And it's one, two, three,

What are we fighting for ?
Don't ask me, I don't give a damn....

So. Trillions of dollars later and hundreds of thousands dead, a destroyed infrastructure and ruined country, a depleted uranium-poisoned environment, a broken and misused military, and thousands of young terrorists in the making.... all for...

Continuing where Saddam left off:

Baghdad, Iraq (AHN) - Iraq's government approved Tuesday a $3 billion deal with a Chinese company to develop an oil field in the central Shiite province of Wasit.

China Petroleum National Corp. will make the Al-Ahdab oil field produce 25,000 barrels of oil per day in the first three years making it the first foreign company to be awarded a service agreement to tap Iraq's oil reserve since the ouster of former leader Saddam Hussein in 2003.

The same agreement revives a $700 million joint venture deal between Iraq and the company signed by Hussein's regime in 1997 but was scuttled because of United Nations sanctions and the war following the U.S. invasion of the country.

How's Cheney taking the news? Planning any air raids on al-Maliki's house and the irritatingly functional democratic Iraqi parliament?

How are the real head honchos taking it? Not Deciderer Commander Guy Georgie Bush, but Exxon-Mobil, Shell, BP?

Echoes of WWII still can be heard

Neo-nazis rising up to create fear and chaos:

"Right-wing extremism is part of everyday life and only attracts attention when the crimes are especially horrific," says Wolfgang Thierse, the Social Democrat vice-president of the lower house of the German parliament, the Bundestag.

The statistics are alarming. In 2007, the number of reported arson attacks committed by right-wing extremists climbed to 24 from 18 in the previous year. The targets are foreigners, including immigrants' mosques, cars and cafés.

"These are crimes that pose a threat to public safety and that could lead to people getting killed," warns Heinz Fromm, president of Germany's domestic intelligence service. The upward trend (more...) seems to be continuing this year. The numbers in March were higher than they had been in years. Throughout Germany, the police documented a total of 1,311 right-wing extremist and racist crimes, an increase of 458 over the year-earlier month. The incidents included 72 acts of violence, the government said in response to an inquiry from the Left Party vice president of the Bundestag, Petra Pau.

New Trend of "Anarchist Nationalists"

Intelligence agents have identified a new, right-wing extremist phenomenon: so-called anarchist nationalists who are "significantly more likely to commit acts of violence against political rivals and the police." After the May riots in Hamburg, the police are keenly aware of the threat posed by this new group of extremist thugs. In Hamburg, they joined in the fray wearing the same black outfits and showing a similar level of aggression as leftist anarchists. It took a massive police effort to prevent the situation from spinning out of control. What happened in Hamburg, says Interior Minister Wolfgang Schäuble, a Christian Democrat, attests to a "new quality."

And talk about ticking time-bombs:

Barely a week goes by in Germany without wartime bombs and weapons being found during construction work.

On Monday, much of the city of Potsdam near Berlin was brought to a standstill after an unexploded 250 kilogram British bomb was found at the site where a tram bridge is being built.

Some 3,000 people were evacuated from nearby homes and a hotel, and the main train station was closed along with key streets and tram lines.

The detonator was still live and the bomb could easily have gone off when it was accidentally touched, a spokeswoman for the city said. A bomb disposal expert gingerly unscrewed the detonator and the all clear was given nine hours after it was found.

Even kids find them:

A 10-year-old boy in the German city of Kassel is lucky to be alive after playing with a new "toy" that turned out to be a high-explosive shell from World War II.

[snip]

Gossens said that in the state of Hesse alone, 230 tons of World War II-era weapons and munitions were found in 2007 -- over 60 years after the end of the war.

Not to activate Godwin's Law, but how many unexploded bunker busters and cluster bombs will be in Iraq for decades to come? (I'm not even addressing the depleted uranium that we've released into the Iraqi environment to poison all forms of life for centuries.)

Reasons 1 through 4 on why we need to leave Iraq

And it isn't so we can attack Iran.

Lawrence J. Korb of the Boston Globe:

First, Maliki knows that if the United States does not set a withdrawal date, the status of forces agreement, or even a memorandum of understanding, will not be approved by the Iraqi Parliament. A majority of the Iraqi Parliament has signed a letter to that effect. Iraq's elected legislators know that the overwhelming majority of the Iraqi people want the American forces out and believe that these foreign forces are actually causing much of the violence. The American people agree that the United States should have never invaded and want US forces to leave as quickly as possible. But, since Bush will not submit the agreement to Congress, he can ignore the wishes of the American people.

Second, there were not that many foreign terrorists to begin with. Despite the administration's claim that we are fighting them (Al Qaeda) over there (in Iraq) so we do not have to fight them over here (the United States), the number of Al Qaeda loyalists who came into the country after the US invasion never numbered more than 2,000. Moreover, Al Qaeda in Iraq is an overwhelmingly Iraqi organization with domestic aims. When members began killing Iraqis and tried to force a rigid version of Islam on their Iraqi collaborators, the Iraqis turned on them.

Once the United States sets a date for a complete withdrawal, Al Qaeda in Iraq will lose what little support it has from the Iraqi people.

Third, with the rising price of oil, Iraq is awash in money and no longer needs US assistance to rebuild its war-torn infrastructure. When the United States invaded, oil was $25 a barrel. Now it is about $130. The Iraqi government now produces 2.5 million barrels a day, and with the contracts it has recently signed with Western companies, it soon will begin producing even more. This means that the Iraqis will be bringing in $100 billion to $200 billion a year.

