are allowed to take "battle buddies" instead of a date. Arnett's is Senior Airman Trelisha Nance, 26, who spent three months in Qatar.

Army Pfc. Adam Nemon, 19, a member of a military honor guard, says he's "really excited to meet the president." But he's really hoping to wow his mom, Barbara Stark-Nemon, who's flying in from Michigan to be her son's date at the Commander-in-Chief Ball.

Nemon says his parents "weren't happy" when he interrupted his pre-med studies at the University of Michigan to join the Army.

Some of the troops attending the ball are facing deployments.

Air Force Tech. Sgt. Ivan Idrobo, 36, is expecting to be sent overseas soon. A computer security specialist, he joined the Air Force 18 years ago. He admits to "a little nervousness" about his upcoming tour of duty but says he's "excited to do my part for my country." His wife is still looking for the perfect dress. "We spent the whole weekend shopping," he says.

His parents, immigrants from Ecuador, are both excited about their son's chance to meet the president "even though they're Democrats," Idrobo says. He's excited, too. "I think it's an absolute honor to be chosen," he says.

Ellie

thedrifter
01-19-05, 06:58 AM
'Farther and Faster' in Iraq

Lieutenant General James T. Conway, U.S. Marine Corps
Proceedings, January 2005




U.S. MARINE CORPS (T. M. MEDINA)

According to the commander of the I Marine Expeditionary Force (MEF) for 22 months of planning for and fighting in Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF), the war’s two segments thus far have proved very different. In 2003, OIF I was comparatively less difficult, with Marines fighting mostly against Shia in the south. In OIF II against Sunni tribes in the west, “our vision to win hearts and minds was met squarely with a 300% increase in the number of attacks in our sector,” he says, which translated into casualties (right) in “the turbulent city of Fallujah.”

Operation Iraqi Freedom unfolded in four distinct phases: a deployment phase, a shaping phase, a decisive operations phase, and a reconstruction phase. During January and February 2003, the Marine Corps flexed its expeditionary muscle, with 60,000 Marines and sailors and their heavy equipment deployed to Kuwait in 45 days. Operation Iraqi Freedom, just as Operation Desert Storm more than a decade before, was a logistical victory. No other nation on earth even could have attempted such a monumental transfer of men and materiel, to a moonscape on exactly the opposite side of the globe, in preparation for an attack.

Our organization for combat remained dynamic throughout phases I and II. The I Marine Expedionary Force was assigned to the Third Army, where we joined with V Corps as the ground force. This would be the main attack force in a fast-moving sweep across mainly desert terrain southwest of Baghdad. We would be the supporting attack, crossing rivers and other poorer avenues of approach. Our role was to look like the main attack: pick a fight with anybody who would engage us, and yet keep battlefield geometry so we were abreast or even slightly in advance of V Corps. Both forces were to focus like a laser on Baghdad. When Turkey closed its borders to Coalition forces, the entire British First Armored Division was assigned to the MEF. Marvelous troops and leaders, with first-rate equipment, they swelled our ranks to just short of 90,000 Marines, soldiers, and sailors. I told the colorful British formations that there was a time in our country when the phrase, “The British are coming,” was used to scare children. In this instance, however, U.S. Marines in Kuwait were glad to hear it.

The all-volunteer force has provided an amazing quality of Marine and sailor. Bigger, stronger, and faster than their namesake of decades past, they also are more informed, and therefore more opinionated and inquisitive. My commanders and I constantly spoke to the troops in their training bases in Kuwait to provide information and squelch rumors. Their number-one question was: “Is the country behind us?” They had read or heard about large antiwar demonstrations in the United States and elsewhere and wanted assurances. We told each formation not to worry about it; just do their jobs. American citizens were mature enough in their beliefs that even if they didn’t support the war, they would still support the troops.

In what had become a predictable pattern, a U.S. air campaign was planned to precede the ground attack. What had been 40 days was reduced to 16 days, and that was cut in half to an 8-day period of “shock and awe” by the air planners. Increasing reports of explosives being moved into the southern oil fields, however, made it apparent that air attack could be the signal for Iraqi forces to demolish the oil platforms in a calculated act of senseless destruction. Since rapid and intact seizure of the southern oilfield production was a MEF mission, we were early advocates of launching the ground attack before an air campaign. For a time, the best we could do was launch them simultaneously. But there is an old adage, well remembered, that “the enemy gets a vote.” Without warning or provocation, on 20 March, Saddam started destruction of the fields. Our attack was moved forward initially 24 hours, then 8 hours more. It’s okay to delay an attack, as long as you rest the troops. Moving an attack forward is very much another matter. That said, I could not have been more pleased with the response of my commanders, air and ground, as we thundered across the international border a full 32 hours ahead of plan.

Our intelligence offered different analyses of enemy strength and intentions, and where he would use his chemical weapons. We faced three Iraqi Corps in our sector—two Regular Army and one Republican Guard, consisting of nine total divisions. We were led to believe major portions of some of those divisions would capitulate, the division most likely to collapse being the 11th Infantry division around an Nazariah. We found the opposite to be true. Some intel experts thought Saddam would unleash his chemical weapons as soon as we crossed the Kuwaiti border; others thought it would happen when we crossed the Euphrates River. My own view was, they would hit us with chemicals as we approached the Republican Guard divisions anchored on the Tigris River southeast of Baghdad. Taking no chances, we crossed the line of departure in our bulky chemical suits and stayed in them for two and a half weeks.

continued....

thedrifter
01-19-05, 06:59 AM
The MEF had been honed by our predecessors to be the most efficient killing machine on the battlefield. With integrated ground, air, and logistics elements under a single commander, the force generated a level of speed and momentum that only the enemy could appreciate fully. The MEF had available more than 340 combat aircraft that could generate almost 700 sorties each day against any target we chose. During the Gulf War it took ten bombs to destroy each target. During Operation Iraqi Freedom, a single aircraft could destroy ten targets. It has been said that the Iraqis melted away, but that does not give proper credit to the Iraqi Army. When they amassed, they were blown away by the effects of our deep air attack. A captured Iraqi tank brigade commander told of making an 80-mile forced march to position his tanks east of Baghdad. So he could rest his troops on the first night, he moved his tanks into palm groves. At 0200, during the worst sandstorm in 20 years, under complete cover of darkness and deep in the palm groves, Marine air began the systematic destruction of his tanks. When 30 had been destroyed by pinpoint bombing, his troops then melted away. He told us, “I wanted to order them back but knew that if I did, it meant certain death.”

We employed a revitalized concept for reporting the war with multiple media embedded in our formations. The program was not without its faults, but on the whole it was a huge success. Members of the media lived the lifestyle of “the grunt” in the cold, the wet, and the biting sand storms. They saw raw emotions as Marine aggressiveness overcame fog and friction, and as the exhilaration of battle was tempered by the realities of casualty evacuation. They marveled repeatedly at the professionalism of the 19-year-old lance corporals as they handled all of the above. The stories they filed were 95% positive, and there were more than a few tearful farewells as they left us. Not since the days of Ernie Pyle and World War II had such bonding occurred between the media and the war fighter.

In every war, some things make you smile, and other things make you cry. One such incident occurred as armor columns attacked up Highway 6 southeast of Baghdad. It was difficult to maintain, but we still showed readiness rates of 93% and 94% on tanks and tracks, respectively. As I stood watching the troops move up the highway, I understood why. I saw one amphibious assault vehicle steam past me at 40 miles per hour, towing another. Atop the second vehicle were three Marine mechanics, with feet and hands into the engine compartment, working on the engine. I said to the division commander standing next to me, “General [Major General James N.] Mattis, that is a safety violation. God bless ‘em!”

Later in the attack on Baghdad, the 1st Battalion, 8th Marines got into a serious fight in and around the Imam Ali mosque in the north-central portion of the city. They killed roughly 250 Republican Guards, Baathists, and Sadaam Fedayeen as they took their objectives. First casualty reports coming in on our side were one gunnery sergeant killed and 41 troops wounded. The next day that figure zoomed to 1 killed and 73 wounded. As we asked how that happened, we learned of the lance corporal who came to the battalion aid station weak and with a bloody arm. The corpsman asked him how many times he had changed the bandage, and the Marine told him he had lost count. The doc, as he should, got on the Marine’s case. The trooper said, “Doc, I’m not the only guy out there like this.” Indeed, he was not. As the company commanders and first sergeants examined their men, they came across the additional casualties. Asked why they didn’t turn themselves in to the aid station for treatment and possible evacuation, they answered, “Sir, I am the only automatic rifleman left in my squad,” or “Sir, I thought there might be another big fight today,” or just “Sir, I didn’t want to leave my buddies.” With troops like those, the outcome of Operation Iraqi Freedom was never in doubt.




After securing Baghdad, we then dispatched a light armor column north to take out any remaining resistance around Saddam’s birthplace, in the vicinity of Tikrit. The MEF had attacked farther and faster than any unit in U.S. history. Feeling pretty spirited, I announced to my Army boss, Lieutenant General Dave McKiernan, that Marines are assault troops, we don’t do nation-building, and we were ready for backload. He said to me, get your butt down south and get started with reconstruction until I can get you relieved. In fact, we spent five and a half months in the southern provinces of Iraq in phase IV operations. We found our 1920s-vintage “small wars manual,” written by Marines on duty in Nicaragua and Haiti, to be very applicable to the situations we faced in cities like Najaf, Karbala, and Samawah. One passage captured the essence of our activities: It said, “Conceived in uncertainty, reconstruction operations are often conducted with precarious responsibility, and doubtful authority, under indeterminate orders, lacking specific instructions.” Our battalion commanders and their company commanders thrived under those conditions and rapidly became effective little potentates until we turned over our sector, and could break them of it, in September 2003.

The MEF had been back at its bases in Southern California for roughly five months when we were unexpectedly ordered back to Iraq for Operation Iraqi Freedom II. We were tasked to replace the 82nd Airborne with a 25,000-Marine air-ground task force in the Al Anbar province during March 2004. On arrival, our numbers grew to 30,000 with the inclusion of a very capable Army brigade combat team. Our responsibilities included the turbulent city of Fallujah and major portions of the Iraq-Syria border. Our new area was about the size of Wyoming and included most of the Sunni Triangle, where Saddam had drawn many of his best officers for the Republican Guard and other elite units.

Returning to western Iraq was very different from our experiences in the south. The tribes were Sunni, not Shia, they were already quite hostile toward Coalition forces, and our ability to employ our proven techniques was much abated. In the Shia provinces, we had been attacked frequently but had not lost a single Marine to enemy fire. After two weeks in the Al Anbar province, by the time of the transfer of authority with the 82nd, we had lost five killed in action. Our vision to win hearts and minds was met squarely with a 300% increase in the number of attacks in our sector.

Initially, we found Iraqi security forces in the region very undependable. Iraqi society is driven by loyalty to the tribal sheiks and religious imams, and this cultural norm frequently made it impossible to rely on the police or national guard units as effective paramilitary forces. Further, they were intimidated by the insurgents and were watching to see which side was going to win. As we built the forces to be more secular, however, and provided them with the weapons and equipment they needed to succeed, they became much more reliable. Indeed, in the fighting in Samarra, Najaf, and the northern Babil province, Army and Marine commanders have given the Iraqi security forces, especially the regular army, a solid grade of “B” for their performances there.

The Coalition forces learned many lessons about information operations (IO) in southwest Asia, and we frankly need to get better in our approach at every level. We tended to treat all media the same, assuming a level of journalistic integrity and responsible reporting. The Arab media, however, were different. We found right away in Fallujah that Al Jazeera and Al Arabia were bound by no such principles of integrity and routinely provided a shrill and outrageous perspective to an Arab public all too willing to believe such distortions. Eventually, we treated them as enemy combat camera and controlled their access to our actions. Our most consistent and effective IO message to the Iraqis was, “You may not want us here, and we don’t particularly want to be here, but we aren’t leaving until there is a level of stability and security in Iraq. So help us achieve that end.”



continued...

thedrifter
01-19-05, 07:00 AM
An amazing figure accompanied our casualty rates in Iraq. As a result of superb planning and execution at all levels, for every 11 Marines or sailors hit, one would be killed but seven would be returned to duty almost immediately. Never before in combat had such recovery figures been the norm. Our protective gear, the helmets, and SAPI (small arms protection insert) plates worked. Our corpsmen in the line companies were magnificent, as were the medevac pilots and the docs at Alpha and Bravo surgical companies. They were truly the “angels of the battlefield,” and when we see each other again, none will ever buy his own drink as long as I am at the bar.

During this deployment, our Commandant won a major victory in Washington, D.C. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld had questioned our seven-month rotation policy and initially felt that all services should adhere to the Army’s 12 months “boots-on-the-ground” approach. We argued that our overall operational tempo was equal to or greater than any other service. For instance, all the MEF’s major headquarters were in Kuwait or Iraq for 17 of the 22 months I was the MEF commander. We argued that six- or seven-month rotations were the norm for the Marine Corps—though not as frequently as we are experiencing now—and that we risked breaking the force if we posed an even more serious burden on our young men and women, especially those with families. The Secretary said to the Commandant “Okay, I’ve got it.” In the Pentagon, you are never sure you have completely won a fight; but we felt much better when Secretary Rumsfeld began asking the Army Chief of Staff to explain why the Army was not doing seven-month rotations.

