Get'cha War Booty 'ere....

[thorfinn]

If you're offended by supposedly "anti-US" sentiment, then don't bother reading any further. On the other hand, if you're interested in more in depth analysis than "embedded journalists" give you, then well, ... Warning, reading all of these links all at once may make you angry. It makes me angry, and I'm not the sort of person that gets angry easily.

Plundered, relics from the dawn of civilisation (13 April 2003) - Notably, "And Baghdadis are acutely aware that the Marines threw a cordon around only one public building when they pulled into town - the high-rise headquarters of the Oil Ministry.". Indeed, the Oil Ministry is of course worth protecting, but 7000 years of human history aren't. But of course, no, control of oil is not a motivating factor. Couldn't possibly be. It's about freedom, honestly. Freedom to loot museums, of course, comes with freedom. And before anyone cries, "nobody could predict the Iraqis would react like this!", have a read of:
Pentagon knew risk to priceless antiquities (14 April 2003) and
International effort to recover stolen Iraqi treasures (14 April 2003), which condemns the US for not protecting the Museum, as they're required to do by the Geneva Conventions.

Of course, the US is casually dismissing the various Geneva Conventions. After all, it's been ignoring the ones about PoWs for quite some time now, and there are plenty of people saying so... One of 'em is the Law Committee for Human Rights, in All Parties to the Conflict Must Treat Detainees Fairly and Consistent with International Humanitarian Law. Let's start with the televising of PoWs...
Preaching, not practice on PoWs (13 April 2003). As for PoWs... Anyone remember those PoWs stuck in Guantanamo Bay? Well, they're still there and they're not being treated nicely:
Guantanamo prisoners still held because of 'wrangling' (22 Dec 2003)
Rumsfeld orders "British" torture for Afghan prisoners of war (19 January 2003)
"Official" pictures prove prisoners have already been tortured (22 January 2003)
Amnesty International criticizes U.S. handling of terror suspects (5 March 2003)
Treatment of Prisoners Exposes America (January 2003)
US tortures two detainees to death in Afghanistan (10 March 2003) - and in case you think that report is biased -
Army Probes Afghan Prisoners' Deaths (6 March 2003) - Military coroners have ruled as homicides the deaths in December of two prisoners at a U.S. base in Afghanistan, a military spokesman said.
Long talk, not torture, intense interrogation likely for 9/11 suspect (4 March 2003) - just something to note - sleep deprivation is torture, no matter what Ari Fleischer would like to claim.

Yet more fun, of course, surrounds the controversies about journalists, their deaths, their embedding, and their reporting:
WILL THE PENTAGON TARGET JOURNALISTS IN IRAQ? AN INTERVIEW WITH VETERAN BBC WAR CORRESPONDENT KATE ADIE (14 March 2003)
Pentagon Threatens To Kill Independent Reporters In Iraq
Non-Embedded Journalists Say Beaten, Starved By US
Israeli Journalists Claim Abuse by U.S. Forces (31 March 2003)
Embedded Journalists Cannot Be Objective (3 April 2003)
World Messenger - Global Media Truth and Lies Al-Jazeera office hit, one killed (8 April 2003)
Media accuses US of targeting journalists (9 April 2003)
Footage shows tank deliberately hit hotel (9 April 2003)
Celebrations in Baghdad (9 April 2003)
Especially alongside the rather Staged "Liberation" media event (10 April 2003)

Aside from all of that, there's rather a lot of dodgy "Intelligence" flying around, about why we're doing all of this and I do find it hard to swallow. For example:
WHO LIED TO WHOM? - Why did the Administration endorse a forgery about Iraq's nuclear program? (24 March 2003)
And that isn't the only case of that sort of thing going on... it's not all one sided, but The Truth about Sanctions in Iraq (March 2002) still says "The Truth Is Bad Enough."
Or, for more fun... Private Lynch fought fiercely before capture (3 April 2003) vs PoW had no gunshot, knife wounds: father (4 April 2003). Saving Private Lynch, huh? C'mon. There are going to be enough real heroes (read, people unfortunate enough to get stick with a bloody horrible job who manage to go through with it), there's no need to make up any. Or maybe there is... after all, this isn't really a terribly heroic war.