Fourth, the Shi'ite dominated Iraqi government is not as concerned about the threat from Iran as the Bush administration. Many of Iraq's Shi'ite leaders lived in Iran during the regime of Saddam Hussein and see the Iranians as Shi'ite allies with whom they can and should have a close relationship - unlike Bush who sees the Iranians as the second coming of Nazi Germany or Stalinist Russia.

Time to leave. Even al-Maliki agrees (and Der Speigel stands by its quote):

In the interview, Maliki expressed support of Obama's plan to withdraw US troops from Iraq within 16 months. "That, we think, would be the right timeframe for a withdrawal, with the possibility of changes."

Maliki was quick to back away from an outright endorsement of Obama, saying "who they choose as their president is the Americans' business." But he then went on to say: "But it's the business of Iraqis to say what they want. And that's where the people and the government are in general agreement: The tenure of the coalition troops in Iraq should be limited."

A Baghdad government spokesman, Ali al-Dabbagh, said in a statement that SPIEGEL had "misunderstood and mistranslated" the Iraqi prime minister, but didn't point to where the misunderstanding or mistranslation might have occurred. Al-Dabbagh said Maliki's comments "should not be understood as support to any US presidential candidates." The statement was sent out by the press desk of the US-led Multinational Force in Iraq.

A number of media outlets likewise professed to being confused by the statement from Maliki's office. The New York Times pointed out that al-Dabbagh's statement "did not address a specific error." CBS likewise expressed disbelief pointing out that Maliki mentions a timeframe for withdrawal three times in the interview and then asks, "how likely is it that SPIEGEL mistranslated three separate comments? Matthew Yglesias, a blogger for the Atlantic Monthly, was astonished by "how little effort was made" to make the Baghdad denial convincing. And the influential blog IraqSlogger also pointed out the lack of specifics in the government statement.

SPIEGEL sticks to its version of the conversation.

Good.

Blackwater and the other defense contractors won't like this

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Security contractors working in Iraq will no longer receive immunity from prosecution in that nation under a deal being brokered by Iraqi and U.S. officials, Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari said.

Zebari said he briefed Iraqi parliament members about the immunity agreement Tuesday during a closed-door meeting. Officials at the U.S. State Department, which is leading the U.S. side of the negotiations, could not be immediately reached for comment.

The immunity issue was one of the sticking points in talks over a long-term security pact that deals with, among other things, the future of the U.S. military presence in Iraq. Negotiations on the pact continue.

The reported immunity agreement comes more than nine months after an incident in which Iraqi officials allege guards with the Blackwater security firm shot and killed 17 people, including women and children, and wounded 27 at Baghdad's Nusoor Square.

Ah, I was right:

Contractors working for the U.S. military in Iraq say a move to end their immunity from Iraqi law would make many leave their jobs instead of face a justice system they do not trust.

Earlier this week, the Iraqi foreign minister, Hoshyar Zebari, said the immunity issue was one of the American concessions made in ongoing negotiations over a long-term security agreement. Since the announcement, contractors — both current and former workers in Iraq — have been buzzing about its implications. There are an estimated 180,000 foreign contractors working in Iraq, more than there are U.S. troops in the country. More than 1,000 have been killed.

"Having worked for two years and two months in Iraq, I can tell you without a doubt, I would in no way work if I fell under Iraqi Law," a deputy sheriff who trains Iraqi police said in an e-mail to Stars and Stripes. "Are you kidding? You wouldn’t be able to get but the most desperate people to work if they fell under their ridiculous laws."

Like almost all contractors working in Iraq, he is not allowed to do media interviews without approval from his company, so he asked that his name not be used.

Other contractors expressed similar concerns about the Iraqi legal system.

"I would immediately have to consider my options concerning leaving this country," another Department of Defense contractor said. "They, the Iraqis, cannot rule themselves and now they want to try and rule contractors."

Some said that unless laws are broken in the first place there’s nothing to worry about.

"I am confident if all [security] contract members stick to their drills and follow the rules of engagement as laid down by the U.S. military or respective companies, there shouldn’t be a problem in the near future," a member of a private security team said.

Under a provision instituted shortly after the invasion, security contractors have been immune from Iraqi law. Under a change to the Uniform Code of Military Justice, they can now be charged and tried in military courts.

The first such case — against an interpreter accused of stabbing another interpreter — was completed earlier this month. The contractor pleaded guilty and was sentenced to time in a military detention facility.

Debate over the status of contractors peaked last year when guards with the Blackwater security company allegedly shot and killed 17 people in a Baghdad incident. Iraqi officials say the guards shot indiscriminately; Blackwater officials have said their guards came under attack.

Blackwater officials declined comment this week on the reported immunity negotiations, saying it would wait until an agreement is announced.

A new agreement between Iraq and the U.S. must be reached before December, when the U.N. mandate under which U.S. forces currently work expires.

Jaco Botes is a security contractor who has worked in Iraq for four years. Last year, he founded the International Contractors Association, which provides members legal and moral support and — more generally — seeks to dispel the notion that the profession is "a bed of dollar bills."

Botes said this week that a vast majority of the group’s 2,500 members would think seriously about leaving Iraq if the immunity deal is cemented.

In his own posting to the group’s online discussion board, Botes voiced many of the same concerns.

Botes brought up issues such as who would represent contractors in legal disputes and how the Iraqi public’s perception — marked by incidents such as the Blackwater shooting — affect the process.

"We do not ask for much. We don’t expect Welcome Home banners or medals or even a pat on the back (we get paid right?)" he wrote, noting it was his personal opinion. "What I expect is to be acknowledged as an important part of the whole effort to bring peace and stability to this region. In my mind this is a package deal. By taking away contractor immunity, contractors are being marked as expendable assets — assets that will be placed in the hands of a very shaky and corrupt law system."

