Firing teams "Gunny" and "Storm" from the 2nd Battalion, 82nd Field Artillery, 3rd Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division fire a M109A6 Paladin, a Self-Propelled Howitzer, into the Diyala River Valley in support of Operation Lightning Hammer, which was just underway when the rounds were launched late into the night, Aug. 13. (U.S. Army photo by Spc. Ryan Stroud, 3rd Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division Public Affairs)


This is a map from The New York Times showing the location of the attacks near a Syrian border. It isn't near an Iranian border.

AT THIS LINK is a map of Iraq (click here) which clearly illustrates the named provinces of Iraq as understood by the USA military and map makers evidently. The NEWLY named 'strategy' of Lightning Hammer is being conducted in Diyala Province. Diyala Province is number 10 on this map. Baghdad is Diyala Province in the way of populous. The point is the attacks on the Kurds were on the opposite side of the nation known as Iraq. That 'technicality' evades the media and the USA miliary when selling their war.

Selling the Bush Genocide

Since the beginning of the Iraq War the USA military has 'resold' the illegal war time and time again.. The latest is "Lightning Hammer (click here). Right at the side of the Bush White House has been the media. Today CNN does it again attempting to say the 'newly named campaign' of the USA military in Iraq is fighting a genocide they have inspired and taken part in since the first day.

Reminding Colonel Michael Steele in the very beginnings of the illegal Iraq invasion of the Bush Administration killed nothing but innocent citizens and never one insurgent. The death toll of Iraqis grew from there to counts speculated in the hundreds of thousands and near a million.

Today, in complete compliance to the demands of the USA military to remake itself and be respected for it, CNN allowed the open speculation of the USA military actually fighting genocide. This is a venue of deceit and is a strategy against the American people that other media sources have ended with a hint of speculation.

When the coordinated attacks occured on August 14, 2007 and many Kurds were murdered, most of the major newspapers including the New York Times and Washington Post didn't 'bill' the deaths as a success of the USA military. Quite the contrary, a refreshing statement the titles] to the Washington Post articles stated, "The Surge is Working?" I dont' consider this editorial a sincere statement of the 'reality' of Iraq but it is a step in the right direction. If I may?

250 Dead: The Surge is Working? (click here)
Does the death of at least 250 Iraqi civilians, the deadliest single incident of the war, coming four years into the fighting and seven months after the surge was announced, actually signal progress for the U.S. strategy in Iraq?
Listen to the military commanders and spokesmen, and to the new cadre of Petraeus propagandists, and you may get that impression. The theory, in part, is that the attack is intended to distract Congress and the American public from the progress being made in Baghdad and elsewhere, and that it is a kind of "last gasp" for al-Qaeda in Iraq....

The most accurate aspect of this editorial is that the attacks were conducted to terrify Iraqis and force the hand of the American people to remove the troops from Iraq. The question left DANGEROUSLY unanswered is 'should the troops be withdrawn from Iraq?' That level of uncertainty is what allows Bush and his military to continue to kill, conduct military school strategies, record their mistakes, suck monies from the USA treasury, send American troops home in body bags or maimed and basically continue a genocide of Iraqis without any concern to the outcome to the people within that country so long as 'the nation building' in Baghdad continues to be the focus of the media and the 'question' of elections. In other words, do the deaths of Iraqis at the hand of other Iraqis in a civil war legitimacize the presence of the USA military?

The attacks happened on August 14, 2007 and let's just say for the sake of 'familiar' argument the reasons were exactly for the reason the Washington Post editorial states it was conducted. To alarm the world. Stun the Iraqis and provide more impetus to remove Amerian forces. I personally don't believe the reasons were ONLY that but let's just proceed on that premise and follow up to conclusions more valid

4 Truck Bombs Kill 190 in Kurdish Area of Iraq (click here)
By DAMIEN CAVE
Published: August 15, 2007
BAGHDAD, Aug. 14 — Four truck bombs killed at least 190 people on Tuesday in two villages in a Kurdish-speaking area near the Syrian border, destroying houses and sending hundreds of the wounded to at least six hospitals as far as 150 miles away, the Iraqi authorities said.