Operation Iraqi Freedom II continues, and Marines from I MEF will continue to be in Iraq until April or May 2005. That said, our view since 28 June and the declaration of national sovereignty is that Iraqi security forces must win against the insurgency in Iraq. We can only set the conditions for success by the host nation. Even then, we must act to ensure an Iraqi lead.

The contrast between the two OIF operations is stark. To begin, they were two very different scenarios: OIF was a classic offensive operation. We never lost the initiative as we put the enemy on his heels from the outset and kept him there until we had secured all objectives. OIF II has evolved into a classic insurgency. Out of necessity to maintain logistical hubs, we operated from fixed sites. But that allowed the enemy to match our freedom to maneuver. Ours was more a defensive role, with emphasis on heavy offensive patrolling and significant civil affairs work. There was a constant effort to hold the initiative, both militarily and psychologically, because as one military dictum says, the commander who maintains the initiative wins.

During OIF II, for reasons still not clear, the media were bent on providing a comparatively more negative slant. Our observations were supported by the reporter who, when asked to come out from Baghdad to cover the opening of a women’s hospital, declined, telling our public affairs officer he “wasn’t really looking for a good news story.” Katie O’Beirne is a political commentator, but she may have offered some insight when she remarked, “You’ve got to remember, most journalists spent their high school years being stuffed into lockers by the kind of males who are running our military. Now they’re determined to get even.” My perception since being home is that any bad news coming out of Iraq is not properly balanced with the great things troops from all the nations are doing.

One thing that remained constant during both operations was the magnificent performance of the troops. Whether they were infantrymen running toward enemy fire, mechanics working in 130° heat, Cobra pilots dueling with heavy-caliber machine guns in support of ground troops, or corpsmen dashing forward to treat a wounded Marine, our young troops were unbelievable in their resolve, discipline, and courage under fire. The older generation worried about this new generation “Y.” We saw them as the joy-stick generation and were concerned they might not measure up when the time came. In the hands of these young warriors, our Corps—indeed, our nation—has absolutely nothing to worry about.

What about the way ahead in Iraq? I believe there will be elections in January, and I suspect very shortly afterward you will start to see a reduction in U.S. forces, not because U.S. planners will seek it, but because the Iraqis will demand it. I used to think that Americans were impatient, but we don’t hold a candle to the Iraqis. We are seen as infidels and nonbelievers, and further, most Iraqis now consider us occupiers. They will expect us to provide regional security for a long time because we have destroyed their army. But they will be willing to accept internal security risks in exchange for a reduced Coalition presence.

I think our strategic planners have it right. When the Iraqis establish a free and democratic state, it probably will not be Jeffersonian, but it will put a stake in the very heart of the region producing terrorists. We will not just be killing terrorists. Rather, we will be doing something about the very cause of terrorism. In a region that has made little progress over the centuries, Iraq has the potential to be a prosperous and powerful regional player. Every day we are in Iraq brings us another step closer to Iraqi victory. Iraqi infantry and counterterrorism forces are being stood up at a rate that will field 27 secular battalions, trained and equipped, by March. These battalions are loyal to the central government and have the support of average Iraqi citizens. When they focus their full attention on the insurgents and foreign fighters, they will have little problem gaining actionable intelligence from their countrymen. Will there continue to be bombings and attacks? I fully expect so, because the terrorists recognize the threat to their very existence. I anticipate Iraqis will one day soon make short work of the principal threats to their government.

For the United States and its allies, Iraq and Afghanistan are important battlegrounds in the war on terrorism—not the whole war. Many of the young Arabs we kill are would-be suicide bombers. These are the same fanatical misfits who would otherwise be seeking their way into Los Angeles or Boston. We are engaged in a defense against these people far from our borders and our families. That’s okay with our troops; they understand it, and they very much prefer to take care of business in Iraq. Coalition forces will, covertly or overtly, battle terrorists in many other locations across the globe, but history might well show Iraq was our most important fight.

Finally, I ask three things of anyone reading these remarks.



Don’t wait for the historians to put the world we live in today in their context. Think of the nation at war instead of enjoying an interrupted peace and it will shape your outlook.
Don’t lose your patience, or more important, your resolve to see the job done. Our enemy knows popular support is the center of gravity for any U.S. government engaged in conflict and he works to disassemble that support every day. You are the ultimate target of the beheadings and bombings. So stay the course.
Continue to support the troops. Their exterior is hardened and battle-ready. But their psyches are more fragile and susceptible to the convictions of their countrymen. Without your support their will will weaken, their confidence wane, and their morale suffer. With the enthusiastic support of the American people, however, our forces are the most formidable, most responsive, and most disciplined troops on the face of the earth. I can only hope they make you, as they have made me, very proud.
General Conway commanded the I Marine Expeditionary Force in Operation Iraqi Freedom and is currently the Director of Operations (J-3) of the Joint Staff. This is an edited and abridged version of remarks he delivered at a seminar cosponosered in October 2004 by the Naval Institute and the Marines’ Memorial Association in San Francisco.

Ellie

thedrifter
01-19-05, 07:01 AM
January 24, 2005

Support troops with better training, equipment and compassionate leaders



From time to time, a few readers try to label me as an eternal skeptic, encouraging me to be more upbeat about the war in Iraq.
So, following the “Give war a chance” motto, many forward me e-mails telling of our wonderful accomplishments.

Rest assured, I’m a true believer in our American ideals, especially the American service member. I do remain a skeptic when it pertains to careless reporting on the truth about combat. As a former professional soldier, I know that an exuberantly positive cheerleader won’t keep you alive in a serious firefight. It takes more to produce victory and survival in combat — such as meticulous planning, good maintenance, tough-as-nails training and participatory upfront leadership.

So when it comes to adequately preparing and equipping our troops for combat, I won’t fall in line with the Internet cheerleaders and the politically motivated float riders.

My reason is simple: Supporting our troops and standing united against terrorism mean more than screaming for the home team. Active support includes speaking out for our troops to help them get better gear, tougher training and more compassionate leadership.

Those who’ve worn the uniform know that when you’re part of the military machine, you can’t easily tell the truth. The only exception is when you’re lucky enough to have a unit leader who places his troops above personal advancement.

Ever the skeptic, my predictions that the real war in Iraq would actually begin with the fall of Baghdad seemed right on. Still, I’m concerned about sustaining combat readiness and troop strength. Recent messages from deployed Guard and reserve troops caution that readiness goes beyond merely buying modern protective gear for city fighting.

And the latest SOS calls don’t come from slackers and complainers but from full-blooded professionals who know that taking care of the troops includes preparing them to survive in treacherous urban warfare. Many seasoned noncommissioned officers are very concerned that their hastily activated Guard and reserve outfits won’t do well under the pressures of urban combat — if they aren’t properly trained and manned.

One, a former active-duty combat arms soldier, wrote me in an e-mail recently: “Over the last 90 days, we’ve received nothing but sub-par training. There are no set standards. Despite voicing my personal concerns, our trainers and leaders are merely checking the briefing blocks. The brass is generally more worried about paper reports than real readiness.

“Despite the problems, they label us ‘good to go.’ Why am I concerned? It’s because my Guard outfit doesn’t have many soldiers with long-term active-duty experience. I would hate to see good men killed because they weren’t adequately trained.”

Ruthless preparation and training are the best life insurance in combat. Army Gen. George S. Patton would turn in his grave knowing that training is being shorted. He believed it was better to expend massive amounts of sweat on the training grounds before losing unnecessary blood in combat.

Yes, I think we can do better than talk smack about being the finest and greatest military in the world. Big speeches usually don’t keep the troops alive.

If you’re a senior leader involved in training certifications of the Army’s Guard and reserve units, I ask you to do right by our troops. Give them the time and the means to stay alive and return home with all essential body parts in working order.

The first step to improvement could be listening to your NCO corps.

The writer is a former Army tank battalion commander and decorated Desert Storm veteran. He writes on numerous military topics. He can be reached at r6zimm@earthlink.net.


Ellie

thedrifter
01-19-05, 07:01 AM
Attacks in Iraq kill at least 20

Catholic bishop kidnapped in Mosul; U.S. Marines target of suicide bomber.

By Robert H. Reid
Associated Press

BAGHDAD, Iraq — Insurgents kidnapped a Catholic archbishop and targeted security forces in a series of brazen assaults Monday that killed more than 20 people. A suicide bomber attacked U.S. Marines in Ramadi, where insurgents also beheaded two Shiite Muslims and left their bodies on a sidewalk.
The top U.S. general in Iraq predicted violence during the Jan. 30 national election but pledged to do "everything in our power" to ensure safety of voters. As part of a crackdown on insurgents, U.S. troops arrested more than 100 suspects over the past three days, U.S. officials said.

In Mosul, Archbishop Basile Georges Casmoussa of the Syrian Catholic Church was seized by gunmen and the Vatican condemned the abduction as a "terrorist act." The 66-year-old churchman was grabbed while walking in front of his church, a priest said on condition of anonymity.

Christians make up just 3 percent of Iraq's 26 million people. The major Christian groups include Chaldean-Assyrians and Armenians with small numbers of Roman Catholics.

The deadliest attacks occurred in three cities in the flash point region north and west of Baghdad where Sunni Muslim insurgents are seeking to derail the election.

In Buhriz, 35 miles north of Baghdad, gunmen attacked an Iraqi National Guard checkpoint at the provincial broadcasting center, killing eight soldiers and wounding four. A suicide driver set off a car bomb at a police station in Beiji, 155 miles north of the capital, killing seven policemen and wounding 25 people.

A U.S. spokesman said Marines suffered an undisclosed number of casualties in a suicide car bombing in Ramadi, 70 miles west of Baghdad. Marines sent to check a suspicious vehicle came under small arms and rocket-propelled grenade fire and the vehicle exploded.

"There were U.S. casualties," 1st Lt. Lyle Gilbert said, but declined to give further details, citing security. Later, the U.S. command reported two Marines were killed in action in the province that includes Ramadi but would not say whether they died in the car bombing.

Elsewhere in Ramadi, a predominantly Sunni Muslim city, officials found the bodies of five civilians and one Iraqi soldier. Each had a handwritten note declaring them collaborators, officials said. Four found together had been shot while two discovered later in the day were beheaded, their blood-soaked bodies left where they died. The notes identified the two beheaded victims as Shiite Muslims.

Shiites have been targets of intimidation because they are expected to turn out in large numbers for the election for a 275-member National Assembly that will appoint a new government and draft a permanent constitution.

About 60 percent of Iraq's 26 million people are Shiites, and their candidates are expected to win most of the assembly seats. Many Sunni Arabs fear losing the power they enjoyed under Saddam Hussein, and Sunni clerics have called for a boycott of the vote. U.S. officials fear a low Sunni turnout may cast doubt on the legitimacy of the new government.

On Monday, police discovered a car loaded with explosives in the Shiite holy city of Karbala. On Sunday, a total of 17 people were killed in several attacks along the main highway from Baghdad to Kut, a city in a largely Shiite area 100 miles to the southeast.

Four mortar shells on Sunday hit schools designated as polling stations in Basra, a largely Shiite city in the far south. An al-Qaida group led by Jordanian militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi claimed responsibility for the attacks in a statement found Monday on a Web site, although its authenticity could not verified.

In a statement Monday, Gen. George W. Casey Jr., commander of the multinational force in Iraq, said about 300,000 soldiers and police from U.S., Iraqi and other foreign forces will be available to protect voters Jan. 30.

"Is there going to be violence on election day? There is, but it's important that we understand what's happening here," Casey said. "It's not just about violence. It's about former regime loyalists and foreign terrorists murdering innocent Iraqis and Iraqi security forces to stop them from exercising their right to vote."

Nevertheless, violence has already affected the exercise in democracy. Some political alliances have declined to release all the names of their candidates for fear of attack, and little public campaigning has been possible except in Kurdish areas of the north.

Iraqis living abroad began registering to vote Monday, with dozens arriving at polling stations in 14 countries from Australia to Britain to the United States. Officials estimate 1.2 million Iraqis are eligible to vote overseas.

"We lived in a dictatorship a long time, and it's the first time in my life, in my 48 years, that I can vote in Iraq," said Saieb Jabbar, who arrived at a London registration center with his 23-year-old son, Ahmed. "I feel very happy."

Iraq's interim defense minister, Hazem Shaalan, said Monday that U.S. and other foreign troops shouldn't leave before the country is stable because governments in neighboring countries might send in their own armies. He specifically named Syria and Iran, both of which he has strongly criticized.


Ellie

thedrifter
01-19-05, 07:02 AM
US military not to overstay in Lanka: Wolfowitz

PK Balachanddran

The United States Marines — who came to Sri Lanka to do rescue, relief and restoration work following the tsunami catastrophe — would not overstay in the island, the US Deputy Secretary of Defence, Dr Paul Wolfowitz, said in Colombo on Monday.

The US Marines would "not stay any longer than they were wanted" Wolfowitz told a media conference at the end of his brief visit to Sri Lanka.

He further said that in Sri Lanka, the need for deploying military forces had now diminished because the work on the ground was progressing from the rescue and relief stage to the reconstruction stage.

He said that there were now, 700 US military personnel in Sri Lanka, who were mostly engineers.

There were also two positioning ships, which had water purification equipment capable of producing 3,000 gallons of potable water a day.