A very shaky and corrupt law system? Like under the Bush administration where torture isn't torture unless you (oops!) die and telecoms can break the law because the president said so? Where mercenary armies can be funded by US taxpayers but need not account for their expenditures or actions? When justices go after Democrats because the attorney general wants it to happen before the election and they get fired if they don't? Where you can literally be disappeared off the streets because Habeas Corpus is dead?

Ohhh... you're talking about the destroyed legal system of the 'Iraqi government'. I wonder why it's destroyed.... hmmmm.

Update 7/14: Juan Cole of Informed Consent has more:

In September 2007, 17 Iraqis died as a result of unjustified and unprovoked shooting at the Nisour Square. Personnel of Blackwater Worldwide, a private agency contracted by the U.S. to operate in Iraq, were involved in the shooting. A week later the Iraqi Government revoked the license of Blackwater to operate in the country. In the last week of September, Blackwater received a contract worth up to $92 million from the U.S. State Department. In April 2008 the assignment to provide personal protection for diplomats in Iraq by Blackwater has been renewed for the third year. The FBI is still investigating the killings at Nisour Square; more than 30 witnesses have been questioned and three Iraqis have testified before the Federal Grand Jury in May 2008. Neither the lives of the ordinary Iraqis nor the decisions of the Iraqi Government were taken into consideration while renewing the contracts for Blackwater.

“This is bad news,” Sami al-Askari, advisory to Prime Minister Maliki said, “I personally am not happy with this, especially because they have committed acts of aggression, killed Iraqis, and this has not been resolved yet positively for families of victims.” The neglect of such crucial Iraqi concerns by the U.S. has in fact prompted the demand for withdrawing foreign troops from Iraqi soil.

The Nisour Square killing is not an isolated incident. In February 2007 a Blackwater sniper shot three Iraqi guards, without provocation, ironically from the terrace of the Iraqi Justice Ministry. In October 2007 a Blackwater personnel was so heavily drunk that he killed the bodyguard of the Iraqi Vice-President. In the same month an Iraqi civilian was shot for simply driving too close to the State Department convoy.

The Iraqi Government has come to realize that the U.S. is attempting to run the Iraqi state through private contractors who cannot be held accountable for their misdeeds. The Report from the American Congressional Research Service in July 2007 clearly indicated that the Iraqi government has no authority over private security firms contracted by the U.S. Government. A shocking incident in the Green Zone in 2006 has demonstrated that the Blackwater personnel have gained greater impunity than the regular U.S. armed forces. A SUV driven by Blackwater operatives had crashed into a U.S. Army Humvee. The Blackwater guards disarmed the army soldiers and forced them to lie on the ground at gunpoint until the vehicle was recovered.

I wrote this in August of 2007

So the very shaky U.S. backed al-Maliki's Shiite government which had Sunnis resigning out of the so-called Iraqi Parliament because the Shiite government is being shored up by Sunni-killing Shiite death squads and al-Sadr which our military promptly attacked while al-Maliki was out of Iraq visiting Shiite Iran to start meaningful diplomatic ties which really freaks Sunni Saudi Arabia who is sending their radicalized Sunni youth to attack Americans in Iraq yet Saudi Arabia has been promised an immense delivery of jets and weapons by the United States which made Russia promise Iran a boatload of weaponry as well which makes no sense to weaponize the Middle East because it is so volatile but it makes perfect sense to Bush to sell weapons to the country that supplied 15 of the 9/11 hijackers so they can claim part of the Iraq that we invaded because of 9/11 but had nothing to do with 9/11 while we ignore Afghanistan which is returning to the Taliban which harbors Osama bin Laden and probably will destablize Pakistan who has nukes.

Has the surge worked yet because it seems that nothing has changed....

Just continuing the tradition he began back in college

When he'd party at the frat house until just before the final, then cram furiously for the test. Explains why he was a 'gentleman's C student':

Iraq report card: only 3 of 18 benchmarks met.
On the one year anniversary of President Bush’s State of the Union address justifying his “New Way Forward” in Iraq, Center for American Progress has compiled an “Iraq Benchmark Report Card” showing that “the surge has failed to meet its objectives” as “the Iraqi government has only met three of the 18 benchmarks laid out last year.”

This time you get an F, Georgie. The surge is a dud, the war is a disaster. And it happened on your watch and during your presidency. This is your legacy and yours alone.





Update: Oh, and by the way, the surge was supposed to bring different sides together. All that press about the meeting? What meeting?:

WASHINGTON, Jan. 24 Negotiations are not taking place in Baghdad on the controversial oil law and other oil disputes, contrary to previous news accounts.

UPI confirmed that a top U.S. State Department official tasked with moving the oil law forward is in Washington, not Iraq.

A number of Iraqi media had reported that a delegation from the Kurdistan Regional Government was in Baghdad meeting with top national oil officials in an effort to find agreement on the stalled oil law.

Al Mowaten newspaper quotes a KRG spokesman that the region's oil minister is in Baghdad. But the paper also quotes a Kurdish member of the national Parliament Mahmoud Othamn said there's no such meeting taking place.

How strange... even the Iraqis want accountability

And recognize the illegality of this occupation:

WASHINGTON - The end of 2007 produced a telltale indication of what the New Year seems likely to bring to Iraq. "We the Iraqi members of Parliament signing below demand a timetable for withdrawal of the occupation forces [MNF] from our beloved Iraq," 144 members of the 275-member Parliament, a clear majority, wrote in a declaration April 2007.

Despite this, the George W Bush administration and the Iraqi government led by US-installed Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki pushed a resolution through the UN Security Council to extend by another year the legal cover for foreign troops to operate in Iraq.