On August 15, 2007, the current president of the USA wrote executive order number 13224. That executive order is invalid. It splits Iran, a sovereign nation, into many authorities as if there were separate sovereign authorities within Iran. To my knowledge that is not the case. Iran is a sovereign country and The Revolutionary Guard is a military unit of the Iranian with something like 125,000 members. If The Revolutionary Guard, which was named for the overthrow of the Shah, has authority to exist and conduct it's business that authority falls under the sovereign government of Iran. Bush needed to 'proclaim' through his executive order 13224, that Iran was a terrorist nation conducting it's business through orders given to The Revolutionary Guard. In that is literally a declaration of war. The charge of one sovereign nation of another and would have opened up Iran to openly defend itself in Iraq and would invite it's allies into joining it. So, the rafications of this stupid executive order could literally lead to WW III. Seriously. Want to talk about genocide now?

But to return to the 'remaking' mode of Bush in cooperation of the USA military, the attacks on August 14th couldn't have been better so Bush could introduce his executive order against Iran the next day. In other words, Bush 'spun' the attacks on the Kurds, dismissed the deaths and their reality and turned the 'reality' of those attacks into a political motive for his party and for his 'reason' to war with Iran. The attacks on the Kurds have absolutely NOTHING to do with Iran but when a PR campaign by Bush and his military is laced together with the words death, al Qaeda and The Revolutionary Guard; it is an attack on the American understanding of THAT REALITY. We have witnessed this mess once coined as 'reason to invade Iraq' for WMD and 'the mushroom cloud.'

US Deems Iran Revolutionary Guard As Terrorists (click here)
Washington (EON) - The Bush administration along with thev are nothing more than a “specially designated global terrorist” force.
This is according to U.S. officials as they try to fight the military branch which is made up of 125,000 troops.
Many U.S. officials as well as President Bush believe that the Revolutionary Guard Corps has been getting involved more and more in Afghanistan and Iraq. It is also believed that they are heavy supporters of extremists in the Middle East.
Executive Order 13224 will designate the Revolutionary Guard as terrorists. Bush signed this order after the 9/11 attacks to try and stop terrorist funding. This means that the U.S. will be trying to freeze accounts of the military faction and block the assets of the terrorists.
This will stop all foreign businesses from supporting or assisting the group.
A U.S. official stated that “Anyone doing business with these people will have to reevaluate their actions immediately.”

Now today, August 16, 2007', on the heels of attacks on the Kurds on the 14th and the bogus Bush executive order, which doesn't necessarily avert WWIII for it's incompetency, on the 15th the USA military has 'it's face' on CNN and across the media touting a new strategy called "Lightning Hammer" (click here). Do read this article because the huge level of fire power is killing people in a nation where the only way they have to protect themselves is to return fire as they can.

So realizing the 'new' strategy was AGAIN studied by the rebels in Iraq; the 'new' strategy to counter that of the USA military in addition to Road Side Bombs and Improvised Explosive Devices is "The House Bomb."

'House Bombs' a Growing Risk for U.S. Troops (click here)
Soldiers Being Lured Into Buildings Rigged to Explode; Commander Cites Insurgents' 'Continually Evolving Tactics'
By Megan GreenwellWashington Post Staff WriterThursday, August 16, 2007; Page A08
BAGHDAD -- When the sniper's bullet hit Billy Edwards, his Army brothers did not hesitate.
The 2nd Brigade, 3rd Infantry Division calls itself the "Send Me" brigade, and on Saturday, its soldiers were quick to send themselves to find the man who shot Pfc. William L. Edwards, a wide-eyed 23-year-old from Houston. They quickly identified the house where they believed the assailant was hiding and moved in, just as the sniper knew they would.
Inside the house, one soldier stepped on a pressure plate, detonating an estimated 30 pounds of explosives hidden under a stairwell. In an instant, four troops were killed; four others were injured. Edwards died later in the hospital. The sniper escaped.
The attack in Arab Jabour, southeast of Baghdad, was particularly savage, predicated on knowledge of the soldiers' sense of duty to a fallen comrade. Military commanders say the number of similar incidents -- those in which soldiers are lured into a house rigged to explode -- has risen dramatically across Iraq in recent months....