Given the speedy return to normalcy in Sri Lanka, the ships would be leaving for the Maldives, he said.


Ellie

thedrifter
01-19-05, 07:17 AM
3 U.S. Troops Killed In Iraq Attack
United Press International
January 19, 2005

BAGHDAD - Three U.S. soldiers were killed in a bombing attack Tuesday in the province of Anbar in western Iraq, the U.S. army said in a brief statement.

A suicide bomber blew up his explosives-laden car near a U.S. army convoy in the Sunni area, inflicting several casualties, Iraqi security sources said.

In another incident, gunmen attacked a police station in the city of Baquba, east of Baghdad, killing a policeman and wounding another before fleeing.

Earlier Tuesday, two people were killed and five others injured in an attack on the offices of a major Shiite party in Baghdad, reports said.




Witnesses said a suicide bomber stormed one roadblock but was stopped at the second by guards who opened fire on his car and managed to keep him from reaching the offices of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, known as Sciri, in the posh neighborhood of Jadriah in central Baghdad.

The blast killed two guards, wounded five others and destroyed three cars. It also smashed the windows of the building housing Sciri's offices.

Suicide car bombs have become a daily occurrence in Iraq as the date of elections draws nearer.

Ellie

thedrifter
01-19-05, 07:40 AM
Violence Spurred by Iraq Rebels Kills 26

By HAMZA HENDAWI, Associated Press Writer

BAGHDAD, Iraq - A wave of car bombings shook the Iraqi capital Wednesday, killing at least nine people as rebels stepped up their offensive to block the Jan. 30 national election. Other attacks were reported north and south of the capital, but the U.N. election chief said only a sustained onslaught could stop the ballot.


U.S. military officials put the death toll from the day's violence at 26, based on initial field reports. Iraqi authorities said 10 people were killed — one in a drive-by shooting on a political party office and the other nine in the bombings. The discrepancy could not be immediately resolved.


The violence began about 7 a.m., when a bomb packed into a truck exploded outside the Australian Embassy in Baghdad, killing two people. Two Australian soldiers were injured.


A half hour later, another car bomb killed six at a police station located next to a hospital in eastern Baghdad.


A third car bombing struck at the main gate to an Iraqi military garrison located at a disused airport in central Baghdad. The U.S. military said two Iraqi army soldiers and two Iraqi civilians were killed in that attack.


The U.S. military also said a car bomb detonated southwest of Baghdad International Airport, killing two Iraqi security guards.


Hours later, another car bomb went off in northern Baghdad around noon near a bank and a Shiite Muslim mosque. Police said one person was killed and one killed at that bombing.


Elsewhere in the capital, insurgents in a car fired on a Baghdad office of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, killing one of its members and wounding another, PUK officials said.


Outside the capital, Maj. Gen. Wirya Maarouf, the dean of a police academy in the Kurdish region of northern Iraq (news - web sites), escaped an assassination attempt when gunmen opened fire on his convoy in the city of Irbil. One bystander was killed and another injured, said police Col. Tharwat AbdulKarim.


In the northern city of Dahuk, a roadside bomb exploded near the convoy of provincial Gov. Nejrivan Ahmed but he was not injured, AbdulKarim said.


An Iraqi police officer was killed Wednesday in another car bombing in the largely Shiite city of Hillah south of Baghdad, the Polish military said.


Fresh clashes erupted Wednesday between U.S. troops and insurgents in the northern city of Mosul. A car bomb exploded beside a U.S. convoy in the eastern part of the city, and two Iraqis were killed when American troops opened fire after the blast, witnesses said. There were no reported casualties among the Americans.


U.S. and Iraqi officials had predicted a steady increase in violence in the run-up to the election, in which Iraqi voters will choose a National Assembly and provincial legislatures. Sunni Muslim insurgents have vowed to disrupt the ballot.


Also, in the city of Kirkuk, two human rights leaders were killed, officials said. Their bodies were found shot in the head and chest after being kidnapped Tuesday, police said.


Carlos Valenzuela, the chief U.N. election adviser in Iraq, said the intimidation of electoral workers by guerrillas seeking to derail this month's balloting is "high and very serious."


But Valenzuela told reporters Tuesday that only a sustained onslaught by insurgents or the mass resignation of electoral workers will prevent this month's national elections from going ahead.


U.S. troops have stepped up raids across the country, arresting scores of suspected insurgents in hopes of aborting plans to disrupt the ballot.





On Wednesday, the U.S. military acknowledged that its soldiers opened fire on a car as it approached their checkpoint, killing two civilians in the vehicle's front seat. Six children riding in the backseat were unhurt.

It wasn't clear from a military statement whether the two victims were the children's parents. "Military officials extend their condolences for this unfortunate incident," the statement said.

In China, authorities warned people to avoid traveling to Iraq as diplomats tried to win the release of eight Chinese laborers abducted by Iraqi insurgents.

"Please don't rashly go to Iraq, in order to avoid unforeseeable incidents," the Chinese Foreign Ministry (news - web sites) said in a statement.

The eight abducted Chinese, including two teenagers, were shown in a video released Tuesday by insurgents. The Foreign Ministry said it had asked for help from Iraqi religious leaders who helped to win the release of other Chinese abducted last year.

The latest abductees are from the southeastern coastal province of Fujian, which sends thousands of laborers each year to the Middle East and elsewhere.

Xinhua identified the eight men — all from Fujian's Pingtan County — as Zhou Sunqin, 18, Zhou Sunlin, 19, Wei Wu, 20, Lin Xiong, 35, Chen Qin'ai, 37, Lin Zhong, 38, Lin Bin, 39 and and Lin Qiang, 40.


Ellie

thedrifter
01-19-05, 08:10 AM
U.S. Returns 3 Stolen Artifacts to Iraq <br />
<br />
Tue Jan 18, 6:56 PM ET <br />
<br />
By TOM HAYS, Associated Press Writer <br />
<br />
NEW YORK - Three thimble-size artifacts looted from a Baghdad museum and sold on the...

thedrifter
01-19-05, 08:49 AM
January 24, 2005

Help is on the way
The Corps is set to add 3,000 new troops over three years — here’s what it means for you

By Christian Lowe
Times staff writer


In a move intended to ease the demands on units strained by frequent deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan, the Corps plans to add thousands of new Marines to the ranks.
The 175,000-strong active-duty force will grow by nearly 3,000 Marines starting this year as part of the fiscal 2005 Defense Authorization Act, which gave the Pentagon the authority to boost the size of the Army by 30,000 and the Marine Corps by 9,000 through 2009.

Marine officials say they have not made a decision to add the full 9,000 authorized, but are keeping the option open.

It is the first significant increase since a 2,400-Marine hike following the October 2001 reactivation of the 4th Marine Expeditionary Brigade as an anti-terrorism unit, and comes as Marine units face increasing demands in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Horn of Africa.

Like that last increase, most of the new troops will be used to fill gaps in existing units. Current manpower shortfalls “have some impact on unit cohesion and the ability to train up,” said Frank Donahoe, deputy director for total force structure with Marine Corps Combat Development Command at Quantico, Va.

Staffing up for a deployment “takes down other units and creates personnel turmoil,” he said. “This is to bring everyone up to 100 percent … regardless if they’re getting ready to deploy.”

Grunt units will gain the most, with nearly 2,000 new Marines slated for infantry battalions, a move intended to fully man those units. Another 425 allocations will go to Marine Corps Recruiting Command, which will fill existing gaps and add 275 new recruiters.

Most of the remainder will be used to establish three new foreign military training units, one apiece for each Marine Expeditionary Force.

Corps leaders have wrestled with the question of whether to grow the force as the responsibilities of stabilization duties in Iraq and Afghanistan have spurred debate over whether the U.S. military is sized properly.

In an August interview, Lt. Gen. Jan Huly, deputy commandant for plans, policies and operations, cautioned that if the Corps were to add more Marines, it would need to be ready to keep them for good.

“We have to balance what the current, immediate need is — at least the perceived need — and what we can afford to do now, and then we have to balance that against [what] the requirement [is] going to be six months, a year, two years from now,” Huly said. “We’d like to get bigger, but we want to be damn sure that when we get bigger, we need to keep it that way.”

The growth of the Army and Marine Corps stands in sharp contrast to the Navy and Air Force, which are cutting tens of thousands of sailors and airmen from their ranks. Reduced mission requirements in the war on terrorism and structural modernization are contributing to the need for reductions in those forces.

Who’s getting bigger

Adding 2,858 new Marines comes with a hefty price tag, and Corps officials plan to ask Congress for $159 million as part of an upcoming Pentagon wartime emergency supplemental funding request.

The supplemental request is due to be forwarded to Congress in February, as is the Marine Corps’ budget request for fiscal 2006, according to Maj. Doug Powell, a spokesman at Marine Corps headquarters.

The additional Marines are to be phased in over three years, using money from supplemental funding bills each year, said Lt. Col. Rick Long, a spokesman for Manpower and Reserve Affairs at Quantico. The amount needed to fund each increment will likely be higher than the $159 million required in fiscal 2005, Long said. Officials did not provide the total anticipated cost.

Plans call for the addition of 1,848 new Marines to infantry battalions over the next three years in order to bring manning for the Corps’ 24 active-duty battalions up to 100 percent. For years, infantry units have been manned at less than full strength unless they were gearing up for deployment. To fill out the ranks, deploying units used individual augmentees from other units.

“This will bring infantry units up to their full wartime requirement,” Donahoe said.

Corps officials want to fill out the infantry ranks as much as possible early on, but are forecasting additions of slightly more than 600 per year through 2007.

Also planned is the addition of 120 new Marines to training units over the next three years, including 60 to staff the security and stabilization operations training course at March Air Reserve Base, Calif., Long said. Sixty others will be used throughout the Corps’ schools to help train additional Marines entering the force, Marine officials said.

The Corps also will add 20 enlisted contract specialists to help with reconstruction operations in Iraq, and 45 aircraft maintainers to support the CH-53D Sea Stallion helicopter fleet, according to manpower officials.

Most of the nearly 3,000 new leathernecks will come from new accessions, so 425 new recruiter billets are being added to Marine Corps Recruiting Command.

A few new units

Marking a further expansion of the Corps’ involvement in inter-national military assistance missions, 400 Marines will be used to form three new MEF-level training units to help modernize foreign militaries. The units could be deployed to Iraq to assist in the training of the fledgling Iraqi army — an institution the Bush administration says is key to the success of America’s mission there — or to other world hot spots such as Africa and Eastern Europe.

Each training unit would consist of about 130 Marines — primarily from infantry and communications specialties. The first unit is scheduled to be fully operational with I MEF in 2006, followed by II MEF in 2007 and III MEF in 2008.

Marines would likely be assigned to such programs as the Security Cooperation Education and Training Center at Quantico, which conducts military-building programs with as many as 80 countries. Last year, the center sent roughly 500 Marines to countries trying to train their fledgling armies, ranging from the former Soviet republic of Georgia to Niger in northern Africa.

Such missions are intended not only as a way to engage with nations with whom the U.S. is already allied, but also to make new connections — reaching out to smaller, needier countries as they attempt to establish more control within their borders. The programs the Quantico center oversees helps the Corps build relationships, gather both formal and informal intelligence and strengthen alliances with dozens of countries.

Last year, in Africa, for example, about 25 Marines traveled to Chad and Niger for two, six-week training stints. A more comprehensive program based in Georgia employed Army and Marine units, which conducted training there for almost two years.

More changes coming?

Manpower officials insist they don’t see any need “in the foreseeable future” to reduce the force again, boosting confidence that the new Marines will be able to stay.

Painful memories of downsizing following the 1991 Persian Gulf War remain and the service wants to avoid adding new leathernecks only to send them packing when military — and budget — realities shift.

In a separate but related effort, the Corps is examining ways to rearrange its current force. A Force Structure Review Group is expected to outline proposals to disestablish some underused units in both the active and Reserve force and establish new organizations — possibly including two new infantry battalions — that are more relevant to the kinds of missions the Corps is handling today and might see in the future.

The group has been debating the issue since March and is expected to outline widespread changes to the Corps soon, officials say. Huly, the Corps’ operations chief, first publicly raised the possibility of new infantry battalions in August.

Any restructuring likely would help the Corps return to its usual deployment routine, a 3-1 ratio. That typically means six months deployed, followed by 18 months in training and garrison duty back home. Because of the demand for units in Iraq and Afghanistan, Marines now spend about seven months deployed, followed by just seven months at home before deploying again.

While the manpower boost helps strengthen unit integrity and maintains their training capability and education options, the possible restructuring is expected to give the service some relief from the breakneck pace of deployments since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks

“The bottom line is just to reduce the stress on the force,” Lt. Col. Tim Corley, head of future operations at Manpower Plans and Policy at Quantico said of the end-strength increase. “That’s what we’re trying to do.”

Christian Lowe can be reached at (703) 750-8613 or clowe@marinecorpstimes.com. Gordon Lubold contributed to this report.


Ellie

thedrifter
01-19-05, 09:09 AM
January 11, 2005 <br />
<br />
Tales from the sandbox <br />
<br />
Military Times senior staff writer Gordon Trowbridge and photographer Lloyd Francis Jr. will spend the next three months in the Middle East, covering...

thedrifter
01-19-05, 09:10 AM
At a Spartan Marine base, a Garden of Eden

Camp Fallujah — Dec. 17, 5:30 p.m.