The move on December 18 violated both the Iraqi constitution and the resolution passed earlier this year by the Iraqi Parliament.

Many Iraqi lawmakers say that any renewal of the UN mandate not ratified by Parliament is illegal. The move almost guarantees an increase in violence and a deepening of sectarian tensions.

Hmmm. The Iraqis don't seem to realize they are operating under the BUSH democracy plan where he tells them how to vote, they vote, and everybody gets the purple finger....

And all their oil are belong to us.

Bush's Legacy: peace on earth

Pakistan:

Rawalpindi, Pakistan (AHN) - At least 30 people were killed and dozens injured in twin suicide car bombings in the city of Rawalpindi, Pakistan, on Saturday. The simultaneous attacks were reportedly carried out by militants on an Army checkpoint and a bus carrying members of the country's powerful Inter-Services Intelligence spy agency (ISI). According to the local authorities, the militants used cars to carry out the deadly attacks.

Afghanistan:

Kabul, Afghanistan (AHN) - A suicide attack in Afghanistan killed one Italian soldier and six Afghans, including three children. The attack happened while a crowd gathered to watch soldiers building a bridge.

At least nine people were injured in the attack. It took place in the Paghman area. The soldier died while being transferred to a military hospital in Kabul.

Some of the victims were reportedly shot. Witnesses said some of the soldiers fired at people during the attack, but a regional police commander said many of the victims were hit with ball bearings packed into the bomb. A doctor who treated some of the victims, however, told The Associated Press that at least four had been hit by bullets.

More than 130 suicide attacks have occurred in Afghanistan this year. More than 6,000 people have died from the violence.

Bush's bestest friend Howard goes down in flames:

Sydney, Australia (AHN) - With 70 percent of the votes counted, sitting Australian Prime Minister John Howard has already conceded to opponent, Kevin Rudd in parliamentary elections held Saturday. "We've bequeathed to [Rudd] a nation that is stronger and prouder and more prosperous than it was 11 and a half years ago," Howard was quoted as saying by BBC News. Howard confirmed that he already called Rudd to congratulate him on his emerging victory. The 50-year-old Rudd, standard-bearer of the labor Party, had shown strength of winning over Howard throughout the campaign period. Opinion polls earlier suggested that most Aussies were already tired of Howard's leadership, and wanted to give a fresh mandate to a new leader.

Update: Glenn Greenwald has the final say on Howard's magnificent defeat.

Lebanon:

BEIRUT, Lebanon (AP) -- Lebanon awoke a republic without a president Saturday amid mounting worries over a power vacuum that has intensified the nation's yearlong political turmoil.

The capital was calm and shops opened for business as usual the morning after a tumultuous day that saw President Emile Lahoud depart without a successor after announcing he was handing over security powers to the army.

Lahoud's final announcement saying the country is in a "state of emergency" was rejected by the rival, pro-Western Cabinet of Prime Minister Fuad Saniora.

The government rejection created fresh confusion in an already unsettled situation, which many Lebanese fear could explode into violence between supporters of Saniora's government and the pro-Syria opposition led by the Shiite militant group Hezbollah.

"Lahoud's term ends in a republic without a president," read the headline of Lebanon's leading An-Nahar newspaper. Another daily, Al-Balad, printed an empty photo frame on its front page, symbolizing the political vacuum.

The departure of Lahoud, a staunch ally of the Syrian regime during his nine years in office, was a long-sought goal of the government installed by parliament's anti-Syria majority, which has been trying to put one of its own in the presidency.

Hezbollah and other opposition groups have blocked legislators from electing a new president by boycotting ballot sessions, leaving parliament without the required quorum.

The fight has put Lebanon into dangerous, unknown territory: Both sides are locked in bitter recriminations, accusing the other of breaking the constitution, and they are nowhere near a compromise on a candidate to become head of state.

The army command refused to comment on the developments. The military, under its widely respected chief, Gen. Michel Suleiman, has sought to remain neutral in the political chaos, and Lahoud's statement did not give it political powers.

Iraq:

BAGHDAD (AP) -- The U.S. military on Saturday blamed the deadly bombing of a pet market in Baghdad on Iranian-backed Shiite militants, raising concerns that escalating activity by Shiite extremists could jeopardize a relative calm that has offered new hopes for Iraqis after years of turmoil.

The bomb, which was hidden in a box of small birds, exploded Friday morning as Iraqis were strolling past animal stalls and bird cages at Baghdad's al-Ghazl market. The market had recently re-emerged as a popular venue as security has increased, raising hopes for calm in the capital after years of turmoil.

Police and hospital officials said at least 15 people were killed and 56 wounded, including four policemen, making it the deadliest in Baghdad in more than two months.

U.S. military spokesman Rear Adm. Gregory Smith said the bomb was packed with ball bearings to maximize casualties, and bore the hallmarks of a so-called special group, the military term for Shiite militia fighters who have been trained by Iran and have broken with radical cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, who called on his supporters to stand down in August.

He said the military believes the Shiite extremists were hoping al-Qaida in Iraq would be held responsible for the attack so Iraqis would turn to them for protection.

Nice legacy there, George. So, now that you are looking at the last year of your second term, and all the term papers have been handed in, all the finals graded, what are you going to do?:

The US has confirmed it will host a conference on Middle East peace next week aimed at relaunching negotiations to create a Palestinian state. Invitations have been issued to Israel, the Palestinians, the UN and key Arab states such as Saudi Arabia and Syria. But Washington is still trying to persuade Arab states to send delegates.

I think this will be filed under too fucking little, too fucking late, Georgie.

