Recently, a couple of kids were found that had been abducted, one of them for 4 yrs the other 4 days. The kids are reunited with their families and the perp is behind bars and being charged with multiple offense. The kids are safe, the perp is dodging guys in lock up and yet the srtory continues and continues….WHY? It has a somewhat happy ending and I am sure the kids would like to get on with their lives and stay away from the multitude of assholees with microphones and cameras.

A small suggestion–MOVE ON! Let the people return to a somewhat normal life, please, MOVE ON!

CHUQ
20/01/07

Since I wrote the previous piece on the possible fate of al-Sadr, of course it is a personal opinion based on what facts I have from the region.

Anyway–recently one of Sadr’s closest friends was arrested by US forces and the most influential Shi’a cleric, Sistani has come out in favor of the “surge” and on the side of Maliki. This is a superb tactic, if you are going to go after Sadr–that is chip away at the perimeter until you expose the center and then act. I foresee an “unfortunate” accident for Sadr.

CHUQ
20/01/07

Will al-Sadr Become A Target?

Just as the Israel have their targeted assassinations, so should the US, seems to be gaining popularity. The thought is that he you silence him, then security could be established, at least in Shi’a areas. With hi9s death the shi’a resistence would have no leader and thusly a tranquility could be established.

IMO, I do not think so! The militias have their own leaders; al-Sadr is little more than their rallying point; their public face, if you will. His death would put a cramp in their style, for awhile, but not eliminate. If anything, the Shi’a are big on martyrs and he would become just that and then a rallying point for a more intense insurgency. Maybe not immediately, but eventually, he would become more influential in death than he has been in life.

The way all are talking in Washington, it seems to be a given, at least in my opinion, that he will be neutralized. it seems to sound like it will be a priority. Will it be an assassination? Depends on how you define the word. I am sure when it occurs there will be some reasonable explanation that has been already decided on by the Boyz in Washington. No One will call it an assassination–but dead is dead.

Since the media has painted him as such a bloodthirsty individual, his death will be widely accepted as a necessity for the Bush “way forward” to be realized.

Only time will tell if I am correct–I am not ruling out some political manuvering to stop this from happening, but since he is an “agent” for Iran–his death will be the best solution for those in the Administration.

CHUQ
11/01/07

http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2006/06/1833899

Just had to have a place for this reference.

I have been playing the political exchange for a long time and for the most part, the exchanges have been very good, but on these forums I have noticed that the more “conservs”, for lack of a better word, you have the more personal attacks you have. Most are unwarranted because it is usually an ideological difference and for some reason, they cannot have people disagreeing with them on anything. Personally, I do not care about a personal attack, because I refuse to let myself fall into the mindless dribble of those without respect. I disagree with a lot of people on the topics, but I will respect their opinion and debate them if I disagree. As far as the personal stuff, I will try to ignore it and keep my cool.

Of course, you also have those who do not attack personally but rather, goad you into poppin’ off with the hope someone will whack the bad guys pee-pee. And one of favs are those who make a statement and when ask to provide a link or such, say, “you do not need a link, it is just so”. Another, mindless way of saying “I am right, you are wrong”.

In other words, these types to me are “trolls” and presnt nothing of substance. I understand forum admin would like to have varying points of view and that is an excellent way of looking at the whole discussion thing, but not everyone is there to discuss, but rather to attack. I have seen good posters leave forums because of mindless crap and that is sad because those posters usually were the ones with very good points and info.

Just my thoughts.

Purge And Surge

I have been watching the Super Bowl of political tap dancing for over a month. The president is slowly and methodically replacing anyone who will not stay on message with his “new” program, A Way Forward.

He purged Rumsfeld and found the perfect yes man to takes his palce, Robt Gates then he moved Negroponte to the #2 spot; yet another yes man, who will play the Bush game to the fullest. So now, we have the deck stacked in Bush’s favor.

