Author: Gunner

  • UN Reverses Oil-for-Food Firing

    The scandal-plagued United Nations continues to trip over its own feet.

    The only United Nations official sacked over the Iraq oil-for-food scandal has been reinstated after a UN appeals panel ruled he had done nothing wrong.

    Joseph Stephanides was fired in May for allegedly interfering in the competitive bidding process.

    Investigators said he had divulged bidding information but did not suggest he had personally benefited.

    While accepting his punishment was too harsh, the UN still insists he violated staff rules, and he plans a new appeal.

    The BBC’s Susannah Price says the decision to reverse the dismissal of Mr Stephanides will obviously be embarrassing for the UN.

    Obviously embarrassing? You betcha. When Stephanides was first canned, I blogged that it was a start. I was wrong, and we’re all back to square one in a game that very well may go absolutely nowhere despite billions of dollars of wrong-doing.

  • Carnival of Liberty XX

    This week’s installment of the Life, Liberty, Property community’s Carnival of Liberty is up over at the site of the community’s founding father, Eric’s Grumbles Before the Grave. Go read another fine collection of posts from a libertarian slant.

  • War on Terror Update, 14 NOV 05

    Jordanians turning against terrorism

    Less than a week ago – before suicide bombers killed 57 people at Amman hotels – Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was seen by many Jordanians as a homegrown holy warrior battling U.S. troops in occupied Iraq.

    After the bombings, claimed by al-Zarqawi’s al-Qaida in Iraq, thousands of Jordanians took to the streets throughout the kingdom, shouting: “Burn in hell, al-Zarqawi.”

    “All Jordanians – even fanatic Muslims – are changing their minds (toward Islamic extremist attacks) because of what they saw happen to innocent people” in Amman, said Ibrahim Hreish, a jeweler in the Jordanian capital.

    In Jordan, a close U.S. ally heralded in the West for its moderation, there has been strong support for militant attacks against what Islamist and independent newspapers described as legitimate targets – Israeli soldiers or U.S. troops in Iraq.

    […]

    But amid a spiraling of violence in neighboring Iraq and numerous foiled terror plots here in Jordan before Wednesday’s strikes, views toward terrorism have started to change.

    Most of those killed in the triple hotel bombings were Arabs and Muslims – and the targets included a Jordanian-Palestinian wedding reception.

    TV talk shows and newspaper columnists have been focussing on the suicide attacks and whether Muslims should condone them in part or total.

    “There has (long) been empathy among Jordanians for insurgent strikes against military targets in Iraq, particularly against U.S. forces,” said Mustafa Hamarneh, a researcher who has conducted surveys on domestic attitudes toward suicide bombings.

    “I believe we will now begin to see a change in how the country’s press reports events in Iraq, such as suicide bombings and in public attitudes,” he said.

    Jordanians, along with the rest of the world, need to realize that the Islamists terrorists have already sorted humanity into two classifications: in one category, those who will help them destroy and then reign in a bloody and fascist fury of extremist Islam; in the other, potential victims. It’s that simple for the radical Islamists. It should be that simple for us.

    No escape from al-Qaeda for Jordan

    Jordan is one of the United States’ staunchest allies in the region, and it is also the “new” Iraq’s closest Arab ally, having done more than any other Arab state to help facilitate Iraq’s transition in the post-Saddam Hussein era.

    This and the global “war on terror” have left Jordan in a precarious position, highlighted by last week’s bombing of three hotels in Amman, the capital, in which nearly 60 people died.

    Such generous use of quotation marks. The “article” goes on to “detail” Jordan’s efforts so far against the Islamist threat and to “question” the Jordanian mindset.

    U.S. Widens Offensive In Far Western Iraq

    The U.S. military broadened its offensive in western Iraq on Monday, launching a major attack on insurgent positions in the town of Ubaydi near the Syrian border and killing about 50 insurgents in precision airstrikes and house-to-house street fighting, according to news reports and the U.S. military.

    U.S. and Iraqi troops reportedly faced stiff resistance from machine-gun and small-arms fire and rocket-propelled grenades.