Update: A little bit of legacy goes to the Iraqi women, too. (via Attaturk of Rising Hegemon):

Oh, look, a new front opens up in the glorious Iraqi Freedom War

Just what we need:

Ankara, Turkey (AHN) - Turkey's parliament overwhelmingly approved cross-border military operations against Kurdish rebels in northern Iraq Wednesday, with a 507-19 vote. The authorization is good for a year, however, and so far, Turkish leaders seem poised to allow more time for a diplomatic resolution before sending more troops across the Iraqi border.

Turkey holds the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) responsible for the deaths of 15 soldiers and 12 civilians earlier this month, which was apparently part of an ongoing campaign for self-rule. The PKK considers parts of southeastern Turkey, northeastern Iraq, northeastern Syria and northwestern Iran to be Kurdistan, and since 1984, they have launched an ongoing campaign to establish a Kurdish state. The militant struggle has met with over two dozen attacks by the Turkish military in the past twenty years and has claimed over 30,000 lives.

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan claims the recent attack was launched from PKK training camps in northern Iraq.

Iraqi leaders are working hard to convince Turkey to exercise restraint while they attempt to quell tensions and persuade the PKK to break up the camps and lay down its arms. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki telephoned his Turkish counterpart early Wednesday, hours prior to the vote, to reiterate his intention to put a halt to the PKK's "terrorist activities," appealing for continued dialogue between the two countries. Iraqi Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi, meanwhile, has traveled to Ankara to issue the same appeal for diplomacy.

Oh yeah? Well I double dog dare ya!

Via Pygalgia:

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Iran's parliament on Saturday approved a nonbinding resolution labeling the CIA and the U.S. Army ``terrorist organizations,'' in apparent response to a Senate resolution seeking to give a similar designation to Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

The hard-line dominated parliament cited U.S. involvement in dropping nuclear bombs in Japan in World War II, using depleted uranium munitions in the Balkans, Afghanistan and Iraq, supporting the killings of Palestinians by Israel, bombing and killing Iraqi civilians, and torturing terror suspects in prisons.

``The aggressor U.S. Army and the Central Intelligence Agency are terrorists and also nurture terror,'' said a statement by the 215 lawmakers who signed the resolution at an open session of the Iranian parliament. The session was broadcast live on state-run radio.

We know Cheney is just waiting to triple dog dare Iran....

Sunnis are odd man out

So what do you think they will do with this?

Shia and Kurdish parties form Iraq alliance

Iraqi leaders on Thursday said Shia and Kurdish political parties had formed a new alliance in a bid to help the beleaguered government emerge from its latest crisis.

Hoshyar Zebari, the foreign minister, told the Financial Times that the move was designed to create a core group of parties that would bolster the administration and help it win support in parliament to push through important legislation.

But the main Sunni Arab bloc, which quit the Shia-led government at the beginning of the month, refused to be part of the four-party alliance despite days of consultations, signalling that the crisis was far from over.

I say Sunni and you say Shiite

Let's call the whole thing off:

BAGHDAD - Two Sunni leaders who took public stances against al-Qaida in Iraq were attacked Saturday, in a sign the terror network may ramp up retaliation against local chiefs who oppose it.

Meanwhile, a powerful roadside bomb killed the governor and police chief of a southern province that has been torn by fierce fighting between Shiite factions. The country's prime minister urged residents to show restraint and not launch reprisals.

The flurry of attacks hinted at the complex challenges facing Iraq, from both Shiite militias and Sunni extremists, who often target not just Americans but also their own sects in vicious internal battles.

The United States has pointed to an anti-al-Qaida alliance of local Sunni leaders as a sign of turnaround, but the attacks showed the high risks local leaders face by joining.

So the very shaky U.S. backed al-Maliki's Shiite government which had Sunnis resigning out of the so-called Iraqi Parliament because the Shiite government is being shored up by Sunni-killing Shiite death squads and al-Sadr which our military promptly attacked while al-Maliki was out of Iraq visiting Shiite Iran to start meaningful diplomatic ties which really freaks Sunni Saudi Arabia who is sending their radicalized Sunni youth to attack Americans in Iraq yet Saudi Arabia has been promised an immense delivery of jets and weapons by the United States which made Russia promise Iran a boatload of weaponry as well which makes no sense to weaponize the Middle East because it is so volatile but it makes perfect sense to Bush to sell weapons to the country that supplied 15 of the 9/11 hijackers so they can claim part of the Iraq that we invaded because of 9/11 but had nothing to do with 9/11 while we ignore Afghanistan which is returning to the Taliban which harbors Osama bin Laden and probably will destablize Pakistan who has nukes.

It's becoming clear to me now...

Lord Voldemort will not be pleased

After all, this is why we've wasted all our military and treasury in Iraq in the first place:

... last month, more than 100 Iraqi oil experts, economists and legal scholars criticized the proposed legislation and urged the Iraqi parliament to put it on hold.

The most vocal opposition to the oil framework has come from Iraq's influential oil workers' unions. Hassan Jumaa Awaad, president of the Iraqi Oil Workers union, called the proposed hydrocarbon laws "more political than economic" and "unbalanced and incoherent," and said they threatened "to set governorate against governorate and region against region." Iraq's oil unions have threatened to "mutiny" if the law is passed as drafted.

In favor of the laws are the multinational energy companies who stand to gain tens of billions more profits in Iraq than they could expect from any other major oil producer's reserves. They're supported by Iraqi separatists -- especially Shias in the South and Northern Kurds -- who want control over the country's oil to rest in the hands of the regional authorities they dominate. They include Iraq's prime minister, Nouri Al-Maliki, and its president, Jalal Talabani.

