Losing the hearts and minds one war crime at a time

(10 am. – promoted by ek hornbeck)

America.  The Home of the Brave.  The Land of the Free.  The country who has pundits and politicians who claim that “they” hate us for our freedom.  

The nation that is losing the hearts and minds of the international community one war crime at a time…

Stephen Webster at Raw Story details for us how the United States military has been, once again, accused of using white phosphorous ordnance against civilian targets, this time, in Afghanistan.  

From the AP article Mr. Webster cites:

KABUL – Doctors voiced concern over “unusual” burns on Afghan villagers wounded in an already controversial U.S.-Taliban battle, and the country’s top human rights groups said Sunday it is investigating the possibility white phosphorus was used.

The American military denied using the incendiary in the battle in Farah province – which President Hamid Karzai has said killed 125 to 130 civilians – but left open the possibility that Taliban militants did. The U.S. says Taliban fighters have used white phosphorus, a spontaneously flammable material that leaves severe chemical burns on flesh, at least four times the last two years.

You see, the military didn’t deny that the burns could have been caused by white phosphorous ordnance, or, that white phosphorous ordnance wasn’t used during the battle, only that it didn’t come from U.S. ordnance.  How’s that for a non-denial denial?

From the Mail Online article Mr. Webster cites:

The US used white phosphorus in the battle of Fallujah in Iraq in 2004 and Israel’s military used it in January against Hamas in Gaza.

Marc Garlasco, senior military analyst at Human Rights Watch and a former senior Pentagon intelligence analyst, said there has been widespread and regular use of white phosphorus by US and NATO forces in Afghanistan.  It was unlikely the Taliban would use it.

Let’s forget the claim that white phosphorous ordnance has been widely used by the U.S. and NATO in Afghanistan for a minute and focus on the fact that the U.S. continues to use it during battles in areas densely populated by civilians such as; Fallujah.

In 2005, the Washington Post had this article on the U.S. use of white phosphorous ordnance during the battle of Fallujah.

WASHINGTON — Pentagon officials say white phosphorous was used as a weapon against insurgent strongholds during the battle of Fallujah last November, but deny an Italian television news report that it was used against civilians.

Lt. Col. Barry Venable, a Pentagon spokesman, said Tuesday that while white phosphorous is most frequently used to mark targets or obscure a position, it was used at times in Fallujah as an incendiary weapon against enemy combatants.

“It was not used against civilians,” Venable said.

Being “used against civilians” is different than using white phosphorous (WP) ordnance in an area inhabited by civilians.  I know, it’s semantics for the Pentagon.  What isn’t semantics are the result of its use:

   JEFF ENGLEHART: I was personally involved with escorting a commander to Fallujah for Operation Phantom Fury. We were told going into Fallujah, into the combat area, that every single person that was walking, talking, breathing was an enemy combatant. As such, every single person that was walking down the street or in a house was a target.

   REPORTER: Is it true that you had orders to shoot even children of ten years old?

   JEFF ENGLEHART: This is actually very interesting. When we first got to Iraq, the army had a set standard for male combat ages. And I believe when we first got there, it was like 18 years old was the commonly perceived age of adulthood. So a male who was 18 years old to 65 was technically capable of being an insurgent. By the time Fallujah rolled around it was any male with an AK-47 or gun or whatever was a military target. And I think that is true to a degree. I mean, if-and it happened. There was many times where children as young as ten were fighting.

   REPORTER: What will you tell your child about the battle of Fallujah?

   JEFF ENGLEHART: It seemed like just a massive killing of Arabs. It looked like just a massive killing.

So, you really aren’t “targeting civilians” when you are classifying every single person as a target.  Let me reiterate this point; Nobody was considered a “civilian”.  Old men.  Old women.  Children.  If they were walking around, they were “targets”.

The battle of Fallujah was reported by Italian news sources.  The reporter, Giuliana Sgrena, had been kidnapped and taken hostage in Iraq while getting eyewitness accounts about the battle.  

GIULIANA SGRENA: Yes, before I had to ask the permission of the sheikh of the mosque, the religious man that was helping these people, because that was an organization of the camp, and they told me that I could speak, and even if it was difficult. After a while, when-because they asked me, but if you are a spy. I am not a spy, but I can’t show you that I am not a spy. So if you believe me. Well, if not, don’t speak. And there were a lot of woman that started to speak to me and children and then also men. So they were telling me the story, the stories. Some stories I knew before about the use of this white phosphorus. And another time, in Fallujah always, they told me about the use of napalm. And at the time it seems to be just propaganda of Iraqis, but then the use of napalm was confirmed by the Pentagon.

AMY GOODMAN: Of napalm.

GIULIANA SGRENA: Yes. Even if in a different formula than the one in Vietnam. And also the white phosphorus, it was confirmed by military, by soldiers, American soldiers that were fighting in Fallujah. So it was true. But at the time it was not so known that this kind of weapons were used in Fallujah. But we have seen the image, you know, the picture of people killed in Fallujah, and it seems to be killed by some kind of weapons that were not normal weapons, because you see that maybe they are burned, but that the dresses, they are still normal, not in touch. So, some elements like that. But, I mean-  

It was after her rescue, while Italian intelligence was trying to get her out of the country, that U.S. forces open-fired on her vehicle near the airport killing the agent and wounding her.  Whether the shooting was coincidence or not, the story aired and exposed the widespread use of white phosphorous during the assault on Falljuh.