    […]

    “This is a fight all the way through the city,” said Col. Stephen Davis, commander of Marine Regimental Combat Team 2, describing the fighting, according to CNN, which had a producer embedded with U.S. troops. Davis said that his forces were encountering “significant resistance” and that they had found three buildings wired with explosives and numerous roadside bombs and car bombs. U.S. officials said about two dozen insurgents had been captured.

    “Insurgent fighters have been battling with Iraqi and Coalition Forces since the operation began at dawn,” a military statement said. “A suspected car bomb placed in the advance of Iraqi Forces was engaged with a round from an M1A1 tank. The blast from the tank initiated a secondary explosion powerful enough to throw the car onto the roof of a nearby building.”

    Happy hunting, troops, and best wishes.

    By the way, it must have been fun to have been in that gunner’s seat, squeeze the cadillacs, and then put a round into a bomb-laden car and watch the fireworks through the thermals. Most of you folks wouldn’t understand the feeling of staring into a scope, firing a 120mm and having the awesome machinery rock and roll about a foot to the left of your head as your powerful effort screams destructively exactly where you wish to put it. Eric could tell you more about it.

    Blair Says a Troop Cut in Iraq Is a ‘Possibility’ Next Year

    British officials have begun to talk, however gingerly, about withdrawing their troops from Iraq.

    On Monday, Prime Minister Tony Blair said it was “entirely reasonable” to “talk about the possibility” that the troops could begin leaving by the end of next year. The discussion, he added, “has got to be always conditioned by the fact that we withdraw when the job is done.”

    His comments came a day after the Iraqi president, Jalal Talabani, said in a television interview that Iraqi soldiers could replace British troops in southern Iraq by the end of 2006. “We don’t want British forces forever in Iraq,” Mr. Talabani said on ITV1. “Within one year, I think at the end of 2006, Iraqi troops will be ready to replace British forces in the south.”

    Let’s not be so hasty. Please see the next story.

    Iraq wants pull-out even later

    Talks on the withdrawal of United States-led foreign troops from Iraq can begin at the end of next year, said Iraq’s president on Monday.

    President Jalal Talabani, in Austria to attend a three-day conference on Islam, gave no timetable for the full pull-out of troops, but said Britain probably could start a “step by step” exit in 2007.

    […]

    On Friday, Iraqi deputy prime minister Ahmad Chalabi said US troops could begin leaving in significant numbers some time next year.

    But US President George W Bush has refused to set a timetable, saying that would play into the hands of insurgents.

    See my thoughts on exit strategies and time tables here. In short, they bring a short-term political gain with the danger of an actual loss in true national goals. No war effort has ever been successfully carried out with the foolishness of an exit strategy or a timetable for withdrawal. Oh yeah, exactly when are we leaving Bosnia?

    To counter Iraq war critics, Bush quotes Democrats

    U.S. President George W. Bush on Monday sought to counter Democratic critics of the Iraq war by turning their own past words of warning about Saddam Hussein against them.

    “Reasonable people can disagree about the conduct of the war — but it is irresponsible for Democrats to now claim that we misled them and the American people,” Bush said in a campaign-style speech accusing Democrats of playing politics with the issue and trying to rewrite the past.

    He spoke to U.S. troops in an air base hangar in Alaska, a refueling spot for Air Force One carrying him on a week-long Asia trip that Bush’s national security adviser, Stephen Hadley, said would be long on conversations about top priorities but not likely to include any breakthrough agreements on simmering trade issues.

    […]

    He quoted statements made in 2001 and 2002 by three Senate Democrats, though he did not quote them by name.

    While I may not agree with the decision for the prez to come out swinging (mildly) on Veterans Day, the swinging had to be done sooner rather than later. The Democrats have played nothing but obstruction on every domestic effort put forth by the administration — and make no mistake, the administration and the Republicans have been the only ones trying to move anything forward — but also have viciously savaged the administration over the prelude to the Iraqi campaign, falsely twisting the Scooter Libby indictments as a statement againt pre-invasion intelligence manipulation and utilizing an all-too-willing and gullible press to curtail public support for our military efforts.

