The following is an archived copy of a message sent to a Discussion List run by the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
Views expressed in this archived message are those of the author, not of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
[Main archive index/search] [List information] [Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]
Personnally, I don't want the occupation to work. If it does, for US's sake (control of Iraq's economy) not democracy or some stupid last minute invention of the sort, then it will be repeated ad nauseam elsewhere. There are a hell of a lot of feable/feasable elsewheres that comes to mind. Asking to "bring back the troops home" don't change the nature of an empire in the making either. Drew can post whatever he wants but please, no attempt to defend Mr. Pentagon or the likes. I was ready to delete the message without commenting when I saw Drew's plea for..."silence". That's what got me...to talk. Cordesman has never been a source for me and never will. Managed to stumble on some of his earlier analysis on Palestine at the begining of the 90s in scholar journals at university. Is mantra is still the same. Not interested. I 've read him from much longer than that tough - mid eighties in audiophile journal like Absolute Sound. Saw him statue like standing during the first Gulf War on ABC as in-house military analyst with his pointer in front a cardboard using already then the "we" word when ever mentioning the US army activities in Iraq. The last thing I heard this week about electricity mainly in Bagdad was that it was getting better than even under Saddam's last days. As for NGO and the UN, since they can't operate freely anymore, I doubt much conclusive and thorough reports will be published from now on. The only thing left that is relatively well-known is the body counts. Marc Azar jennifer horan a écrit: > Cordesman often offers quality military analysis useful for those of > us trying to map the trajectory of this accursed intervention. That > he does so to promote US hegemony of the Middle East, by giving the > Washington elites a reality check, doesn't change that fact. > > Some months ago someone posted an excerpt or link to a report by him > in which he pointed out how ungrounded in reality was the call for > more US troops to be deployed to Iraq: It simply meant more mouths to > feed and shelter, and more bodies to protect. He observed that the > only personnel that could help the US 'secure' the occupation were > more Arab speakers and technocrats ready to repair infrastructure. I > took his assessment as particularly compelling, given his extensive > grasp of military logistics and wish to help the US find a way to make > this dammed occupation work. > > I'm grateful to Drew and to anyone else who sends us postings that we > can learn from, and hope they feel free to continue to do so. And > seeing as how I'm breaking my habit of non-listserv posting, let me > register the following query: What has been the documentable impact > of the US invasion and its aftermath on Iraqi civilian population? > What was the effect of the summertime electricity shortages, and was > it worse for Baghdad than for Basra? Is there any kind of damage > assesment in the works? It's making me crazy that the only civilian > casualties being counted by the think tankies are ones caused by > bullets and bombs. I would have thought all the UN and NGO publicity > to the effects of sanctions would have ensured a less myopic focus. > > Jennifer > > _______________________________________________ Sent via the discussion list of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq. To unsubscribe, visit http://lists.casi.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/casi-discuss To contact the list manager, email email@example.com All postings are archived on CASI's website: http://www.casi.org.uk