Faced with such broad and intense opposition to a set of laws that were effectively crafted in Washington, London and Houston, the Iraqi government and the U.S. authorities in Baghdad have kept Iraqis in the dark over the details of the proposed legislation, brought all manner of pressure on lawmakers and, when that failed, used heavy-handed coercion to move the legislation forward.

According to the poll released this week, more than three out of four Iraqis -- including nine of 10 Sunni Arabs -- say "the level of information provided by the Iraqi government on this law" was not adequate for them to "feel informed" about the issue. Only 4 percent of Iraqis feel they've been given "totally adequate" information about the oil law.

Al-Maliki on the edge

Will he be able to keep his job? Or is he already finished? Al-Maliki makes connections with Iran and Turkey:

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) -- Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki met with officials in Iran on Wednesday to seek help in reining in violence in his country, reaching out to a nation the U.S. accuses of fueling Iraq's turmoil by backing Shiite militants.

It was al-Maliki's second visit to Tehran in less than a year, coming days after U.S. and Iranian experts held talks in Baghdad on improving Iraq's security.

Al-Maliki and the Shiite and Kurdish parties that dominate his government are closely linked to predominantly Shiite Iran, and he has struggled to balance those ties with the United States, Tehran's top rival in the region.

The U.S. has recently stepped up its allegations that Iran is arming Shiite militiamen, but the Iraqi government has taken a low-key stance without outright backing the American claims, which Tehran denies. One al-Maliki adviser, Sami al-Askari, said last month that the government "doesn't rule out" Iranian arming of militants.

[snip]
Before arriving in Iran, al-Maliki traveled to Turkey and agreed to root out a Kurdish rebel group operating from northern Iraq. But he said the Iraqi parliament would have the final say on efforts to halt the guerrillas' cross-border attacks into Turkey. Iran also faces problems with its Kurdish minority near the Iraqi border.

Turkey has threatened to stage an incursion into northern Iraq unless Iraq or the United States cracks down on rebels from the separatist Kurdistan Workers Party, or PKK, that have set up bases there. The envisaged counterterrorism agreement is aimed at forcing Iraq to officially commit itself to fighting the rebels.

Iraq, which like Iran is majority Shiite, has managed a difficult balancing act between Tehran and Washington since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003, trying to maintain good relations with its powerful neighbor while not angering the Americans.

The U.S. has accused Iran of providing money and weapons to Shiite militias in Iraq. Iran denies the charges and argues that the presence of U.S. troops is destabilizing the region.

Washington and Tehran have held three rounds of talks on Iraqi security since May, and al-Maliki told AP he would push for these talks to continue at an ambassador level.

Looks like he's making every attempt to keep Iraq together but then:

... Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki - whose days in office are surely numbered - might want to to be remembered as the man who brought democracy and justice to Iraqis; the man who rooted out terrorism and killed al-Qaeda leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

Instead, Iraqis will remember Maliki as a selfish, sectarian politician who divided the country as never before, between Shi'ites and Sunnis. They will remember the death squads that flourished under his regime, the targeted assassinations of Sunni notables, and they will see him as a stooge of the Americans who was unable to fulfill any of the promises he made when coming to power in May 2006.
Maliki's problem is that his government is not constitutional, as his cabinet no longer represents all parties that are seated in Parliament. Thirteen out of 37 ministers have walked out, and more are likely to follow soon.

The first to abandon him were six Shi'ite ministers from the Sadrist bloc in April. They objected to his relationship with the United States, and his failure to secure a timetable for US troop withdrawal from Iraq. They were followed by Sunni Justice Minister Hashem al-Shibli from the Iraqi List that is headed by former prime minister Iyad Allawi.

This week, five Sunni ministers from the Iraqi Accordance Front stepped down, along with Sunni Salam al-Zoubai, who was deputy prime minister. They claimed this was because Maliki had not responded to any of the 11 demands they had made, which included greater decision-making for Sunnis, and a political amnesty for Sunni prisoners.

Then came the resignation of nine senior officers from the Iraqi Army, including Baker Zebari, the commander-in-chief. All of them were objecting to how the prime minister is running affairs.

After discussing the politicians who are jockeying for position to take al-Maliki's seat, the writer of this article, Sami Moubayed (a Syrian political analyst) goes on to say:

The pro-US Arab states have been very blunt in opposing Maliki, because of his relations with Iran and his well-known animosity toward Sunnis. Recently, they turned down an offer by US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to support the Maliki cabinet.

[snip]

One cannot help but recall Maliki's first speech to the Iraqi people, broadcast in April 2006 when he was still prime minister-designate. He said, "Our Sunni brothers, by their participation in a broad alliance, have begun to carry responsibilities in the political process ... which will dry up the sources of terrorism. Fighting the insurgency will be my government's priority." He said he hoped to do so by creating "a white front" of Sunnis, Shi'ites and Kurds and that he would create a non-sectarian government to ward off accusations made by observers claiming that he was "too Shi'ite".

Maliki then addressed the Sunnis directly by playing down fears that Iran was interfering in Iraqi affairs. He thanked neighboring countries such as Iran for sheltering the Iraqi opposition during Saddam's era, saying, "But this does not mean any country can meddle in our affairs." Gratitude did not mean security interference, he added. Earlier, Maliki had said, "The weapons must be in the hands of the state. Their presence in the hands of others [militias] will be the start of problems that will trigger a civil war."

Rather than collect arms and root out militias, Maliki did the exact opposite. He will leave office amid a civil war - a very ugly one - that is largely due to his own doing.

The more Bush demands the 'Iraqi government' do something, the more it unravels. Heckovajob, Georgie!

Paying off the Sunni to undermine the Shiite government

Run by the U.S. chosen Shiite leader al-Maliki whose Parliament has just had the Sunnis walk out on it...