It’s been a while since I’ve posted anything for the blog, for a variety of reasons: we’ve been busy; we’ve been in the city of Fallujah, and we’ve had the minor communication problems that plague journalists here. (It’s been kind of reassuring, actually, to see the 10 or so other journalists here occasionally suffering from the same satellite brown-outs and balky laptops that we’ve had to deal with.)

Mostly, though, I think it’s that I have a hard time knowing what to make of Camp Fallujah.

Compared to other places we’ve been — Camp Victory, Balad Air Base, certainly Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar — Camp Fallujah is the kind of Spartan environment for which the Marine Corps is famous. Still, our tents are heated; there are even pillows and extra blankets. And the water in the shower is always plenty hot, which has been extremely welcome on recent mornings when we’ve had to be careful not to slip on the sheen of ice that has formed on mud puddles overnight.

There is plenty of mud to be had here, plenty of sights and sounds that say “austere forward operating base.” While the Army’s 1st Infantry Division, for example, is headquartered in a palace near Saddam Hussein’s hometown of Tikrit, Lt. Gen. John Sattler and the I Marine Expeditionary Force make do with a confounding office building — a maze of low, winding corridors and open walkways with little charm.

Even so, I think this might be my favorite of the dozen or so bases I’ve visited in the region. While there’s plenty of mud and ugly former military buildings, there are also more trees here than any base I’ve visited: date palms; eucalyptus; some kind of evergreen I haven’t been able to identify; and another variety I don’t recognize, with frond-like branches that remind me of ash and seed cases that look like foot-long pea pods. I keep meaning to search the Internet for their names.

Near our tent there’s a garden — small, a tad overgrown, with broken branches blocking the walkway. It’s still the only place I’ve seen in Iraq that invites the kind of Sunday stroll you’d take through your neighborhood back home. Flowering bushes with brilliant purple-red blossoms line one walkway, still present despite the cold. Along the back wall is a stand of eucalyptus, which you feel more than smell as you walk by. If aroma had color, this would be pale, ice blue.

Of course, you can’t spend a half-hour here without becoming aware of what’s still going on nearby. Fighter-bombers and attack helicopters constantly swirl overhead. Field guns — booming 155mm artillery — fire with disturbing regularity into the surrounding countryside. This morning, walking back to our tent, I had to move quickly to the side of the road to make room for a Marine ambulance, speeding to the base’s Bravo Surgical Company.

So, every walk in the garden ends up tinged with guilt. I haven’t decided yet if the garden is a welcome diversion, or the kind of place too frivolous for war.

Stuck outside of Baghdad with the Fallujah blues again

Camp Victory, Baghdad — Dec. 6, 1:20 p.m.

We arrived back here last night after what could only be termed a hard-luck weekend.

We left Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, home of the coalition air forces headquarters in the Middle East, on Friday, hoping to get here by helicopter within a couple days. We were eager to get back to the Marine Expeditionary Force because the Marines’ area of operations includes some of the toughest regions in Iraq, even after the recapture of Fallujah.

But through a series of unfortunate events — I won’t bore you with the details, other than to say they don’t make me look too smart — my laptop and some of our other electronic equipment ended up on the losing end of a confrontation with a Ford Explorer. While not quite fatal to our efforts here, losing that equipment meant things instantly got a lot harder — not to mention the fact that I was responsible for the destruction of a few thousand dollars’ worth of my employer’s property.

So, as we sat waiting for a helicopter ride from Camp Victory, near Baghdad, to Camp Fallujah, I sat in the cold contemplating the depressing facts. Appropriately, one of the helicopters set to take us here had a maintenance problem, so a flight scheduled to leave around midnight was still sitting on the ramp, and we were still shivering in the winter chill at 3:30 a.m.

Then a funny thing happened. I stumbled into a conversation with someone who not only provided a valuable reminder that the military is made up of all sorts of folks, but told a story that made it truly difficult to be depressed about anything.

We had met him a few days before, an Air Force captain with an interesting military background — prior enlisted service, a couple of breaks in service, studied at lots of interesting schools and interesting assignments. He and Lloyd shared stories of spots in Jordan and Egypt they both had visited, comparing notes on local dishes and reviews of cut-rate lodgings.

Saturday night, as we awaited the helicopter flight that was not to be, he strolled up, pack on his shoulder, hoping to board the same flight, aiming for a camp near Ramadi. In between updates on the maintenance situation, we struck up a conversation on the edge of the darkened helicopter landing pad unlike any I’ve ever had with someone in uniform. I won’t share his name — we weren’t ever in notebook-out, on-the-record mode, and besides, he’s an intelligence officer, and those folks tend to shy away from that sort of attention.

He told stories — and he was a fine story-teller — about his job in a Manhattan art gallery, and of the joy of placing his own watercolors in a gallery for the first time, with an art dealer in Texas. He smiled broadly while describing his hopes of landing a spot as an Air Force Academy instructor after his deployment here. And he told, with just the proper degree of drama, of a flight in the days before the 2003 invasion of Iraq, when the reconnaissance plane he was aboard was briefly chased by an Iraqi MiG fighter.

Mostly he talked about his children: his young son’s wrestling matches with their giant dog, and the story of their daughter’s adoption — one that would get you laughed out of town if you pitched it to a network movie-of-the week producer.

Military men and women — men in particular, perhaps — fit into a pretty narrow band of public perception. English-degree-holding, watercolor-painting intel officers don’t really fit anywhere in that band. It was a valuable reminder that there are all sorts of fascinating people here.

By 4 a.m., when we gave up on the night’s flight and headed back to the base’s temporary lodging tents, I still didn’t have a laptop, and I wasn’t sure how we were going to tackle that problem. Somehow, though, I was a lot less depressed than I should have been. Amazing the difference one enlightening conversation can make.

• • • • •

Past Weblog entries:

• Another day, another doughnut … •
http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-582813.php

• Living (relatively) large at Camp Victory •
http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-582809.php

• Hospitality in a most inhospitable place •
http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-541335.php

• Moving day — out of Balad, on to Fallujah •
http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-526704.php

• Doughnut of Misery •
http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-502237.php

• The places no one wants to go •
http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-502225.php

• ‘They’re getting pounded up there’ •
http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-502204.php

• • • • •

To readers kind enough to spend a few minutes here, this Internet diary, Weblog, whatever you care to call it, is something of an experiment. Some of what you’ll read, like the paragraphs above, are my personal observations. But I’d like it to be largely about you readers — many of whom will have family, friends and co-workers deployed at the locations we’ll visit. We want to hear from you about story ideas, questions we can help answer, concerns you have. Drop us a line at the e-mail addresses above, and help us experiment in interactive, Internet-based reporting.

Ellie

thedrifter
01-19-05, 09:57 AM
What's really going on Iraq
A message from the U.S. Marine Corps' 'Mad Ghosts'

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: January 19, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern

Editor's note: Lt. Col. Mark Smith is commander of the "Mad Ghosts," the 2/24th Battalion (U.S. Marine Corps Reserve – Chicago). When he is not leading Marines in Iraq, he is an Indiana state trooper.

© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com


Greetings from FOB St. Michael. Hopefully, and prayerfully, this week's update finds you all healthy, happy and joyful. For another week in your separation from your loved one is behind you, and you are yet one day closer to that reunion where a hug will be more than a hug, a kiss more than a kiss and a touch more than a touch! That moment of reunion will be the point in space and time when the victory is yours.

Victory over loneliness, victory over stress, victory over challenge, victory over hardship. Victory over all those things that the devil uses to turn people's heart to stone, but that the Lord uses to turn people's heart to thanksgiving. The victory over these things will only be sweetened by the fact that they were endured for a cause worthy of the pain: the cause of freedom and security for you, for us, for Iraq and it's global impact on all of our futures, and for the blessings of liberty that come with the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA! Bless us all.

Ellie

thedrifter
01-19-05, 10:24 AM
Two American marines killed in Iraq
Iraq, Military, 1/18/2005

A statement by the American army said on Tuesday that two marines were killed during confrontations with gunmen in al-Anbar governorate which includes al-Ramadai and Falluja. The statement said the two soldiers were killed on Tuesday at dawn but gave no details about their killing.

This coincided with the operation in which several American marines were injured in a booby trapped car explosion led by a suicide attack against their vehicle in Ramadi on Monday evening.

Also found in Ramadi city were the bodies of Iraqi civilians including two Shiites, and beside them was a written statement describing them as hirelings.

These developments came after a wave of explosions took place in the region on Monday and resulted in killing 22 persons at least most of them members of the Iraqi police and national guards.

Seven police men were killed and 25 injured in a suicide attack in a booby trapped car in a police center in Beji to the north of Iraq. In Bahraza ( 55 Km to the north of Baghdad) 8 persons were killed including 7 soldiers and other 4 injured when gunmen attacked an inspection point near Baqouba city.

Meantime, the interim Iraqi government announced that its forces killed during the two past days 35 gunmen in armed clashes in Falluja area.

Gunmen also fired mortars at three ballot centers in Basra and this resulted in killing one security guard, while clashes erupted with the British forces which guard the school where voting will be held.

Followers of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, supporter of al-Qaida organization and the most wanted person in Iraq, claimed responsibility for the attack on the voting centers.

On the other hand, the American forces launched a plenary campaign of arrest in al-Anbar governorate in which it detained some 100 gunmen and confiscated large amounts of weapons and ammunition along the three past days.

Ellie

thedrifter
01-19-05, 11:07 AM
January 24, 2005

California shootout
Pendleton Marine’s behavior before shootings prompts ‘suicide-by-cop’ theory

By Laura Bailey
Times staff writer


After killing one police officer and wounding another, a Marine from Camp Pendleton, Calif., was shot and killed in the town of Ceres on Jan. 9 in what police have called a possible “suicide-by-cop” scenario.
Lance Cpl. Andres Raya, 19, a motor transport operator with 2nd Battalion, 4th Marines, was on weekend liberty when the shooting took place outside a liquor store in Ceres, south of Modesto.

According to a spokesman with the Stanislaus County Sheriff’s Department, the confrontation began after an employee called police to report Raya acting strangely outside the store.

Witnesses said Raya, carrying an SKS assault rifle, was pacing back and forth aggressively outside the store.

At one point, he fired off a round, then entered the store and told an employee he had been shot and to call the police, said police spokesman Jason Woodman.

Raya, he said, had not actually been hit.

“He wanted the police there. Whether it was to ambush them or whether it was the whole suicide-by-cop theory, we still haven’t come to a conclusive decision on that,” Woodman said.

Raya then left the store. Employees called the police and locked the door while Raya stood outside waiting.

When police arrived at the scene, Raya shot officer Sam Ryno, 50, several times, Woodman said. At press time, Ryno was hospitalized in serious condition.

When backup officers arrived, Raya continued to shoot and hit Sgt. Howard Stevenson several times, including once in the back of the head at close range. Stevenson, 39, a father of three, died from his wounds.

Raya fled to a nearby neighborhood, running through backyards to escape.

As people came out of their homes, police said Raya told them to go back inside, that the situation didn’t concern them.

Over the next 2˝ hours, police evacuated several homes and asked other residents to lock up and turn off their lights.

Three hours after the first shooting, Raya emerged in one of the neighborhood alleys and a second gunfight began.

Woodman said Raya refused to respond to police orders to get down on the ground and instead began shooting. Police responded by shooting Raya, who fell to the ground but then got back up without his rifle and continued advancing until he was shot several more times before he eventually fell to the ground.

Police were still investigating the incident Jan. 14 and did not yet have a clear picture of what provoked Raya to behave as he did.

Woodman said the police were trying to learn about his past and were also awaiting toxicology reports to determine if Raya could have been on drugs.

Woodman also said the police were interested in a possible gang affiliation they learned of.

Back from Iraq

Raya’s family said they had a hard time understanding what happened that night. He served one tour in Iraq, according to officials at Camp Pendleton.

Family and friends said he was a motivated, friendly and outgoing kid but something seemed to have happened to him during the deployment.

When Raya returned from Iraq, family members said he was taciturn. One of his neighbors, George Alvarez, told the Modesto Bee that Raya confided in him during the holidays, saying he had “lots of trouble sleeping,” and “a lot of mental things going on inside.”

Family members said Raya believed he was about to be sent back to Iraq, although Marine Corps officials said his unit was not scheduled for an immediate return.

Raya’s family said that although he initially didn’t want to discuss the topic while he was home during the holidays, he eventually said he didn’t want to go back to Iraq.

“He just came out and said ‘I don’t want to go back,’.” his mother Julia Raya told KPIX-TV. She said she hugged him, as did his father. They had tried to give him the best Christmas they could, they said.

“It’s awful what happened, and we don’t want to make excuses because it’s a double tragedy,” cousin Araceli Valdez told the San Francisco Chronicle. “But we do know one thing. That man on the liquor store surveillance cameras wasn’t our cousin. He wasn’t Andy anymore.”

“By the statements the suspect made at the scene, it was clear he wanted to die and take as many cops down as he could in the process,” Lt. Bill Heyne, lead investigator for the Stanislaus County Sheriff’s Department, told the Chronicle.

“This officer was executed,” he said.

Among the pictures the Raya family has to remember Andres by are some in which he looks proud in his uniform — but there’s also one in which he holds up a sign saying, “Operation send me home,” family friends said.