How about the military? Good you ask, Gen. Casey will be replaced as senior co in Iraq and Gen Abizaid, will be replaced as Co of Central Command. Casey will be replaced by Gen. Petraeus, a supporter of the esc alation of troops for Iraq. Abizaid is to be replaced by Adm. Fallon, who is a good choice if a new Iran plan is to include the Naval forces. Now the military leadership is in the Bush camp and will rubber stamp all the president proposes for the military.

But wait there is more! Amb. Khalizad will be replaced and it seems to be because he was off message when he suggested the US have talks with Iran about the security probs in Iraq. Khalizad will be sent as the new Ambassador to the UN.

Purge is near completion. How about the surge, you ask? Good question!

It seems just a couple of months ago was the election–WAIT!–It was a couple of months ago. Please let me know if I missed something, but was not the last election billed as the repudiation of the war in Iraq? And did not a study group issue a report saying that recommendations for the easing of US involvement in Iraq? Did this happen or was I just dreaming? Apparedntly I was dreaming!

The president in his speech outline the deployment of 20,000+ additional troops for Iraq and there were some money mentions in there also. He has totally disgarded the Iraq Study Group report and just figured out a way to “stay the course”.

If none of this tap dancing gets the job done, will BUsh be held accountable? Or will it be those damn democrats fault? What will the cost of the escalation? More violence and bloodshed will be the most obvious. Since this “new” plan will not be effective, I think al-Maliki will start looking for a new job. Why? Since Bush has said that most of his new plan is an Iraqi plan, all failures will fall on Maliki’s shoulders and I do not think he can bear the weight.

CHUQ
11/01/07

Not if the US has any say! Rice is making another trip to the area to kick start the peace process. Anyone believing this please let me sell you some land in Florida.

Regardless what the reason, the US refused to deal with an elected government, because they did not agree with the position of the leaders. I am sorry, but if the majority of the people want them to lead, who are you to say no?

Anyway back to the sub–The US is giving aid, monetary and ordinance, to the Fatah faction. It is trying to give them the high ground in the conflict. If peace is a priority, why not pressure Israel to come to the table? Instead the Us is giving weapons to the Fatah which whenn talks break down may be used against Israel, thus giving Israel another green light to destroy Palestinains.

The US DOES NOT want peace! If it was truly concerned it would “step up” and demand ALL factions talk or lose any and all aid. Money talks–Bullshit walks!

For at least 2 months I have been watching the occurances between the US and Iran. Now it is not so much a news story because sanctions have been put into place and it is not worthy until they try the nuke thing again. Yeah–I really care about Beck coming to America, that alone should promote world peace.

Anyway back to the subject–On two separate occassions the US has detained Iranians, Iraqis say theu were diplomats, but the US says different. Now the military sources are saying there are Iranians fighting in Iraq. I cannot wait to see what new occurances will happen.

Do I believe any of these stories, well ask yourself has the US government ever lied to the American people to go to war? Have they ever misled Congress or the World?

My opinion? It is just setting the stage for whatever the Administration is planning. This will not happen overnight, but they seem to be painstakingly setting the stage for a reaction to something that Iran may do. The plans are there and are on hold, waiting for the proper timing.

CHUQ
13/01/07

For months I had posted on a couple of discussion forums about the situation developing in Somalia; it was pretty much ignored, but I kept posting about the situation. Once someone fired a shot across the border then a new threead appeared and a lot of people had an opinion.

As I have said in the past, the American people have no opinion until the news media tells them they have an opinion. The thing is a lotof the opinions defended what had happened. That was ok, but not one of them had enough inclination to read up on what the developements were that lead to the attack; all they know is whaT CNN or FOX tells them. I refuse to be that flippin’ lazy or that flippin’ uninformed.

CHUQ
12/01/07

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070111/ts_nm/iran_usa_dc

The link above is a story about how some fear that Bush has intentions to widening the war in Iraq to include Syria and Iran. As I have said, there seems to be a lot of pressure on Iran, especially, and it appears to be there with the hope that Iran will make an ill-advised move, which would give the US an opening and it can be justified.

onsider, if you will, all the occurances deaaling with Iran. IMO, the ducks are beginning to line up in a row and all that needs now, is that mistake by Iran.

CHUQ
12/01/07