Do I have it right? We are paying bribe money to insurgents who are killing our soldiers who are trying to prop up a non-existent government to give it time to stand up so we can leave.

This must have been thought up by Georgie.



Update: We also can't find a um.. few .. you know... guns...

The US government cannot account for 190,000 weapons issued to Iraqi security forces in 2004 and 2005, according to an investigation carried out by the Government Accountability Office.

According to the July 31 report, the military "cannot fully account for about 110,000 AK-47 assault rifles, 80,000 pistols, 135,000 items of body armour and 115,000 helmets reported as issued to Iraqi forces."

The weapons disappeared from records between June 2004 and September 2005, as the military struggled to rebuild the disbanded Iraqi forces from scratch amid increasing attacks from Sunni insurgents and Shiite militias.

...Brigadier General Kevin Bergner, spokesman for the US-led military in Iraq, said the Americans were working hard with their Iraqi partners to improve accountability and increase the security of weapons.

You say goodbye

When I say hello...

Just what did al-Maliki mean?

"We say in full confidence that we are able, God willing, to take the responsibility completely in running the security file if the international forces withdraw at any time they want," al-Maliki said.

OKAY!! But now... (my bold)

BAGHDAD (AP) -- Iraq's prime minister was misunderstood when he said the Americans could leave "any time they want" an aide said Sunday, as politicians moved to end a pair of boycotts that are holding up work on crucial political reforms sought by Washington.

Ahhhh... they haven't signed the Oil Law which signs over Iraq's oil to Bush and Cheney yet. Then can we go?

Just a thought... do you think they will sign the law before the August vacation the Iraqi Parliament is taking?

We are in Iraq to give the Iraqi government time to take charge

Um... WHAT Iraqi government?

AJ in DC at AmericaBlog:

This idea that we need to train forces to support the central government is based on a complete fallacy. There is no functioning central government; the "national unity government" hailed by war supporters in early 2006, which never really existed in the first place, is a demonstrated failure. The only think keeping Maliki in power is the complete lack of alternative candidates who could unite enough parliament members to form a ruling coalition, and in the meantime, no progress occurs.

How that parliament working out? (my bold):

WASHINGTON, July 5 Iraq's oil minister says a Saddam-era oil deal with China has not been finalized and no oil deals will be until an oil law is passed by Parliament.

[snip]

That deal, along with those signed with Vietnamese, Indian and Indonesian firms, and those the Kurdistan Regional Government has signed since 2003, must be brought in line with the pending federal oil law before they are legit, said Oil Minister Hussain al-Shahristani, who was in the China delegation.

"No oil deal, regardless, specifically those that are signed in the Kurdish region, will be valid until they are approved by the federal council (on oil and gas) after the oil and gas law is passed and the federal council is formed," Shahristani told UPI from Baghdad during a telephone interview.

"There is an article in the law that specifically states that all contracts that were made under the previous regime and by the KRG have to be reviewed in the light of the new oil and gas law by the federal council," he said.

Progress was made on the federal law lately, though its success in the Parliament is unsure. The council of ministers approved it suddenly Tuesday, but numerous parties have boycotted the council and the Parliament -- threatening quorum -- and are against the law. The Kurds, the law's biggest proponents, said they may be against changes that were made to it in the council.

The Iraqi parliament has one job... to deliver their country's oil wealth into the clutching hands of Dick Cheney and George Bush. Oddly, the Iraqis are balking at such a thing. I'm sure the idea their lives would be immediately forfeit doesn't occur to the PNAC crowd.

A reminder:
Michael Schwartz of the Asia Times:

Since the invasion of Iraq, US officials have melded economic and military policy into a single fatal brew, driven by dreams of controlling the country's fabulous potential oil wealth. The key "benchmark", therefore, that the government of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki must pass is passage of a new oil law forced on it by the Bush administration. Widespread opposition to the law, though, could result in escalating conflict that leaves the oil out of the United States' reach.

This excellent adventure of Bush and Cheney's could all be for naught....

What Bush and Cheney have been waiting for

Is about to come to fruition:

A draft oil law has been submitted to Iraq's parliament after the government and the Iraqi Kurdistan regional authority resolved differences on the sharing of the country's oil reserves, officials have said.

A spokesman for Iraq's oil minister said he expected politicians to begin debating the draft law in the next few days.

"A deal has been reached and the draft has been delivered to parliament to be discussed... in the coming days. An agreement has been reached covering all disputes," Asim Jihad said.

An official in the Kurdish regional government said an agreement had been made, but did not give further details.

[snip]

The draft oil law is crucial in regulating how wealth from Iraq's huge oil reserves will be distributed between sectarian and ethnic groups.

Dividing up the loot....

Cheney can't understand why they can't get that oil law signed

That's really why he's pushing and demanding they not take a vacation. The oil companies are getting anxious:

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Vice President Dick Cheney met Wednesday with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to push al-Maliki's government into adopting U.S.-favored changes before American military commander Gen. David Petraeus must report to Congress on whether the "surge" of American troops has been succeeding.

Cheney pressed Maliki to stop the Iraqi parliament from taking its scheduled two-month summer recess. President Bush made a similar appeal in a videoconference with al-Maliki on Monday.

"I did make it clear that we believe it's very important to move on the issues before us in a timely fashion and that any undue delay would be difficult to explain," Cheney told reporters after his day of back-to-back meetings. "I think they're somewhat sympathetic to our concerns."

[snip]

In his speech Jan. 10 in which he announced the dispatch of tens of thousands of additional U.S. troops to Iraq, Bush said the increase would help provide security so that Iraq's government could resolve critical issues involving oil revenues, deBaathification, and the constitution.