— With Associated Press reports

Ellie

thedrifter
01-19-05, 11:21 AM
Marine shares his letter home from war zone
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By FRANK DAVIES
fdavies@herald.com

WASHINGTON - Marine Cpl. Denis Silva Torres of South Florida, after he entered Iraq, wrote about how he had ''poverty stare me dead in the eyes.'' The sight of Iraqi children begging ``broke my heart.''

Lt. Kathy McConkey Zeller, a nurse and Army reservist, recalled how Special Forces soldiers in Afghanistan sat for hours with their dead comrades: ``It was terrible, more than I could bear.''

On Tuesday, Silva Torres and McConkey Zeller had a chance to read the intense personal observations from their war letters to a select audience -- President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, 60 Medal of Honor recipients and 7,000 members of the armed forces and their families.

There was plenty of military music, patriotic fervor and heartfelt thanks for wartime sacrifices during the first major inaugural event, a tribute to the U.S. military services at the MCI Arena in downtown Washington that was seen by troops abroad.

Hosted by actor Kelsey Grammer, the event featured plenty of big names. Gloria Estefan sang Your Picture, a tribute to her father, a Vietnam veteran. Darryl Worley performed his defiant call to arms, Have You Forgotten?, and John Michael Montgomery sang Letter from Home.

Jay Leno and David Letterman sent video messages and Darrell Hammond told a few jokes, impersonating Donald Rumsfeld with his trademark squint -- as the secretary of defense watched and laughed.

But a running theme during the big-stage production was the experience and sacrifice of average soldiers, as seen through letters they and their families had written, from the Civil War to Iraq. They were taken from War Letters, an anthology put together by Andrew Carroll.

Letters from a freed slave, a World War I nurse and the mother of a soldier killed in Vietnam were read by such celebrities as football Hall of Famer Lynn Swann and Shandi Finnessey, Miss USA.

But Silva Torres, who left Nicaragua at the age of 7 and grew up in Hialeah, and McConkey Zeller of Toledo, Ohio, had a chance to read their own letters.

''This was quite an honor, and I felt I was speaking for the members of the armed forces who could not be there,'' said Silva Torres, 24, who now lives in Miami Lakes. ``I was just trying to convey in the letter some of the good and bad things we saw in Iraq.''

Silva Torres wrote the letter in April 2003 to his fiancée's parents as his unit guarded convoys in southern Iraq. After four years in the Marines, he left the service this month, will take courses at Broward Community College and plans a career in law enforcement.

Another emotional high point of the tribute came when one other letter-writer read from his own words. He was a young Navy lieutenant when his plane was shot down in the Pacific in 1944.

''The day seemed friendly and innocent,'' wrote George H.W. Bush, who would become the 41st president. Then the day turned ``awful and sinister.''

Bush read from his letter home -- about seeing his plane's wings on fire, not knowing if his crew was alive, and bailing out near hostile forces. He was rescued by a nearby sub.

Then the former president gave way to his son, who will take the oath of office Thursday for his second term.

''I want you to know how gratified I am for your service and sacrifice,'' President Bush, joined by the first lady, told the cheering throng. ''I want you to know how proud I am to be your commander-in-chief.'' Bush said that elections in Afghanistan and Iraq would be ``landmark events in the history of liberty -- and none of it would be possible without the courage and determination of the United States armed forces.''

Silva Torres, who said reading his letter ''was a humbling experience,'' afterwards met both President Bush and Bush's father.


Ellie

thedrifter
01-19-05, 11:44 AM
Army affirms its ban on women in combat
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Rowan Scarborough
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Jan. 19, 2005

Army Secretary Francis Harvey has told Congress that the service will keep the Pentagon's ban against female soldiers in ground combat, including no assignments to units that routinely embed with war fighters.

The Army had been reviewing the 1994 ban to see whether changes should be made to coincide with a sweeping transformation plan for combat brigades. Some officers at the Pentagon advocate lifting the ban on embedding, or collocating, sex-integrated support units with infantry, armor and other combat units.

Elaine Donnelly, who heads a pro-military group, said yesterday that it is still not clear whether the Army is telling Congress one thing, while in actual operations, it plans to mix integrated Forward Support Companies (FSC) within combat units.

"It's disappointing that official information from the Army seems so difficult to come by," Mrs. Donnelly said. "If they say the FSC will be all-male, and historically they have been, that would be true compliance with law and policy. However, if there are female soldiers being trained for the FSCs, that would be something else."

Mr. Harvey sent a memo to four senior members of Congress on Thursday, a day after The Washington Times reported that the president had said in an interview that he opposes any move to change the ground combat prohibition. The president was emphatic: "No women in combat."

The Army, for months, has been reviewing the role of female soldiers. Confidential briefing papers obtained by The Times showed that senior officers advocate lifting the so-called "collocation rule." This would have allowed women to serve in support units, such as Forward Support Companies, that normally embed with combat units such as armor or infantry and are in fact combat troops.

Mr. Harvey last week notified the chairmen and ranking members of the House and Senate Armed Services committees that he was retaining the ban. The Stars and Stripes newspaper first reported on the memos.

Mrs. Donnelly, who heads the Center for Military Readiness and has been working to expose the internal Army debate, expressed suspicion and asked why the Army is reluctant to explain its decision in full.

She questions whether the Army intends merely to assign co-ed Forward Support Companies outside a combat unit's organizational chart, even though they will have to embed with those units to do the resupply mission.

The Army in November gave a private briefing to House military staffers that showed FSCs attached to brigade support battalions, a move the Army did not consider to be collocation. Mrs. Donnelly disagrees.

"The issue is not where they put them on paper, but the reality," Mrs. Donnelly said. "If they put gender-integrated FSCs with the brigade support battalion, then they would be violating the collocation policy."

Gen. Peter Schoomaker, the Army chief of staff, is spearheading a major transformation of Army brigades by turning them into "units of action" that train and deploy as one. To fully achieve these rapid deployment brigades, some inside the Pentagon have advocated changing the collocation rule so that mixed-sex FSCs can be embedded with them.

The Times has reported on two sets of briefing papers circulated at the highest levels of Army headquarters. One states that the Army does not have enough male soldiers to keep the FSCs all-male and should therefore consider the change.

A second Nov. 29 briefing from the director of the Army's Human Resources Policy Directorate states: "The way ahead: rewrite/eliminate the Army collocation policy."

With the Harvey memo, that idea appears, for now, to be dead.

Reporters and editors of The Times asked Mr. Bush in a Jan. 11 Oval Office interview whether he supported internal Army proposals to change the land-combat rules.

"There's no change of policy as far as I'm concerned," Mr. Bush said. "No women in combat. Having said that, let me explain, we've got to make sure we define combat properly: We've got women flying choppers and women flying fighters, which I'm perfectly content with."

The Clinton administration in 1994 lifted the ban on women in combat aircraft and ships, but left in place the prohibition on direct land combat and collocation.

Advocates of lifting the collocation cite a need for deploy-as-one brigades, and note that in Iraq there are no clear lines of battle. Islamist terrorists attack support units about as often as they strike all-male units that are clearly combat units.


Ellie

thedrifter
01-19-05, 11:52 AM
The truth about the cop-killing Marine
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michelle Malkin
January 19, 2005

If you watched the evening news a week ago, you may recall the sensational story of a distraught Marine who died in a murderous shootout with police. Anti-war writers and Latino activists have turned the cop-killer, Lance Cpl. Andres Raya, into a martyr. Don't believe the hype.

Network and cable TV shows repeatedly broadcast video and photo stills of Raya's Jan. 9 bloody gun battle in a Ceres, Calif., liquor store. Mental health experts immediately blamed post-traumatic stress disorder. Ignoring the cold-blooded murder of one of the ambushed police officers who was lured to his death, international headlines instead trumpeted the supposedly traumatized Raya:

Teenage War Veteran Committed Suicide 'By Cop'

Marine 'Committed Suicide by Cop to Avoid Iraq Return'

Kin of Marine Who Shot Policemen Ask if He Is a Casualty of War

Young Camp Pendleton Marine who shot officers did not want to go back to Iraq.

A far Left Web site, San Francisco Bay Area Indymedia.org, posted a complaint that the California legislature -- which lowered its flags to honor slain cop Sgt. Howard Stevenson -- was showing "no consideration [for the] young man whose life was ruined by military service."

La Voz de Aztlan, a radical fringe publication by Mexican nationalists, lionized Raya and demonized police:

"One can only speculate what horrors Andres Raya experienced in Fallujah. The slaughter by U.S. occupation forces of Iraqi civilians in Fallujah has been compared to the slaughter in Guernica by Nazi forces in 1937. Many U.S. Marines with a conscious (sic) have found it very difficult to reconcile the Iraqi civilian murders in their minds and have committed suicide. U.S. Marine Andres Raya decided to take some cops with him. Most probably he was harassed by them while growing up Mexican in this small northern California town." The paper also lambasted Raya's hometown, Ceres, as "a redneck town notorious for its mistreatment of his people."

Writing in the anti-war publication CounterPunch, Jack Random lamented Raya's death as "symbolic of the untold story of war. Hundreds of thousands of trained killers survive combat only to come home to a life for which they are no longer prepared. They have seen what men and women should never see. They have engaged in operations that brought them face to face with the death of innocent civilians, women and children."

The only elements missing in the bleeding-heart coverage of Raya's story were the soundtrack to "Platoon" and a bulk order of Kleenex. There's just one thing wrong with the sympathetic spin about the anti-war Marine. It's all dead wrong.

This much is true about Raya: The 19-year-old man did in fact serve with the Marines' 1st Intelligence Battalion's motor transport unit as a driver in Iraq.

But contrary to the impression left by initial media reports, Raya had never seen combat. And he was not headed back to Iraq. He had been transferred to a new unit scheduled for deployment to Okinawa. "During our investigation, we found he wasn't due to go back to Iraq, never faced combat situations and never even fired his gun," Stanislaus County Sheriff's Deputy Jason Woodman said.

Raya was high on cocaine at the time of the ambush, according to police reports. He was reportedly affiliated with the prison gang Nuestra Familia. Investigators found photos of Raya wearing gang colors and a shopping list in his bedroom safe that included body armor, assault rifles and ammunition. Authorities also discovered a video showing Raya smoking what appears to be marijuana and making gang sign gestures. The tape showed desecrated pieces of the American flag laid on a gymnasium floor to spell out expletives directed at President Bush.

Family members deny Raya's gang ties and blame the military. Meanwhile, Raya's neighborhood was decorated with anti-cop graffiti such as "Kill the Pigs" in his memory. And militant Hispanic residents celebrate Raya. Ceres resident Hilda Mercado told The New York Times that Raya "died like a true Mexican: He died standing on his feet."

The question isn't what got into Raya when he entered the military. The question is why and how Raya -- who police say had a propensity for violence well before he joined the Marines -- got into our military in the first place.

And now you know the rest of the story.


Ellie

thedrifter
01-19-05, 12:56 PM
Mobile Surgical Units Making Difference in Iraq

TUESDAY, Jan. 18 (HealthDayNews) -- New mobile military surgical units provide faster treatment for injured U.S. Marines and Iraqis, says a study in the January issue of the Archives of Surgery.


The study examined the effectiveness of six Forward Resuscitative Surgery System (FRSS) teams that treated 30 Marines and 60 Iraqis between March 21 and April 22, 2003. The teams treated only patients who required immediate care for life- or limb-threatening injuries.


During the study period, the teams conducted a total of 149 procedures, including 21 patients identified as critical. Of the treated injuries, 77 were penetrating and 64 percent occurred in patients' extremities. Seven of the Marines developed complications due to their injuries and there were three confirmed deaths among the Iraqi patients treated by the teams.


"The KIA (killed in action) and DOW (died of wounds) rates of 13.5 percent and 0.8 percent, respectively, are lower than previous experiences, providing optimism that the FRSS works and is effective," the study authors wrote.


"The use of the FRSS allowed rapid access to surgical care from the point of wounding. The outcome for those treated at the FRSS was better than in previous conflicts, but the number of casualties treated was relatively small. The newly developed en route care system allowed the critically ill postoperative casualties to be transported to higher-level facilities and was vital to its success," the authors wrote.


The study was done by personnel at the First Medical Battalion/Naval Hospital at Camp Pendleton, Calif.


More information


The American College of Prehospital Medicine has more about military medicine.


Ellie

thedrifter
01-19-05, 01:24 PM
Voting is predicted in violent Iraqi cities


By David R. Sands
THE WASHINGTON TIMES


More than half of the voters in Iraq's most violent cities will be able to participate in the Jan. 30 election, a senior U.S. military commander said yesterday, even as U.S. officials shied away from predicting turnout for the critical vote.
Marine Lt. Gen. John Sattler told reporters that voting will proceed in both Fallujah and Ramadi, Sunni Muslim strongholds where violent opposition to the U.S.-led invasion and the interim Iraqi government has been strongest.
"It is our goal to make polling places available so that the preponderance of the [about 500,000 eligible] voters there would, in fact, have the opportunity to vote," said Gen. Sattler, commander of the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force in al Anbar province.