When you couple the fact that the military ordered the use against everyone in Fallujah with the torturing of prisoners in Iraq at Abu Ghraib and other prisons, we see a pattern of acts committed by the Bush administration that constitute war crimes.

The United States is trying its best to stay in Iraq and the Iraqi’s are doing their best to get us out:

(AP)  Iraq’s government Monday ruled out allowing U.S. combat troops to remain in Iraqi cities after the June 30 deadline for their withdrawal, despite concern that Iraqi forces cannot cope with the security challenge following a resurgence of bombings in recent weeks.

Given the war crimes our military committed under President Bush against Iraqi’s, I can’t blame them for wanting us out regardless of the situation.  But then, our intentions were always out there for all to see:

From McClatchy:

Headline — U.S. soldiers helping pacify Iraq’s violent Diyala province

From the Asia Times:

If the George W Bush administration in the US were wise, it would have waited for the current holy fasting period of Ramadan of the more than a billion Muslims of the world and their Eid festivities to be over before launching its much-publicized and much-hyped offensive to pacify Fallujah, the Sunni stronghold in Iraq, which is apparently perceived by the Pentagon as the nerve center of anti-US resistance and jihadi terrorism in Iraq.

Where did these papers get the idea that we needed to “pacify” Iraq?  Why, from the Bush administration!

WASHINGTON (CNN) — President Bush on Wednesday will announce a plan to send about 20,000 more troops to Iraq in an effort to pacify Baghdad, a U.S. official said Tuesday.

Now, how do you “pacify” an entire country, an entire people, an entire CULTURE, to be compliant to your wishes, your invasion, your occupation, if it isn’t to declare every man from age 18-65 a combatant, every civilian in an area a “target” to bomb, every dissident a terrorist?  And, if they aren’t willing to be “pacified” into compliance, then you simply consider everyone a “target”.

We have lost Iraq.  We have lost the hearts and minds of the people.  We lost it by committing war crimes against its people.  We invaded their country based on false premises.  We imprisoned everyone who spoke out, or, deigned to take up arms against us.  We tortured them.  We used white phosphorous against their civilians.  Our political wishes have no place in Iraq, no support, and will not be left to fester in that country.  It’s people have spoken.  Now, the Afghanistan people are speaking out, as well.

It should come as no surprise to anyone that the reasons are the same.  We are using white phosphorous rounds in Afghanistan just as thoughtlessly, imprisoning everyone, and, you can bet, that we tortured prisoners in Afghanistan with the same techniques used in Iraq and Guantanamo.  

WASHINGTON (AFP) – Afghan President Hamid Karzai has demanded an end to US air strikes, which he said killed as many as 130 civilians earlier in the week and were infuriating the public.

Gee, who could have guessed that indiscriminately bombing villages, killing civilians, would infuriate people in Afghanistan?  Who would have thought dropping white phosphorous on a village so that innocent people could see their children burn to death would turn their hearts and minds against us?  Really, who could have thought that would happen?  The United States?  We have a plan!

We built so many bases in Afghanistan and Iraq.  We finally got our military might into the region.  All we had, have, to do is pacify the people.  All because we wanted to control the oil in the region, a policy which finds its roots in the Eisenhower administration.

US policy in the Middle East was to protect the oil supply, keep these countries out of Soviet hands, and to carry out a special commitment to Israel. The US backed leaders, regardless of what they did domestically, as long as they cooperated with the US and its allies.

That foreign policy objective was launched, or at least put into practice, in 1953.

Blame America first, you say?

The CIA deposed the democratically-elected leader of Iran in 1953, installing a brutal dictator, which led to the 1979 uprising in Iran and fostered the anti-American sentiment we find today.

Blame America first, you cry?

Name me a time when Iran, Iraq, Venezuela, Haiti, Guatamala, or any other country that we have meddled in, deposed its leaders, installed dictators, ever had a foreign policy of co-opting the United States for its own purpose?  When they have ever toppled our government and installed puppets that ruled over us, the American citizen?

Since 1953, the American government worked in secret with the CIA to turn the world into one that met our goals.  Yet, it wasn’t until 1983 that America saw a terrorist retaliation for that meddling.  30 years.  It wasn’t until 1993 that America saw the first terrorist attack on our soil due to our meddling.  40 years.  And it wasn’t until 2001 that America saw the first American casualties due to a terrorist attack on our soil.  48 years.  

Our response?  To invade and pacify the populace.  To commit war crimes.  To torture.  To use white phosphorous rounds on civilians.  To imprison everyone.

Who could have imagined that we’d lose the hearts and minds of Iraqi’s?  Yet, it happened, and, it is happening again in Afghanistan.  One war crime at a time.