The 3rd Anniversary of the Iraqi War
Was actually yesterday, but I was down in Harris watching goats and couldn't rant. But I'm here now.
So, we have a bit of a situation here. A sovereign nation has been illegally occupied for 3 years. The main constituents of the 'Coalition of the Willing' (or what ever semantic slant is being used this week) are the USA and Britain. Not up on my British figures, but to date the total cost to the United States for this blunder of all blunders is $248,302,671,361 and rising. George W has just asked the US Congress for an additional $70 billion.
Perhaps a better way to measure the costs of this war would be to look at the body count. To date, the US has lost 2319 and the UK 103 military service personnel. More shockingly, the amount of innocent civilians killed has been estimated at '30 thousand, more or less' by US figures, or as high as 250 000 from other sources. This is on top of the hundreds of thousands killed during the UN imposed sanctions on Iraq following the first Gulf War. The majority of casualties comes from the indiscriminate bombing of Iraqi targets. Despite the propaganda we see daily on Western Networks like Fox and CNN, the overwhelming majority of ordinance used in Iraq are not 'smart bombs'. An example of this is the 'daisy cutter', a 15 000 lbs 'dumb bomb' that produces enough power to level buildings and trees.
Why did these two nations initially decide to wage war? Admittedly national security has become a complex issue since the events of 9/11, but the two main reasons repeatedly tossed about were 1) Saddam Hussein supports international terrorism and has been linked to Al Qaeda and 2) he has weapons of mass destruction and currently furthering these capabilities.
His links to Al Qaeda were unsubstantiated claims from the Bush Administration. Saddam's 'regime of terror' was largely secular, and hated by the various Islamic fundamentalists groups in the region. His WMD program was largely defunct from the severe damage, defections, and subsequent sanctions that hit Iraq after Desert Storm. Iraqi scientists were not procuring fissile material; the 'yellow cake' from Niger was falsified intelligence. It was initially received from Italian sources, stovepiped straight to the Bush Admin (bypassing those trained to interpret it) and used in media broadcasts. Upon exposure, Bush Admin officials blew the cover of the investigating officer's wife, a long time CIA covert operative, which is a felony offense.
Yet, despite the progress UN weapons inspectors were making, the invasion went ahead. What is worse, officials have acknowledge that the initial claims were false, and the war persists. Iraq is not democratic, nor will it be anytime soon, the government is miles away from stability and functions only in the Occupied Green Zone. Outer regions of the country are controlled by various warlords and Bathist supporters. Iraqi citizens are not safer now than they were with Saddam at the helm, in fact, Iraqis are 58 times more likely to die in the period following the invasion than before. I don't think I even need to mention the torture allegations and detaining of suspects, denied of legal and family contact (illegal under US and International Law).
The majority who will read this blog are Canadian. Sure, we wisely said no this hair-brained attempt to secure energy resources in the Middle East, but we have done nothing since to forward our anti-war stance. Outside of government officials publicly condemning the invasion, imposing sanctions, or raising complaints to the UN, I'm not sure what we could do. But ignoring the issue and continuing to engage in cozy relations with the occupying nations (which looks suspicious to those on the other side of the fence) is not the right course of action. Quiet complacency will only make us future targets.
With that off my chest... I'm headed back to study the goats.
So, we have a bit of a situation here. A sovereign nation has been illegally occupied for 3 years. The main constituents of the 'Coalition of the Willing' (or what ever semantic slant is being used this week) are the USA and Britain. Not up on my British figures, but to date the total cost to the United States for this blunder of all blunders is $248,302,671,361 and rising. George W has just asked the US Congress for an additional $70 billion.
Perhaps a better way to measure the costs of this war would be to look at the body count. To date, the US has lost 2319 and the UK 103 military service personnel. More shockingly, the amount of innocent civilians killed has been estimated at '30 thousand, more or less' by US figures, or as high as 250 000 from other sources. This is on top of the hundreds of thousands killed during the UN imposed sanctions on Iraq following the first Gulf War. The majority of casualties comes from the indiscriminate bombing of Iraqi targets. Despite the propaganda we see daily on Western Networks like Fox and CNN, the overwhelming majority of ordinance used in Iraq are not 'smart bombs'. An example of this is the 'daisy cutter', a 15 000 lbs 'dumb bomb' that produces enough power to level buildings and trees.
Why did these two nations initially decide to wage war? Admittedly national security has become a complex issue since the events of 9/11, but the two main reasons repeatedly tossed about were 1) Saddam Hussein supports international terrorism and has been linked to Al Qaeda and 2) he has weapons of mass destruction and currently furthering these capabilities.
His links to Al Qaeda were unsubstantiated claims from the Bush Administration. Saddam's 'regime of terror' was largely secular, and hated by the various Islamic fundamentalists groups in the region. His WMD program was largely defunct from the severe damage, defections, and subsequent sanctions that hit Iraq after Desert Storm. Iraqi scientists were not procuring fissile material; the 'yellow cake' from Niger was falsified intelligence. It was initially received from Italian sources, stovepiped straight to the Bush Admin (bypassing those trained to interpret it) and used in media broadcasts. Upon exposure, Bush Admin officials blew the cover of the investigating officer's wife, a long time CIA covert operative, which is a felony offense.
Yet, despite the progress UN weapons inspectors were making, the invasion went ahead. What is worse, officials have acknowledge that the initial claims were false, and the war persists. Iraq is not democratic, nor will it be anytime soon, the government is miles away from stability and functions only in the Occupied Green Zone. Outer regions of the country are controlled by various warlords and Bathist supporters. Iraqi citizens are not safer now than they were with Saddam at the helm, in fact, Iraqis are 58 times more likely to die in the period following the invasion than before. I don't think I even need to mention the torture allegations and detaining of suspects, denied of legal and family contact (illegal under US and International Law).
The majority who will read this blog are Canadian. Sure, we wisely said no this hair-brained attempt to secure energy resources in the Middle East, but we have done nothing since to forward our anti-war stance. Outside of government officials publicly condemning the invasion, imposing sanctions, or raising complaints to the UN, I'm not sure what we could do. But ignoring the issue and continuing to engage in cozy relations with the occupying nations (which looks suspicious to those on the other side of the fence) is not the right course of action. Quiet complacency will only make us future targets.
With that off my chest... I'm headed back to study the goats.
posted by Ian at 4:26 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home