Terrorists continued a campaign of intimidation ahead of the vote, as the Baghdad headquarters of Iraq's biggest Shi'ite Muslim party was struck by a suicide bomber. Gunmen also killed three candidates, including two from the alliance led by Prime Minister Iyad Allawi.
An American soldier was killed in a roadside bombing in Baghdad, but, in a bit of good news, a Catholic archbishop kidnapped Monday in northern Iraq was released unharmed.
Turnout has emerged as a key barometer of the success of the Jan. 30 vote, in which more than 100 parties are vying for slots in the 275-seat transitional national assembly. The assembly will draft a new constitution, appoint a president and meet until a permanent government is voted in by the end of the year.
Surveys by the District-based International Republican Institute and other groups have found that a majority of Iraqis want to vote. The al-Mada newspaper this week published a poll indicating that two-thirds of Baghdad's 5 million residents planned to vote.
But terrorists and insurgent groups have vowed to derail the vote, and some leading Sunni Muslim groups have urged a boycott out of a fear that their political power will be curbed severely.
A strong overall turnout — and a respectable level of participation by Sunnis — would be major victories for the Bush administration, but U.S. officials steadfastly have refused to offer hard benchmarks for success.
With Iraq emerging from more than two decades of Saddam Hussein's dictatorship, the United States and its coalition allies argue that any reasonably free election would be a huge step forward.
"The fact that the Iraqi people are having elections is a significant achievement," White House spokesman Scott McClellan said yesterday. "A year ago, people would have looked at that as not very realistic."
Michael Kozak, the acting assistant secretary of state for democracy, human rights and labor, said the size of the turnout was less important than the quality of the election process.
"If people decide to boycott an election ... that's their choice," he said in a briefing last week. "If the process is clean, whether people choose to take advantage of it or not doesn't undermine its credibility," he said.
But critics fear that a low turnout in Iraq — or a significant boycott by restive Sunnis — could leave the fledgling government crippled before it gets started. A new assembly dominated by rival Shi'ite Muslim factions could sharpen the country's sectarian and ethnic strife.
Iraqi Interior Minister Falah Hassan al-Nakib told reporters in Baghdad yesterday that a major Sunni boycott would be tantamount to "treason."
"Participating is important," he said, adding, "If the national assembly does not represent all Iraqis, we will enter civil war and division of the country."
The Stockholm-based International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance offers some unexpected figures on voter turnout from around the world. Italy, which has averaged 92.5 percent turnout in 14 elections since World War II, boasts the highest participation numbers, followed closely by the Seychelles and Cambodia.
The United States ranked 139th out of 172 countries surveyed, with an average turnout in presidential elections since 1948 of 48.3 percent.
U.S. turnout in the 2000 election was 51.3 percent, but jumped to 60.7 percent in 2004 as terrorism and the war in Iraq became top voter concerns.
In Afghanistan, an estimated 77 percent of the country's 10.5 million registered voters cast ballots in the October presidential election, the first since U.S.-led forces ousted the fundamentalist Taliban regime.
Leading Iraqi officials have not backed away from issuing turnout estimates.
Farid Ayar, vice president of Iraq's independent electoral commission, predicted that about 7 million of the country's 14 million eligible voters will vote.
"Maybe it looks like a small number, but in Europe consider that if you have 40 percent of votes, it's a legal election," he said.
Finance Minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi told the Arabic-language al-Hayat newspaper that he expects between 40 percent and 50 percent of Iraq's Sunni Arabs to vote.
Judy Van Rest, executive vice president of the International Republican Institute, said turnout is only one factor in whether an election is accepted as legitimate.
"You can't just look at one number," she said. "There's the integrity of the vote, the number of choices voters have on the ballot, the information they receive prior to voting.
"Saddam Hussein routinely held elections in which 100 percent of the population turned out to vote for him. I don't think anyone thought those were legitimate elections."


Ellie

thedrifter
01-19-05, 02:04 PM
Lawyers: British Soldiers in Iraq Followed Orders

By James Mackenzie

OSNABRUECK, Germany (Reuters) - British soldiers accused of abusing and sexually humiliating Iraqi prisoners were only following orders that their detainees be "worked hard," defense lawyers told a military court on Wednesday.


The defense began cross-examining witnesses at the trial of Corporal Daniel Kenyon and lance corporals Darren Larkin and Mark Cooley a day after published photos, some including the soldiers, appeared to show naked detainees being forced to simulate anal and other sex acts.


British Prime Minister Tony Blair (news - web sites), a staunch advocate of the U.S.-led Iraq (news - web sites) invasion to oust Saddam Hussein (news - web sites), told parliament on Wednesday he found the pictures "shocking and appalling."


The case echoes the scandal involving U.S. soldiers at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, which severely tarnished Washington's image in the Arab world and elsewhere.


British officials have stressed that very few British troops have been accused of similar actions, although a prosecution witness said on Wednesday that commanders heard several reports of problems, which prompted them to reinforce orders that civilians were not to be mistreated.


"We had a number of allegations that civilians were not being treated as they should be," Lt. Col. Nicholas Mercer, a senior legal officer stationed in the Gulf during the war said.


Joseph Giret, a civilian lawyer for Kenyon, told the court his client was following orders to round up looters stealing from food stores near the southern Iraqi city of Basra in the weeks after the invasion.


Under a plan called "Ali Baba," troops were told that looters were to be caught and "worked hard" to repair damage and deter further pilfering.


"The whole reason Kenyon is in the dock stems from those who gave the order to operate plan Ali Baba," Giret said.


On Tuesday the prosecution said the order was against international law preventing civilians from being detained and forced to work, but the prosecutors said soldiers' actions went far beyond it.


Mercer said the "quasi-police" role forced on troops by the total breakdown of law and order in Iraq posed big challenges. But he said troops had clear instructions about what to do with civilians apprehended for suspected criminal activity.


"They can be detained, handed over to Military Police and underpinning all this is treatment with humanity and dignity."


KEY TESTIMONY


Major Daniel Taylor, the commander of the camp hit by looters and the one who allegedly gave the verbal order, is expected to testify on Thursday after the court adjourned early on Wednesday to give lawyers time to look at new evidence.


"At the very heart in this case will be the words uttered by Major Taylor and the actions undertaken by those under his command," said Stephen Vullo, a lawyer for Cooley.


The three soldiers, who sat straight-faced throughout the testimony, have pleaded not guilty to numerous counts of abuse, although one admitted assaulting a man.


Photos plastered across British newspaper front pages showed an Iraqi man dangling from a forklift truck held only by netting and a soldier with his foot raised over a bound Iraqi lying in a puddle of water.





A U.S. military court sentenced Charles Graner, the alleged ringleader at Abu Ghraib, to 10 years in prison last weekend. Graner's defense lawyer also argued that he had only been following orders.


Ellie

thedrifter
01-19-05, 03:55 PM
Lejeune unit begins returning from Iraq
January 19,2005
ERIC STEINKOPFF
DAILY NEWS STAFF

An advance party from the 1st Battalion, 8th Marine Regiment, which sustained substantial casualties during the bloody November campaign to secure Fallujah, is home from Iraq, Camp Lejeune officials said Tuesday.

About 40 members of the unit returned over the weekend. The remainder are scheduled to arrive in the next couple of weeks, according to Gunnery Sgt. Sean Wright, a spokesman for the 8th Marine Regiment.

The 1/8 left Camp Lejeune last June. According to a November issue of Time magazine, it was one of six infantry battalions - four Marine and two Army - that stormed Fallujah that month. About 10,000 U.S. soldiers and Marines, along with roughly 2,000 Iraqi troops, engaged insurgents on the streets and inside houses.

According to the Department of Defense, at least 10 Marines from the 1/8 were killed during the deployment.

Battalion commander Lt. Col. Gareth F. Brandl told families on a unit Web site that they should be proud of their Marines and sailors who performed bravely and honorably in combat.

"Unfortunately, this operation has not been without a heavy cost," Brandl wrote. "Although we mourn the loss of our brave comrades in our hearts, we carry their spirit with us always, and will continue to honor their memory in every endeavor we undertake


Ellie

thedrifter
01-19-05, 04:44 PM
January 24, 2005

Registry could cut war deaths
Data reporting system aims to improve care for wounded

By Deborah Funk
Times staff writer


About half of the U.S. troops in Iraq who are hospitalized with physical trauma are injured in battle, most often by improvised bombs, grenades, shrapnel, bullets and other penetrating devices.
And, regardless of whether they are wounded in or away from battle, few of these trauma patients return to duty — at least not immediately, according to preliminary military figures.

The inpatient data are in early reports from the Joint Theater Trauma Registry — the backbone of a new wartime trauma reporting system that will save lives and steer research, a top Army doctor said.

“I want to drive my research lab with the data that comes out of this war,” said Army Col. (Dr.) John Holcomb, commander of the U.S. Army Institute of Surgical Research.

“Right now, we’re using 40-year-old data. We’re obligated to have current data,” he said.

Using current data can cut preventable death by 15 percent by making sure the injured get the right care at the right place and time, and that proper resources are where they need to be, Holcomb said.

Holcomb stressed that the Joint Theater Trauma Registry is very much a work in progress.

As of Dec. 31, the database contained the records of 2,403 military inpatients treated in combat-support hospitals in Southwest and Central Asia and treatment records of 1,026 troops from among the larger group who were further evacuated to Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Germany for follow-on care.

That represents only about 30 percent of all inpatient injuries to date in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom.

Trends could change

Holcomb said his staff has many more records but has not had time to enter them into the registry.

In addition, the data that have been entered are not in chronological order; the information is being entered as boxes of reports reach the team in San Antonio that is compiling the data, so the trends could change, Holcomb said.

Holcomb also stressed that the registry includes only inpatient data. Of all troops injured in the war zones, he estimates that half receive outpatient care and return to duty.

The data analyzed so far show that 39 percent of the injuries of hospitalized troops in Southwest and Central Asia are from penetrating trauma, and about 25 percent are due to injuries from roadside bombs and other explosive ordnance.

These two types of injuries, which are also the leading cause of deaths among combat troops, often occur in tandem. They account for nearly 88 percent of battle injuries and about 27 percent of nonbattle injuries.

Nearly half of the wounded have multiple injuries. Meanwhile, for those who suffer trauma to only one part of the body, almost 35 percent had wounds to their arms or legs and just over 11 percent had head and/or neck injuries.

Only 4.4 percent of traumatic wounds were to the torso — an indication that body armor may be helping limit damage for troops hit in that area.

Trauma patients in Iraq and Afghanistan who are injured badly enough to be hospitalized are evacuated out of the combat support hospitals in theater nearly three-fourths of the time; fewer than 20 percent return to duty directly from those facilities.

Of all the trauma patients who are flown to Landstuhl from the combat support hospitals, about 77 percent are then evacuated back to the States for further care. Only about 10 percent of the Landstuhl trauma inpatients return from there to the war zones, the data show.

Regardless of where they are ultimately evacuated for care, however, most of the injured can return to duty at some point, Holcomb said.

Such trauma registries — which are well proven in civilian hospitals — are the backbone of medical trauma systems, which improve chances of survival, reduce the days in intensive care and the overall days spent in the hospital.

A learning process

The military, however, has not had to use such a system since Vietnam and is just now getting back up to speed.

Capturing military trauma data “was just amazingly well done” during the Vietnam War, said Ellen Embrey, deputy assistant secretary of defense for force health protection and readiness. “Since that time, because we haven’t had many opportunities to capture that kind of thing, we sort of got rusty at it.”

Embrey said the need to reinstitute a new trauma registry, “to make sure we were capturing the same kind of data across the services,” became evident with the advent two years ago of the intense, large-scale war in Iraq.

The joint theater trauma program is an effort to bring the services’ information together.

Holcomb said he doesn’t expect the data being collected to differ much from what was seen in the Vietnam War, although the widespread use of protective chest plates will probably decrease wounds and deaths from chest injuries, which is what military officials saw in Somalia in the early 1990s, in a very small sample.

Medical officials have been meeting weekly to improve the registry, with strong support from the Pentagon’s Office of Health Affairs and the services’ surgeons general.

They hope to perform a comparative analysis with other conflicts, enabling them to see over time how the enemy’s tactics have changed, so the military can better prevent injuries and better treat those that do occur.

“You’ve got to know what’s happening so you can prevent it,” Holcomb said.

Ellie

thedrifter
01-19-05, 06:38 PM
No. 054-05
Jan 19, 2005
IMMEDIATE RELEASE



National Guard and Reserve Mobilized as of January 19, 2005
This week, the Army, Air Force, Marine Corps and Navy announced an overall decrease in the number of reservists on active duty in support of the partial mobilization, while the Coast Guard number remained the same. The net collective result is 868 fewer reservists mobilized than last week.

At any given time, services may mobilize some units and individuals while demobilizing others, making it possible for these figures to either increase or decrease. Total number currently on active duty in support of the partial mobilization for the Army National Guard and Army Reserve is 162,857; Naval Reserve, 3,567; Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve, 11,928; Marine Corps Reserve, 13,188; and the Coast Guard Reserve, 967. This brings the total National Guard and Reserve personnel, who have been mobilized, to 192,507, including both units and individual augmentees.

