Naomi Klein: Mutiny in Iraq

...holding his d*ck in one hand and with his index finger on the other hand ready to push the nuclear button and no one to stop him. That is not a secure thought.:scared:

Don't forget the Red Cross and UN bailed out long ago.
.....................................................

There is a case for a mutiny in the US as well.

US Admirals have said they took an oath to defend the constitution and not just the President. They are less willing to obey illegal orders than the air force.

The Pentagon has been subdivided by Rumsfeld to the consternation of many in the military.

When push comes to shove, PNAC would rather create a martyr of Bush Jr. than lose control of the game.

This kind of power struggle often ends this way as it did in Rome.

Assasination of American left wing leaders in 1968 had an impact for decades.
Perhaps pushing one of thier own over a cliff in 2004 will
be their best scenario to insure a complete takeover.

Thanks. I'd smile if it weren't so true and chilling.

No one, least of all the Iraqi people, would be sorry to see Saddam's downfall; but the Iraqi people would also know the difference between real liberation and colonial occupation.

Ms. Klein is among the foremost writers who know that democracy and neoliberalism are fundamentally incompatible. The invasion was not a liberation; it was gunboat diplomacy with cruise missiles. Its aims were not and are not sovereignty for Iraq, but to force a neoliberal arrangement down the throats of yet one more developing nation. It is a scheme that has failed the common people wherever it has been tried and one that has been rejected wherever people have the opportunity to say something about it.

Saddam is gone and good riddance. However, the Iraqi struggle for liberation continues.

http://xymphora.blogspot.com/2004_05_01_xymphora_archive.html#108338736556004732

"It represents an incredible loss of control by the Pentagon in Washington over the American military. It is apparent that the American commanders on the ground in Falluja came to the conclusion that whoever was giving the orders in Washington was insane (Dr. Strangelove), and that they were no longer prepared to participate in a massacre that not only would fail in its short-term military goal, but would turn the whole country violently against the Americans (not to mention completely destroying the moral integrity of the American military by forcing soldiers to murder civilians). They negotiated a cease-fire unknown to the Pentagon in Washington and against the express wishes of the civilian neocons in charge of the Pentagon. In fact, Falluja was being micromanaged by the White House itself. No to put too fine a point on it, the cease-fire in Falluja was a mutiny by the American commanders in Falluja (the hero seems to be Marine Lt. Gen. James Conway)."

It's been evident for some time that the ducks
are no longer in a row, and this too echoes the
situation long ago in VietNam. The "leaders"
really cannot afford to let the idea circulate,
either, so the Lt. Gen. might well get away with it.

He said there wasn't an American military solution to Fallujah. There had to be an Iraqi solution.

It was in a sense a mutiny. What it boiled down to was the military leadership telling the civilian leadership, "we're done with you telling us, you don't have a clue, so we're telling you." I think he sensed not only the true dilemna in Iraq but the deteriorating political position of the regime at home. Nothing undermines power more than losing in a war. Therefore he got away with being insubordinate because this regime is too weak to remove him at this point.

Abazaid is saving this regime from itself by enabling it to get beyond April without 300 dead in one month. He's empowered the regime with the possibility to get to November without a total diastrous implosion. He gave them a fig leaf and a clue.

Abazaid's fig leaf is that he is going to get the murderers of the 4 contractors. The occupation forces seem to have lost the capability to complete any investigation. After soldiers were killed in Iraq early on, it was always followed by a vague statement and a promise of future investigation. The results were almost never forthcoming. Now they don't ever bother saying there will be an investigation. The conditions are too chaotic.

Whey don't they say, it looks like a turning point, only averaging 40 attacks a day?

Edit: I still don't think they have until June 30,
but it depends on what the Iraqis do, which is I suppose
the point.

...have we? Kimmit is a freaking moron. What is happening is way over his box of conditioned responses.

A lot of "leaders" in that box right now.
Like Saddam, maybe they should have read Giap.
Some other fellow saying Giap is a candidate for man
of the last century, which is a thought I had not
entertained, but on thinking about it it feels right,
although there are a couple of others like Einstein,
Goedel, probably a few more that have a case.