    Did I say Bush had to start fighting back sooner rather than later? I meant that it is well past time that the public hear more of the duplicity of those who have been oh-so-freakin’-publicly undermining our efforts, hoping to grab defeat from the jaws of victory in the Viet Nam mode, only for their personal and party gain at the expense of the possible future security of our republic.

  • Chirac Admits Riots Reveal French Malaise

    I don’t necessarily agree with the ol’ saying that there’ s nothing new under the sun, but I will admit history has a great tendency to repeat itself — tyrants will rise up and oppress again and again, hero after hero will stand forth and face adversity, and a spineless one can always be found presenting meekness as leadership.

    Jacques Chirac acknowledged last night that France’s 18 nights of urban violence had revealed a “profound malaise” in society and launched an appeal to combat the “poison” of racial discrimination.

    In his first formal address to the nation since the unrest started on October 27, the French president said the problem had to be tackled firmly but justly. “Those who attack … must know that in a republic, one cannot break the law without being caught, judged and punished,” he said.

    Mr Chirac said the rioting reflected a “crisis of … identity”, but added that “we can accomplish nothing if we do not respect the rules”. Parental authority was critical, and parents who did not “accept their responsibilities” would be punished. The president confirmed that the government would today put a bill before parliament recommending that the state of emergency be extended for three months until mid-February if necessary.

    Everyone should have the chance to share in the benefits of French society, Mr Chirac said, but “discrimination saps the foundations of the republic”. The French media and political class must “better reflect the reality of French society today”, he insisted. At present, the ethnic minority faces on French television can be counted on the fingers of one hand and mainland France has not a single MP of north African or black African origin.

    Companies and trades unions must actively encourage diversity and support employment for immigrant youths from depressed suburbs, he said. He also announced the formation of a national volunteer corps that would offer training for 50,000 youths by 2007 and help them to get jobs. “Everyone must commit themselves, companies too – how many applications end up in the bin because of the applicant’s name or address?” he asked. But he ruled out positive discrimination or quotas, saying the country must remain true to its republican values.

    Jacques presents little, pointing a finger more at French society than at the Islamic radicals refusing to assimilate into that same society. Ah, Jacques, more than two weeks after the levees figuratively gave way and your country found itself awash with flame and violence, you come sallying forth with wooden sword and stage-prop shield.

    Where have heard such words before, why do they sound so familiar? Ah yes, the echoes of inept, defeatist history.

  • Quote of the Week, 13 NOV 05

    Those who win a war well rarely can make a good peace and those who could make a good peace never have won the war.

    —Winston Churchill

  • Quiz: Which Middle Earth Race are You?

    Yeah, it’s another quiz, but I’m a sucker for Tolkien-related silliness. Hat tip to Captain’s Quarters for this one. I scored as follows:

    Numenorean
    Numenorean

    To which race of Middle Earth do you belong?
    brought to you by Quizilla

    Numenorean. I’m cool with that. Meanwhile, the fiancee scored as elvish. Maybe that explains the torch she’s carried for Legolas since I first introduced her to Middle Earth by taking her to see The Fellowship of the Ring. I don’t know that it actually explains the drooling, though.

  • Quiz: Which Type of Soldier are You?

    Hat tip to Mind of Mog, another veteran, for the following quiz.

    You scored as Officer. Officer, you’re the brass. The leader of the bunch. You have leadership qualities, or you have a really big ego. Most likely both. You know how to get things done, and don’t care who you have to kill to get them done. Your a man with a mission and to stand in your way means pain. You have gumption and intelligence to back it up.

    Hold the line!!! AND SOMEONE GET ME COFFEE!!!

    Officer

    81%

    Combat Infantry

    63%

    Artillery

    56%

    Special Ops

    56%

    Support Gunner

    56%

    Engineer

    44%

    Medic

    38%

    Civilian

    0%

    Which soldier type are you?
    created with QuizFarm.com

    Well, actually I was an enlisted tanker. It got the coffee part right, though.

  • Aggies Fall at Oklahoma

    At least it wasn’t 77-0 again.