A cumulative roster of all National Guard and Reserve personnel, who are currently mobilized, can be found at http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Jan2005/d20050119.pdf


Ellie

thedrifter
01-19-05, 08:59 PM
Al Asad welcomes VMFA(AW)-224 Hornets to Iraq
Submitted by: 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing
Story Identification #: 20051196155
Story by Cpl. Paul Leicht



AL ASAD, Iraq (Jan 19, 2005) -- Landing in succession, ‘tiger-striped’ F/A-18D Hornets with Marine (All Weather) Fighter Attack Squadron 224 arrived here Jan. 15.

Fellow squadron members from their advanced party and 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing personnel, who helped set the stage for their deployment to Iraq, met them soon after they taxied to their home at Al Asad.

Based out of Marine Corps Air Station Beaufort, S.C., the Marines and Sailors with VMFA(AW)-224 will be supporting ongoing operations in Iraq during their anticipated seven-month deployment in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

“We are honored to be here to perform our squadron's mission in support of Marines and Coalition forces,” said Lt.Col. Wilbert E. Thomas, commanding officer, VMFA(AW)-224, whose squadron started flying combat missions 48 hours after their arrival. “We are working for the (Combined Force Air Component Commander) for the next two months, but anticipate transferring to direct support of II MEF.”

The ‘Bengals’ also come to Iraq with a new squadron sergeant major, Sgt. Maj. William Burton, who joined VMFA(AW)-224 Jan. 7 following their pre-deployment preparations during the Desert Talon Exercise at Marine Corps Air Station Yuma, Ariz.

“The Marines of VMFA (AW) 224 are extremely excited and motivated to finally get a chance to participate in the Global War against Terrorism,” said Burton who looks forward to leading the enlisted Marines over the next few years and during the deployment. “They have trained intensively for months on end and have made large sacrifices, to ensure that the squadron was capable of performing it's mission.”

Burton, a 20-year veteran of the Marine Corps and a Harlem native in New York, said he looks forward to supporting the squadron in every way possible and to be there for every Marine to ensure mission success.

“These are truly professional Marines--officers as well as enlisted--who take pride in being the best at what they do,” said Burton

http://www.usmc.mil/marinelink/image1.nsf/Lookup/200511961450/$file/1294%20LR.jpg

Submitted by: 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing


Illuminated by the setting sun after landing at Al Asad, Iraq, Jan. 15, a ‘tiger-striped’ F/A-18D Hornet with Marine (All Weather) Fighter Attack Squadron 224 rests in the new hangar area prepared for the squadron by 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing Marines.
Photo by: Cpl. Paul Leicht

Ellie

thedrifter
01-19-05, 11:23 PM
Technology Cuts 'Friendly Fire'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Tony Perry
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
January 18, 2005

FALLOUJA, Iraq - Improved technology and better planning before November's battle for Fallouja helped U.S. forces avoid the "friendly fire" casualties that have plagued other large-scale military operations, Marine Corps commanders say.

Col. John Coleman, chief of staff for the Camp Pendleton-based 1st Marine Expeditionary Force, said new technology, rushed to Fallouja within days of the battle, allowed air and ground units to know the precise location of U.S. forces in real time. Among the improvements was better intelligence gathering by ScanEagle, the unmanned reconnaissance aircraft that circled Fallouja and continuously beamed back information on U.S. forces and the location and movement of insurgents.

"I know of no blue-on-blue incidents," said Coleman, using military parlance for cases of members of a military force mistakenly killing their own fighters.

In Fallouja, the chances for friendly-fire deaths were significant, as more than 10,000 Marines and soldiers and dozens of warplanes were involved in a crowded, fast-moving battle in an area roughly the size of a Southern California suburb.

The U.S. used several unmanned aircraft during the battle. Unheard and largely unseen, they broadcast information to forces on the ground, air units and top brass at a command post.

"It's been a great tool for us," Coleman said during a wide-ranging interview about Fallouja and other aspects of the Marine mission in Iraq.

Brig. Gen. Joe Dunford, assistant commander of the 1st Marine Division, said in a separate interview that, along with technological advances, good "situational awareness" among troops on the ground thanks to advance planning helped avoid friendly-fire casualties.

"Technology is an enabler, but there's no substitute for the engagement of Marines, soldiers, sailors at all levels in good cross-talk," Dunford said.

"I believe that the man-in-the-loop is the biggest factor in precluding blue-on-blue," Dunford said. "Human factors outweigh technological factors."

Coleman said some Marines might have been struck by bullets intended for insurgents, given the enormous distances that even small-caliber ordnance can travel if it misses its target. At least 72 Marines were killed during the eight-day battle. Most were killed while storming barricaded buildings where heavily armed insurgents, refusing to surrender, had taken refuge and attacked the Marines with small-arms fire.

An estimated 1,600 insurgents died. The exact number of slain militants may never be known because many of them were buried beneath the rubble of buildings demolished by U.S. firepower.

Friendly-fire casualties have been an issue for U.S. commanders for as long as the U.S. has had a military. George Washington wrote about the anguish of having his soldiers killed by their comrades after they were mistaken for British forces.

Statistics vary, but Pentagon figures suggest that friendly fire accounted for 24% of U.S. fatalities during the 1991 Persian Gulf War and 15% of the nonfatal injuries.

More recently, the Army acknowledged that former pro football player Pat Tillman might have died from friendly fire in Afghanistan when members of his special forces unit became confused and began firing at one another in the dark.

During the assault on Baghdad in the spring of 2003, as many as 10 Marines were killed near Nasiriya when their vehicles were mistakenly attacked by Air Force A-10 Thunderbolts. The incident was a virtual repeat of an incident during the Gulf War in which seven Marines were killed in an A-10 attack.

A 900-page investigative report into the Nasiriya incident blamed errors by a Marine Corps air traffic controller.

After the report, the military embarked on a crash program of developing and upgrading its battlefield information-gathering system and "cross-talk" planning.

A further complication in Fallouja was the presence of Iraqi military units. U.S. commanders made communication with the Iraqis a priority, Dunford said.

"Much of that is the result of personal upfront leadership," he said.

In April, during the Marines' first assault on Fallouja, two Marines were killed and nine seriously wounded when an artillery unit mistakenly fired a mortar shell at a Marine encampment.

Along with the technology and planning, U.S. forces had other advantages in November that allowed for decreasing the chances of friendly-fire deaths.

Most of the fighting was during daylight. And the U.S. had detailed maps of the city and good intelligence - much of it provided by fleeing residents - on the location and capability of insurgent forces, officials said.

"The result was never in question, only the timing," he said.

Ellie

thedrifter
01-19-05, 11:24 PM
Media coverage distorts Iraq reality
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By LTC Tim Ryan
SPECIAL TO WORLD TRIBUNE.COM
Tuesday, January 18, 2005

Editors' Note: LTC Tim Ryan is Commander, Task Force 2-12 Cavalry, First Cavalry Division in Iraq. He led troops into battle in Fallujah late last year and is now involved in security operations for the upcoming elections. He wrote the following during "down time" after the Fallujah operation. His views are his own.

All right, I've had enough. I am tired of reading distorted and grossly exaggerated stories from major news organizations about the "failures" in the war in Iraq. "The most trusted name in news" and a long list of others continue to misrepresent the scale of events in Iraq. Print and video journalists are covering only a fraction of the events in Iraq and, more often than not, the events they cover are only negative.

The inaccurate picture they paint has distorted the world view of the daily realities in Iraq. The result is a further erosion of international support for the United States' efforts there, and a strengthening of the insurgents' resolve and recruiting efforts while weakening our own. Through their incomplete, uninformed and unbalanced reporting, many members of the media covering the war in Iraq are aiding and abetting the enemy.

The fact is the Coalition is making steady progress in Iraq, but not without ups and downs. So why is it that no matter what events unfold, good or bad, the media highlights mostly the negative aspects of the event? The journalistic adage, "If it bleeds, it leads," still applies in Iraq, but why only when it's American blood?

As a recent example, the operation in Fallujah delivered an absolutely devastating blow to the insurgency. Though much smaller in scope, clearing Fallujah of insurgents arguably could equate to the Allies' breakout from the hedgerows in France during World War II. In both cases, our troops overcame a well-prepared and solidly entrenched enemy and began what could be the latter's last stand. In Fallujah, the enemy death toll has exceeded 1,500 and still is climbing. Put one in the win column for the good guys, right? Wrong. As soon as there was nothing negative to report about Fallujah, the media shifted its focus to other parts of the country.

More recently, a major news agency's website lead read: "Suicide Bomber Kills Six in Baghdad" and "Seven Marines Die in Iraq Clashes." True, yes. Comprehensive, no. Did the author of this article bother to mention that Coalition troops killed 50 or so terrorists while incurring those seven losses? Of course not. Nor was there any mention about the substantial progress these offensive operations continue to achieve in defeating the insurgents. Unfortunately, this sort of incomplete reporting has become the norm for the media, whose poor job of presenting a complete picture of what is going on in Iraq borders on being criminal.

Much of the problem is about perspective, putting things in scale and balance. What if domestic news outlets continually fed American readers headlines like: "Bloody Week on U.S. Highways: Some 700 Killed," or "More Than 900 Americans Die Weekly from Obesity-Related Diseases"? Both of these headlines might be true statistically, but do they really represent accurate pictures of the situations? What if you combined all of the negatives to be found in the state of Texas and used them as an indicator of the quality of life for all Texans? Imagine the headlines: "Anti-law Enforcement Elements Spread Robbery, Rape and Murder through Texas Cities." For all intents and purposes, this statement is true for any day of any year in any state. True - yes, accurate - yes, but in context with the greater good taking place - no! After a year or two of headlines like these, more than a few folks back in Texas and the rest of the U.S. probably would be ready to jump off of a building and end it all. So, imagine being an American in Iraq right now.

From where I sit in Iraq, things are not all bad right now. In fact, they are going quite well. We are not under attack by the enemy; on the contrary, we are taking the fight to him daily and have him on the ropes. In the distance, I can hear the repeated impacts of heavy artillery and five-hundred-pound bombs hitting their targets. The occasional tank main gun report and the staccato rhythm of a Marine Corps LAV or Army Bradley Fighting Vehicle's 25-millimeter cannon provide the bass line for a symphony of destruction. As elements from all four services complete the absolute annihilation of the insurgent forces remaining in Fallujah, the area around the former insurgent stronghold is more peaceful than it has been for more than a year.

The number of attacks in the greater Al Anbar Province is down by at least 70-80 percent from late October - before Operation Al Fajar began. The enemy in this area is completely defeated, but not completely gone. Final eradication of the pockets of insurgents will take some time, as it always does, but the fact remains that the central geographic stronghold of the insurgents is now under friendly control. That sounds a lot like success to me. Given all of this, why don't the papers lead with "Coalition Crushes Remaining Pockets of Insurgents" or "Enemy Forces Resort to Suicide Bombings of Civilians"? This would paint a far more accurate picture of the enemy's predicament over here. Instead, headlines focus almost exclusively on our hardships.

What about the media's portrayal of the enemy? Why do these ruthless murderers, kidnappers and thieves get a pass when it comes to their actions? What did the the media show or tell us about Margaret Hassoon, the director of C.A.R.E. in Iraq and an Iraqi citizen, who was kidnapped, brutally tortured and left disemboweled on a street in Fallujah? Did anyone in the press show these images over and over to emphasize the moral failings of the enemy as they did with the soldiers at Abu Ghuraib?

Did anyone show the world how this enemy had huge stockpiles of weapons in schools and mosques, or how he used these protected places as sanctuaries for planning and fighting in Fallujah and the rest of Iraq? Are people of the world getting the complete story? The answer again is no! What the world got instead were repeated images of a battle-weary Marine who made a quick decision to use lethal force and who immediately was tried in the world press. Was this one act really illustrative of the overall action in Fallujah? No, but the Marine video clip was shown an average of four times each hour on just about every major TV news channel for a week. This is how the world views our efforts over here and stories like this without a counter continually serve as propaganda victories for the enemy. Al Jazeera isn't showing the film of the C.A.R.E. worker, but is showing the clip of the Marine. Earlier this year, the Iraqi government banned Al Jazeera from the country for its inaccurate reporting. Wonder where they get their information now? Well, if you go to the Internet, you'll find a web link from the Al Jazeera home page to CNN's home page. Very interesting.

The operation in Fallujah is only one of the recent examples of incomplete coverage of the events in Iraq. The battle in Najaf last August provides another. Television and newspapers spilled a continuous stream of images and stories about the destruction done to the sacred city, and of all the human suffering allegedly brought about by the hands of the big, bad Americans. These stories and the lack of anything to counter them gave more fuel to the fire of anti-Americanism that burns in this part of the world. Those on the outside saw the Coalition portrayed as invaders or oppressors, killing hapless Iraqis who, one was given to believe, simply were trying to defend their homes and their Muslim way of life.

Such perceptions couldn't be farther from the truth. What noticeably was missing were accounts of the atrocities committed by the Mehdi Militia - Muqtada Al Sadr's band of henchmen. While the media was busy bashing the Coalition, Muqtada's boys were kidnapping policemen, city council members and anyone else accused of supporting the Coalition or the new government, trying them in a kangaroo court based on Islamic Shari'a law, then brutally torturing and executing them for their "crimes." What the media didn't show or write about were the two hundred-plus headless bodies found in the main mosque there, or the body that was put into a bread oven and baked. Nor did they show the world the hundreds of thousands of mortar, artillery and small arms rounds found within the "sacred" walls of the mosque. Also missing from the coverage was the huge cache of weapons found in Muqtada's "political" headquarters nearby. No, none of this made it to the screen or to print. All anyone showed were the few chipped tiles on the dome of the mosque and discussion centered on how we, the Coalition, had somehow done wrong. Score another one for the enemy's propaganda machine.