Realizing there are Howitzers going off in Iraq, it is easy to state there are at least one million dead. Easily. The deaths of Iraqis include battlefield deaths and death by poverty, starvation, thirst and grossly inadequate medical treatment. The deaths of American soldiers currently are:

American Deaths, since war began (3/19/03): 3701 (click here)

U.S. lacks mechanism to accurately track troops wounded in Iraq (click here)
By LORRAINE ASHGannett New Jersey
There is no disputing the number of American troops who have died in the war on terror. At press time, more than 2,590 soldiers had lost their lives, according to U.S. Department of Defense numbers.
But the number of wounded is not clear-cut. In fact, that count is elusive. DoD numbers have tallied 17,702 wounded.
"Basically, that's everybody who has been through the major military hospitals, like Walter Reed Army Medical Center," said Kryn Westhoven, spokesman for the New Jersey Department of Military and Veterans Affairs. "There are some who are not counted in that roll-up, and the numbers are not broken down by state."
New Jersey Gov. Jon S. Corzine has asked the department to track the number but the task is "nightmarish," according to Westhoven, particularly since the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (known as HIPAA) does not allow patients' medical information to be reported because of privacy issues. HIPAA covers both the civilian and military populations.
"Let's say a soldier comes back and he's the walking wounded. He just needs physical therapy, but he is nonetheless wounded," Westhoven said. "Let's say he comes back to Fort Dix. He might go to a local doctor for two to three months for physical therapy and then be on his way. He might receive a 10 percent disability. He might have no disability. He might be fine afterwards. The point is, he'll never truly be tracked."...

The Village Voice has a unique 'shot' of Katherine Harris with Petreaus worth noting. Many would like to discredit The Village Voice as an extremist newsprint. Look, the truth is the truth and for the Neocons, Petreaus is their savior.

Iraq and Petraeus Spin Out of Control (click here)
posted: 9:18 AM, August 16, 2007 by Harkavy
In what the GOP hopes will be a boost for next year's elections, General David Petraeus has broadly hinted in the wake of the worst massacre of the war that the U.S. will be able to start withdrawing troops from Iraq next summer.

So back to the 'dangerous' question; "Should the American Troops be Withdrawn from Iraq?"

To begin, do I actually have to answer that question now? I would hope not, but, I will and I'll answer it directly and why the media coverage of Iraq is grossly "W"rong and adds to the political 'spin' of a war killing a million people and causing a genocide with refugees in neighboring countries while emptying the future pockets of American generations with a military that wants to start a draft.

What is implied in the question, "Should the American Troops be Withdrawn from Iraq?" The implications are that the USA military is properly deployed to fight a war necessary to American National Security.

There is no purpose to the USA occupation of Iraq except nation building providing contracts for oil. There is no danger from Iraq to the USA. None. There is nothing the nation of Iraq can do to the USA. It's military is in disarray and the current attempts to rebuild a national military and police have failed and even if it were rebuilt there is nothing to say it would be used for peaceful purposes realizing Bush's illegal invasion have removed all the 'disarmament resolutions' that were issued against Saddam.

Iraq and terrorist networks are separate issues. The fact al Qaeda is in Iraq is a creation by the presence of the USA military AND especially the continued occupation of the USA. To refer to the 'reason' of the attacks in The Washington Post article, it stated "The attackers were able to produce a large body count among a people who don't particularly have a natural ally to retaliate for them. This attack is meant for U.S., Western, Arab, and an Iraqi audience -- to convey an image of instability, to motivate flagging fighters, to communicate to the U.S. that the surge isn't working."