    In fact after falling behind 21-0 before the game was nine minutes old and trailing 28-7 at the end of the first quarter, the Ags rallied to make quite a game of it. Unfortunately, the 36-30 defeat almost certainly condemns A&M to a losing 2005 campaign and a seat on the couch for the bowl season. At 5-5, the Aggies need a highly improbable win against rival and second-ranked Texas on Nov. 25. To compound the difficulties, starting quarterback Reggie McNeal may be lost for the game against the Longhorns, leaving the Oklahoma game in the third quarter with an ankle injury.

    In a Big 12 shocker, thirteenth-ranked Texas Tech went down to a 24-17 defeat at the hands of Oklahoma State. Tech entered the game as 23-point favorites and fresh off crushing A&M, but the Cowboys jumped out to a 17-0 third-quarter lead. The Raiders rallied to tie, but Oklahoma State scored the deciding points in the final minute of the game for the huge upset and their first Big 12 win of the year.

  • VFW, American Legion Work to Avoid Fading Away

    Ranks thin at VFWs as GIs pass on

    Veterans’ organizations, from VFWs to Legion halls, are losing a war of attrition as their core membership fades.

    Some post commanders worry that without an infusion of younger vets, entire halls will close as the warriors of World War II succumb to old age.

    Some say the generation gap and busy lifestyles of Gulf and Iraq war vets keep the youngest veterans away, while resentment from Vietnam veterans toward organizations that did not welcome them with open arms keeps those closest to retirement age from signing up.

    “We’re getting a few in, but very few,” said Howard Crawford, 82, adjutant of the Franklin VFW Post 3402 and a World War II and Korean War veteran. “I’m really working on it, too. I talk ’em all up but I think I got about two members this year.”

    Vietnam vets find home in groups they once avoided

    Vietnam veterans have become the backbone of the nation’s largest veterans organizations after decades of avoiding them following service in an unpopular war.

    Vietnam vets are joining the American Legion and Veterans of Foreign Wars in greater numbers, in part because the groups lobby for their interests in Washington, says Kirsten Gronbjerg, an Indiana University professor who studies membership organizations.

    “They’re older,” Gronbjerg says. “Some of the initial disjunctions they experienced have faded a bit. Disability, pension issues, health care now make a difference to them.”

    […]

    Larry Kutschma, 58, says he felt belittled by older vets when he returned from fighting in Vietnam’s Central Highlands in the late 1960s — they said he hadn’t fought in a “real war.”

    Now he’s been a member of the VFW in Racine, Wis., for 10 years. “Through the years our feelings change,” he says. He works on a VFW project sending packages to troops in Iraq.

    Newest veterans are slow to join traditional organizations

    At 30, Staff Sgt. Jerad Myers is a war veteran, but he’s not quite ready to join the American Legion post or the VFW.

    A member of the Indiana National Guard for the past four years and the U.S. Coast Guard for four years before that, Myers returned home to Danville this summer after serving 11 months in Afghanistan.

    Like thousands of other Hoosiers who have served in the Middle East, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Afghanistan since 1990, Myers is part of the newest army of veterans eligible to join at least two service organizations — the American Legion and the Veterans of Foreign Wars.

    […]

    Many of the groups have the same goals: to advocate for veterans’ rights and benefits, ensure veterans know what services are available to them and support active troops and their families. Historically, the groups also have served as social circles, some with bars and restaurants.

    But today, those organizations are eager to figure out how to attract a new generation of veterans that includes more women and a greater proportion of National Guard and Reserve troops. Myers, like many of his cohorts and young veterans before him, is not joining — at least not yet.

    Organizations like the Veterans of Foreign Wars and the American Legion may never again see the large pool of potential members that was available after the two world wars and the lengthy, bloody Cold War clashes of Korea and Viet Nam. It goes without saying that the military is different now, operating with a much diminished, all-volunteer force. This is obviously a double-edged sword — it is good that far fewer must suffer the battlefield, but it would also be a shame to lose such fine links to our military past like the veterans’ organizations.

    Then again, China, North Korea or somebody else may make all this a moot concern.