Now, compare the Najaf example to the coverage and debate ad nauseam of the Abu Ghuraib Prison affair. There certainly is no justification for what a dozen or so soldiers did there, but unbalanced reporting led the world to believe that the actions of the dozen were representative of the entire military. This has had an incredibly negative effect on Middle Easterners' already sagging opinion of the U.S. and its military.

continued.......

thedrifter
01-19-05, 11:25 PM
Did anyone show the world images of the 200 who were beheaded and mutilated in Muqtada's Shari'a Law court, or spend the next six months talking about how horrible all of that was? No, of course not. Most people don't know that these atrocities even happened. It's little wonder that many people here want us out and would vote someone like Muqtada Al Sadr into office given the chance - they never see the whole truth. Strange, when the enemy is the instigator the media does not flash images across the screens of televisions in the Middle East as they did with Abu Ghuraib. Is it because the beheaded bodies might offend someone? If so, then why do we continue see photos of the naked human pyramid over and over?

So, why doesn't the military get more involved in showing the media the other side of the story? The answer is they do. Although some outfits are better than others, the Army and other military organizations today understand the importance of getting out the story - the whole story - and trains leaders to talk to the press. There is a saying about media and the military that goes: "The only way the media is going to tell a good story is if you give them one to tell." This doesn't always work as planned. Recently, when a Coalition spokesman tried to let TV networks in on opening moves in the Fallujah operation, they misconstrued the events for something they were not and then blamed the military for their gullibility. CNN recently aired a "special report" in which the cable network accused the military of lying to it and others about the beginning of the Fallujah operation. The incident referred to took place in October when a Marine public affairs officer called media representatives and told them that an operation was about to begin. Reporters rushed to the outskirts of Fallujah to see what they assumed was going to be the beginning of the main attack on the city. As it turned out, what they saw were tactical "feints" designed to confuse the enemy about the timing of the main attack, then planned to take place weeks later.

Once the network realized that major combat operations wouldn't start for several more weeks, CNN alleged that the Marines had used them as a tool for their deception operation. Now, they say they want answers from the military and the administration on the matter. The reality appears to be that in their zeal to scoop their competition, CNN and others took the information they were given and turned it into what they wanted it to be. Did the military lie to the media: no. It is specifically against regulations to provide misinformation to the press. However, did the military planners anticipate that reporters would take the ball and run with it, adding to the overall deception plan? Possibly. Is that unprecedented or illegal? Of course not.

CNN and others say they were duped by the military in this and other cases. Yet, they never seem to be upset by the undeniable fact that the enemy manipulates them with a cunning that is almost worthy of envy. You can bet that terrorist leader Abu Musab Al Zarqawi has his own version of a public affairs officer and it is evident that he uses him to great effect. Each time Zarqawi's group executes a terrorist act such as a beheading or a car bomb, they have a prepared statement ready to post on their website and feed to the press. Over-eager reporters take the bait, hook, line and sinker, and report it just as they got it.

Did it ever occur to the media that this type of notoriety is just what the terrorists want and need? Every headline they grab is a victory for them. Those who have read the ancient Chinese military theorist and army general Sun Tzu will recall the philosophy of "Kill one, scare ten thousand" as the basic theory behind the strategy of terrorism. Through fear, the terrorist can then manipulate the behavior of the masses. The media allows the terrorist to use relatively small but spectacular events that directly affect very few, and spread them around the world to scare millions. What about the thousands of things that go right every day and are never reported? Complete a multi-million-dollar sewer project and no one wants to cover it, but let one car bomb go off and it makes headlines. With each headline, the enemy scores another point and the good-guys lose one. This method of scoring slowly is eroding domestic and international support while fueling the enemy's cause.

I believe one of the reasons for this shallow and subjective reporting is that many reporters never actually cover the events they report on. This is a point of growing concern within the Coalition. It appears many members of the media are hesitant to venture beyond the relative safety of the so-called "International Zone" in downtown Baghdad, or similar "safe havens" in other large cities. Because terrorists and other thugs wisely target western media members and others for kidnappings or attacks, the westerners stay close to their quarters. This has the effect of holding the media captive in cities and keeps them away from the broader truth that lies outside their view. With the press thus cornered, the terrorists easily feed their unwitting captives a thin gruel of anarchy, one spoonful each day. A car bomb at the entry point to the International Zone one day, a few mortars the next, maybe a kidnapping or two thrown in. All delivered to the doorsteps of those who will gladly accept it without having to leave their hotel rooms - how convenient.

The scene is repeated all too often: an attack takes place in Baghdad and the morning sounds are punctuated by a large explosion and a rising cloud of smoke. Sirens wail in the distance and photographers dash to the scene a few miles away. Within the hour, stern-faced reporters confidently stare into the camera while standing on the balcony of their tenth-floor Baghdad hotel room, their back to the city and a distant smoke plume rising behind them. More mayhem in Gotham City they intone, and just in time for the morning news. There is a transparent reason why the majority of car bombings and other major events take place before noon Baghdad-time; any later and the event would miss the start of the morning news cycle on the U.S. east coast. These terrorists aren't stupid; they know just what to do to scare the masses and when to do it. An important key to their plan is manipulation of the news media. But, at least the reporters in Iraq are gathering information and filing their stories, regardless of whether or the stories are in perspective. Much worse are the "talking heads" who sit in studios or offices back home and pontificate about how badly things are going when they never have been to Iraq and only occasionally leave Manhattan.

Almost on a daily basis, newspapers, periodicals and airwaves give us negative views about the premises for this war and its progress. It seems that everyone from politicians to pop stars are voicing their unqualified opinions on how things are going. Recently, I saw a Rolling Stone magazine and in bold print on the cover was, "Iraq on Fire; Dispatches from the Lost War." Now, will someone please tell me who at Rolling Stone or just about any other "news" outlet is qualified to make a determination as to when all is lost and it's time to throw in the towel? In reality, such flawed reporting serves only to misshape world opinion and bolster the enemy's position. Each enemy success splashed across the front pages and TV screens of the world not only emboldens them, but increases their ability to recruit more money and followers.

So what are the credentials of these self proclaimed "experts"? The fact is that most of those on whom we rely for complete and factual accounts have little or no experience or education in counter-insurgency operations or in nation-building to support their assessments. How would they really know if things are going well or not? War is an ugly thing with many unexpected twists and turns. Who among them is qualified to say if this one is worse than any other at this point? What would they have said in early 1942 about our chances of winning World War II? Was it a lost cause too? How much have these "experts" studied warfare and counter-insurgencies in particular? Have they ever read Roger Trinquier's treatise Modern Warfare: A French View on Counter-insurgency (1956)? He is one of the few French military guys who got it right. The Algerian insurgency of the 1950s and the Iraq insurgency have many similarities. What about Napoleon's campaigns in Sardinia in 1805-07? Again, there are a lot of similarities to this campaign. Have they studied that and contrasted the strategies? Or, have they even read Mao Zedung's theories on insurgencies, or Nygen Giap's, or maybe Che' Gueverra's? Have they seen any of Sun Tzu's work lately? Who are these guys? It's time to start studying, folks. If a journalist doesn't recognize the names on this list, he or she probably isn't qualified to assess the state of this or any other campaign's progress.

Worse yet, why in the world would they seek opinion from someone who probably knows even less than they do about the state of affairs in Iraq? It sells commercials, I suppose. But, I find it amazing that some people are more apt to listen to a movie star's or rock singer's view on how we should prosecute world affairs than to someone whose profession it is to know how these things should go. I play the guitar, but Bruce Springsteen doesn't listen to me play. Why should I be subjected to his views on the validity of the war? By profession, he's a guitar player. Someone remind me what it is that makes Sean Penn an expert on anything. It seems that anyone who has a dissenting view is first to get in front of the camera. I'm all for freedom of speech, but let's talk about things we know. Otherwise, television news soon could have about as much credibility as "The Bachelor" has for showing us truly loving couples.

continued.....

thedrifter
01-19-05, 11:25 PM
Also bothersome are references by "experts" on how "long" this war is taking. I've read that in the world of manufacturing, you can have only two of the following three qualities when developing a product - cheap, fast or good. You can produce something cheap and fast, but it won't be good; good and fast, but it won't be cheap; good and cheap, but it won't be fast. In this case, we want the result to be good and we want it at the lowest cost in human lives. Given this set of conditions, one can expect this war is to take a while, and rightfully so. Creating a democracy in Iraq not only will require a change in the political system, but the economic system as well. Study of examples of similar socio-economic changes that took place in countries like Chile, Bulgaria, Serbia, Russia and other countries with oppressive Socialist dictatorships shows that it took seven to ten years to move those countries to where they are now. There are many lessons to be learned from these transfomations, the most important of which is that change doesn't come easily, even without an insurgency going on. Maybe the experts should take a look at all of the work that has gone into stabilizing Bosnia-Herzegovina over the last 10 years. We are just at the 20-month mark in Iraq, a place far more oppressive than Bosnia ever was. If previous examples are any comparison, there will be no quick solutions here, but that should be no surprise to an analyst who has done his or her homework.

This war is not without its tragedies; none ever are. The key to the enemy's success is use of his limited assets to gain the greatest influence over the masses. The media serves as the glass through which a relatively small event can be magnified to international proportions, and the enemy is exploiting this with incredible ease. There is no good news to counteract the bad, so the enemy scores a victory almost every day. In its zeal to get to the hot spots and report the latest bombing, the media is missing the reality of a greater good going on in Iraq. We seldom are seen doing anything right or positive in the news. People believe what they see, and what people of the world see almost on a daily basis is negative. How could they see it any other way? These images and stories, out of scale and context to the greater good going on over here, are just the sort of thing the terrorists are looking for. This focus on the enemy's successes strengthens his resolve and aids and abets his cause. It's the American image abroad that suffers in the end.

Ironically, the press freedom that we have brought to this part of the world is providing support for the enemy we fight. I obviously think it's a disgrace when many on whom the world relies for news paint such an incomplete picture of what actually has happened. Much too much is ignored or omitted. I am confident that history will prove our cause right in this war, but by the time that happens, the world might be so steeped in the gloom of ignorance we won't recognize victory when we achieve it.

Postscript: I have had my staff aggressively pursue media coverage for all sorts of events that tell the other side of the story only to have them turned down or ignored by the press in Baghdad. Strangely, I found it much easier to lure the Arab media to a "non-lethal" event than the western outlets. Open a renovated school or a youth center and I could always count on Al-Iraqia or even Al-Jazeera to show up, but no western media ever showed up - ever. Now I did have a pretty dangerous sector, the Abu Ghuraib district that extends from western Baghdad to the outskirts of Fallujah (not including the prison), but it certainly wasn't as bad as Fallujah in November and there were reporters in there.

Ellie

thedrifter
01-20-05, 12:44 AM
For Military Personnel Serving in Iraq/Afghanistan
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
''Declare Combat Pay as Income and Receive Bigger Tax Refund''

TRACY, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jan. 19, 2005--Military personnel serving in combat areas do not have to pay federal income tax. However, Congress is now allowing soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines in combat areas such as Iraq and Afghanistan alternatives that could put significant cash back into the pockets of their "cammies."

According to Leroy E. Petz, Sr., President of Petz Enterprises, Inc., producers of the popular TaxBrain ® Online Tax Service, "If a combat soldier's 2004 W-2 form shows a "Q" in Box 14, he or she has the potential to increase their federal tax refunds by hundreds -- if not thousands -- of dollars. Because combat pay is tax free, most military personnel do not take extraordinary steps to generate refunds. However, combat pay can be treated as earned income for the Child Tax Credit, Child Dependent Care Expenses and Earned Income Credit, and is not considered earned income as a tax liability. By doing a little homework, personnel of all ranks serving in combat areas can generate some much-needed cash."

Preparing, filing taxes via the Internet cited as best way to increase refunds.

Petz added, "Military personnel have easy access to the Internet through their government-owned computers. Unfortunately, they cannot permanently store personal information, such as their taxes. So Internet-based preparation and filing is really their best solution. TaxBrain Online is standing by to help with free expert advice, instant filing via the Internet, and significantly reduced preparation costs. Since almost 20% of TaxBrain users are in the military, we have a special affinity and understanding of their financial needs, especially in this difficult time for many."

Eric Hayes, TaxBrain Online Tax Specialist said, "The Child Tax Credit allows the taxpayer with at least one qualifying child under the age of 17 a dollar-for-dollar credit against the tax liability up to the amount of the child care credit, $1,000 per child. With two children, if the tax liability were $1800 the Sergeant/Petty Officer would use $1800 of the $2000 child tax credit to reduce the tax to zero and could receive the additional $200 back as a refund.

"Obviously, the lower the tax liability, the higher the refund," said Mr. Hayes. "To maximize the deductions the service member will want to include the combat pay into income to get the full effect, generating a bigger refund. It's to their benefit to declare combat pay as income, and reap the rewards they so richly deserve."

Complete details with specific examples are available by contacting Eric Hayes, TaxBrain.com Online Tax Service, 209-835-2720, ext. 2118 or ehayes@petzent.com


Ellie