While we're at it... Why is the US at war anyway? Well:
IT'S ABOUT THE US AND EUROPE GOING HEAD-TO-HEAD ON WORLD ECONOMIC DOMINANCE (March 2003)
The Real Reasons for the Upcoming War With Iraq (January and March 2003)
The Bush Doctrine and War with Iraq (February 2003)
The real reasons America is invading Iraq (20 March 2003)
HOW IT CAME TO WAR (24 March 2003)

As for what's happening in Iraq now that Saddam is gone? Some say that one Mr Chalabi is the man to watch:
US and Iraqis split over 'Spartacus' (9 April 2003)... but of course, the situation is probably a lot more messy, as per:
With combat over, U.S. and Iraq look to form new government, but many Iraqis wary and some boycott meeting (15 April 2003)

Änd, y'know, in the Land Of The Free, you'd expect better than this sort of thing:
Violent crackdown on US anti-war protests (8 March 2003)...
But then, well, it's not really the land of the free, is it:
Civil Liberties and Human Rights Eroded by Changes to U.S. Law and Policy. (March 2003)

Of course, this leads on to... well, where next? Well, the US seems to have a target in mind, even if the "coalition of the killing" don't seem to agree...
Bush lashes out at Syria (14 April 2003)
After Iraq, US turns on Syria (14 April 2003)
No plans to attack Syria: Downer (15 April 2003)
Victory in Iraq would bring spoils of many sorts, oil and regional clout among them (14 April 2003)

Whee. So, there you go. That's a lot of information, I know, but it's worth knowing, believe me. This is the age of Pax Americana, and you're better off knowing why, before the secret police come knocking down your door.

Comments

Good linkage.

[subtle-eye.livejournal.com]

I've been looking (fruitlessly) for an article I stumbled over concerning US sanctions and that since they were imposed, they have been predominantly about "regime change" and not disarmament. Apparently Clinton hinted at it when he cam to office, and backed down *verrry* rapidly due to the ensuing shitstorm. Don't remember if that was instrumental in the appointment of "Pitbull" Albright.

Re: Good linkage.

[thorfinn]

How about:
Council on Foreign Relations: U.S. - Iraq Relations
or maybe Federation of American Scientists: Iraq 1999.

[hestia.livejournal.com]

Wow.

[lederhosen.livejournal.com]

What I'd like to see is an exhaustive list of all the dozen-odd chemical weapons "finds" that have been reported in the last few weeks, all destined to mysteriously evaporate like the morning dew. (Since I tend to believe that Saddam *did* have chemical weapons hidden somewhere, I have particularly little sympathy for people who feel they have to invent them...)

[anthologie.livejournal.com]

Thank you. :)

[thorfinn]

BTW, I really must credit, in particular, patchworkkid, frou_frou and erudito for the inspiration for this post. I started with some of the links they'd quoted, did a chunk of spot-research, mostly via Google and The Age Bad researcher me, for not giving a bibliography. Well, now you know.

[mordwen.livejournal.com]

Have I mentioned recently how much you rock? Thanks for these.

Yeah

[jeshyr]

Isn't he cool? :)

Ricky
Whoops, forgot again ...

[queergrrrl.livejournal.com]

Hey Thorfy ........ love your journal and comments ... many of them mirror my own.

You used to know me as lthrdyke ages and ages ago ... sent ya an email too, then found your LJ.

Mind if I friend ya?

[thorfinn]

Hey, got your email, but haven't replied to it yet. :) And no, go right ahead and add me. Ta, Thorf.

[queergrrrl.livejournal.com]

*smile* . . . done!

Add me if you like too!