That could be the reason. But, why would a terrorist networks called al Qaeda in Iraq which has already lost it's leadership in several successful attacks by the USA, Abu Ayyub al-Masri (click here) and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi (click here) be so sophisticated in their attacks that all those directives are realized. They have that level of control over capacity well beyond their reaches? I have a tough time believing these attacks are anything except simply carried out for the sake of killing people and instilling fear in local populations, no different than the Taliban to insure loyalty.

The reason the loyalty is necessary is because the USA has literally driven them out of areas such as Diyala which brings me to my next point regarding the ineffectiveness of any USA surge or any other strategy including some kind of lightning whereby Howitzers are necessary. These killers of the Kurds don't have Howitzers, but, are far more successful than the USA has been and are.

The current Surge and Lightning Hammer are no different than any other strategy by Bush and the USA's variety of generals over the past years since March 19, 2003; in that 'it works' in the area deployed, ie: Fallujah, but nowhere else. The result are roving bands of militias, which al Qaeda in Iraq is, to areas of Iraq where the USA deployment is absent.

The result of these American attacks on supposedly troubled areas where al Qaeda is the enemy are dead civilians or refugeed civilians, destroyed infrastruture, isolating civilians from humanitarian aid or any methods of food, water and medical care. The dead civilians are then touted by the USA military as 'the reason' for retaliation and more killing of civilians as when the USA military moves in all the militias move out to areas in Iraq not occupied by the USA. This 'surge' and 'lightning hammer' is absolutely no different than 'Wack-A-Mole' except Petreaus is going to 'hold the area' longer than past generals so rebuilding can occur and Iraqi forces can be built utilizing locals for their own defense.

What Patreaus is doing is abandoning the rest of Iraq for a success in a 'locality' whereby the Bush administration can point to it and Patreaus can have a feather for his cap. If ALL of Iraq cannot be secured at the same time by The Surge (increased number of troops), as was promised, so the entire country can be held to allow rebuilding both miitary and infrastructure than there is no success. Because while Bush and Petreaus are playing 'success' in one area of Iraq the rest of the country is being lost. The 'idea' that the USA could ever build a nation out of an illegal war is perposterous. The 'theory' (playing with lives) is that the area where Petreaus has success will never be undermined once the USA military moves on to the next region of conquest. That is not realistic.

While Petreaus is 'holding his' in Diyala, there are militias all over Iraq 'holding their's.' They are not only holding onto their power and prowess they are hacking away at the American military while serving under Petreaus. Petreaus will never have a military solution for Iraq.

Currently, the Prime Minister has done the smartest thing he could by lending his loyality to Iran and Afghanistan to work toward a political solution to that country. Iraq is in no danger of invasion from neighboring countries. It's internal strife is the issue and that cannot be answered by the USA military. Iraq is a complete and abject failure. Currently, General Petraeus and Bush state the enemies in Iraq are al Qaeda and Shi'ite militias. Now, Iran is the enemy is as well in the form of The Revolutionary Guard.

The USA will never be successful in Iraq and more and more civilians will suffer and die. We know Iran does not have the perfect government but there aren't human rights issues leading to poverty and destitution. Iraq has to be allowed to find a solution within it's region and according to Iran the USA has to leave to insure progress toward stability. I am more confident than ever, Iran is right.

The USA military is not the solution for Iraq, OBVIOUSLY, and if the region including Iran can stop the suffering within that country then they need to be allowed to proceed. Iraq is not about oil contracts and American politics, it's about providing a chance for the Iraqis to find stability, peace and a chance to live without fear while worshiping Allah. That won't come from the USA military and it's Howitzers, but, will more than likely come from neighboring countries when the 'incentive' is there and they are allowed to proceed. Iran has been stable from the day the Shah was ousted, what makes anyone think they aren't capable of the same in Iraq. The genocide of the Iraqi people has to stop.

Al Qaeda in Iraq survives under Bush's Surge. It can't even be found in Iran.