But the parliament has made virtually no progress in those areas. A draft oil law is in committee, and there's been no discussion on easing rules that bar Baathists from serving in government. A report from a committee on proposed changes to Iraq's constitution is due to parliament on Tuesday.

Few here expect the parliament to reach agreement on the issues, even if it stays in session an extra month.

I think the Iraqi Parliament realizes once they sign away their nation's resources to foreign companies, their lives are forfeit. It looks like they are trying to wait Bush and Cheney out.

Giiiiivvvveee iiiiittttt tooooooo meeeeeee:

Update: I posted on this before, why privatization, why the bill is stuck, who benefits.

Update: Michael Schwartz of the Asia Times:

Since the invasion of Iraq, US officials have melded economic and military policy into a single fatal brew, driven by dreams of controlling the country's fabulous potential oil wealth. The key "benchmark", therefore, that the government of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki must pass is passage of a new oil law forced on it by the Bush administration. Widespread opposition to the law, though, could result in escalating conflict that leaves the oil out of the United States' reach.

When the bill is signed into law, will we celebrate

The stealing of another nation's resources? Bush and Cheney really really really need this bill to be signed:

BAGHDAD, April 19 Reports that Iraq's Parliament will take up the draft oil law next week may be wishful thinking, since negotiations continue and the Kurds oppose it.

After nearly a year of tense negotiations, Iraq's Cabinet in February endorsed the hydrocarbons law framework, which would set out exactly how the country's vast oil and natural-gas reserves would be governed.

But ongoing disagreement between the central government and the Kurdistan Regional Government is a roadblock to reaching terms on important annexes to the law.

[snip]

Iraqi oil and government officials and foreign technocrats are meeting in Dubai, the United Arab Emirates, in an attempt to iron out differences. Oil Minister Hussain al-Shahristani said at the meeting that he will turn it over to Parliament next week.

Shahristani is being pressed by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who is getting heat from Washington to pass the law -- a benchmark President Bush has set for success in Iraq. Maliki is threatening to reshuffle his Cabinet posts, including the Oil Ministry spot.

The Washington Post:

The OPEC member has the world's third-largest proven oil reserves and needs billions of dollars to revive its oil sector, which is crucial for rebuilding its shattered economy.

Shahristani said earlier this month that it was "achievable to pass the law within two months since all political parties are in favor."

The long-planned law will also restructure the Iraq National Oil Company as an independent holding firm and establish a Federal Council as a forum for national oil policy.

The world's top oil companies have been manoeuvring for years to win a stake in Iraq's prized oilfields such as Bin Umar, Majnoon, Nassiriyah, West Qurna and Ratawi, all located in the south of the country.

Is this a beginning to the Russian United States Oil wars?

The “scandal” may not be American market ideology in Iraq. The real scandal may be the US move to nationalize some key elements of the Iraqi oil industry in an effort to thwart Russian (and French) ambitions.
[snip]
If the US invasion of Iraq was part of a Great Power battle with Russia, then the key decision on the Iraqi hydrocarbons law may have been to renationalize those Iraqi oil fields that were set to fall into the hands of Russia and France.

Privatization?:

A secret NSC memorandum in 2001 spoke candidly of “actions regarding the capture of new and existing oil and gas fields” in Iraq. In 2002 Paul Wolfowitz suggested simply seizing the oil fields. These words and suggestions were draconian, overt, and reprehensible-morally, historically, politically and diplomatically. The seizure of the oil would have to be oblique and far more sophisticated.

A year before the war the State Department undertook the “Future of Iraq” project, expressly to design the institutional contours of the postwar country. The ­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­”Oil and Energy Working Group” looked with dismay at the National Iraqi Oil Company, the government agency that owned and operated the Iraqi oil fields and marketed the products. 100% of the revenues went directly to the central government, and constituted about 90% of its income. Saddam Hussein benefited, certainly-his lavish palaces-but the Iraqi people did so to a far greater extent, in terms of the nation’s public services and physical infrastructure. For this reason nationalized oil industries are the norm throughout the world.

The Oil and Energy Working Group designed a scheme that was oblique and sophisticated, indeed. The oil seizure would be less than total. It would be obscured in complexity. The apparent responsibility for it would be shifted, and it would be disguised as benefiting, even necessary to Iraq’s well being. Their work was supremely ingenious, undeniably brilliant.

The plan would keep the National Iraqi Oil Company in place, to continue overseeing the currently producing fields. But those fields represent only 19% of Iraq’s petroleum reserves. The other 81% would be flung open to “investment” by foreign oil interests, and the companies in favored positions today-because of the war and their political connections-are Exxon/Mobil, Chevron/Texaco, BP/Amoco, and Royal Dutch/Shell.

The nationalized industry would be 80% privatized.

[snip]

The Iraqi people do, however, benefit to some degree. The seizure is not total. The hydrocarbon law specifies the oil revenues-the residue accruing to Iraq-will be shared equally among the Sunni, Shiite, and Kurdish regions, on a basis of population. This is the feature President Bush relies upon exclusively to justify, to insist on the passage of the hydrocarbon law. His real reasons are Exxon/Mobil, Chevron/Texaco, BP/Amoco, and Royal Dutch/Shell.

No one can say at the moment how much the hydrocarbon law will cost the Iraqi people, but it will be in the hundreds of billions. The circumstances of its passage are mired in the country’s chaos, and its final details are not yet settled. If and when it passes, however, Iraq will orchestrate the foreign capture of its own oil. The ingenious, brilliant seizure of Iraqi oil will be assured.

That outcome has been on the Bush Administration’s agenda since early in 2001, long before terrorism struck in New York and Washington. The Iraqi war has never been about terrorism.