By Hanlon, on February 11th, 2010 at 01:04 PM
 Throughout the Iraq quagmire, there have been a few topics which pretty nicely encapsulate everything that’s going wrong. None of them do this job better than Blackwater (now renamed Xe). They managed to combine the money wasting, the shady missionary mercenary activities, and all of the unjust holding of innocents into one probably-illegal package.
So it’s with great pleasure that I report that Iraq is telling a whole bunch of them to GTFO.
The order comes in the wake of a U.S. judge’s dismissal of criminal charges against five Blackwater guards who were accused in the September 2007 shooting deaths of 17 Iraqis in Baghdad.
It applies to about 250 security contractors who worked for Blackwater in Iraq at the time of the incident, Interior Minister Jawad al-Bolani told The Associated Press.
Some of the guards now work for other security firms in Iraq, while others work for a Blackwater subsidiary, al-Bolani said. He said all “concerned parties” were notified of the order three days ago and now have four days left before they must leave. He did not name the companies.
I’d like to point out that Iraq is not exactly treating us with a “thank you for all you’ve done, we’ll take it from here” attitude so much as a “god dammit get out we’ll clean up your mess” attitude. It’s kind of a “thanks for knocking down that bee’s nest, but you didn’t have to burn the whole house down to do it, did you?” situation.
Seems like in their zeal to avoid another “duck and run from Vietnam” incident, we’re just hanging around and waiting for the South Vietnamese to get pissed off and kick everyone out.
By Hanlon, on January 23rd, 2010 at 01:15 PM
By Hanlon, on January 7th, 2010 at 07:40 PM
I hope so.
Iraq said on Monday it would launch lawsuits in U.S. and Iraqi courts against the U.S. security firm for the Baghdad killings, rejecting a U.S. judge’s decision last week to throw out the charges.
In a statement, the United Nations working group on the use of mercenaries said the case underscored the need for “credible oversight” of private security companies working for the United States and other governments in war zones.
By Hanlon, on November 25th, 2009 at 08:17 PM
Y’know how you read something that you already figured was true, but you just needed to see it in writing? Yeah.
By Hanlon, on June 29th, 2009 at 08:13 PM
 …except it’s to celebrate the fact that we’re leaving.
Iraqi soldiers paraded through the streets in their American-made vehicles draped with Iraqi flags and flowers, chanting, dancing and calling the pullout a “victory.”
One drove a motorcycle with party streamers on it; another, a Humvee with a garland of plastic roses on the grill.
…
“The American forces’ withdrawal is something awaited by every Iraqi: male, female, young and old. I consider June 30 to be like a wedding,” said Ahmed Hameed, 38, near an ice cream bar in Baghdad’s upmarket Karrada district.
Crucial quote here:
“It is a big joy to see them leaving,” said Abu Hassan, 60, a shop owner. “There might be some more attacks because of struggles between the different parties, but Iraqis are controlling security now. It’s up to our forces now.”
Even if attacks go up a tad, Iraqis themselves are happy because they themselves are the ones in charge of securing it. They’d rather some more violence than another day of American occupation.
I think what’s comically… curious about the above statement is that we have an Iraqi shop owner better embodying Ben Franklin’s famous statement than the American conservative movement. Remember this one? “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” The Iraqis are eager to live by this motto, living a life that’s not quite so secure but one run by their own, and over here we still have politicians squealing about bombing half the country and placing surveillance on every bit of data in the name of “security”.
We’re at a point where we can draw inspiration from the Iraqis and Iranians, folks.
By Hanlon, on June 6th, 2009 at 06:24 PM
By Hanlon, on March 16th, 2009 at 12:33 PM
 What can I say? This is awesome.
While deep difficulties remain, the advances are remarkable. Eighty-four percent of Iraqis now rate security in their own area positively, nearly double its August 2007 level. Seventy-eight percent say their protection from crime is good, more than double its low. Three-quarters say they can go where they want safely – triple what it’s been.
One slightly hilarious caveat…
Few credit the United States, still widely unpopular given the post-invasion violence, and eight in 10 favor its withdrawal on schedule by 2011 – or sooner. But at the same time a new high, 64 percent of Iraqis, now call democracy their preferred form of government.
Read the full thing, Iraq overall looks to be finally, finally, coming together. I know this will come as a surprise to all of the conservatives out there, but even the most curmudgeonly of liberals is glad to hear that the people of Iraq are may end up with a government that they can trust and feel protected by.
I do find it funny though that in the last year, even the right has started to question if Iraq would end up successful. Although while liberals suspected that the American venture was a bad idea, conservatives blamed the Iraqis for any potential problems.
Hell with it, though, the day we exit Iraq and leave behind a stable and prosperous Iraq I’m 100% willing to share the drinks with Sean Hannity.
By Hanlon, on February 22nd, 2009 at 04:51 PM
 I really want to believe this story is true, but my liberal pessimism (which at this point is more like playing percentages) tells me not to count my eggs before they’ve been tortured. After being seen as a house of torture under two separate leaderships, Saddam’s and then ours, the Iraqi government has re-opened Abu Ghraib, given it a new name, and determined to make it a human and reputable place of corrections.
Rooms have been transformed and renovated. CNN was told, but not shown, that a few hundred prisoners are here already, in a revamped part of the facility that can hold up to 3,000 prisoners. The capacity is critical to help deal with overcrowding at Iraq’s other facilities and the potential security threat.
The Iraqi government is going to great lengths to try to change the image this facility has. It organized a tour for journalists, very carefully orchestrated by the Ministry of Justice.
Murtada Sharif, the only Ministry of Justice official to speak to CNN on camera about the prison, admitted Abu Ghraib is synonymous in people’s minds with the inhumane acts that took place there both before and after the fall of Saddam in 2003.
“We want to change its image, to make it a place of justice,” he said.
A wing that used to hold a thousand prisoners In Saddam Hussein’s time now is ready for 160. Cells that used to hold between 30 and 50 people now have a capacity of eight.
Prisoners and their families actually get to see each other — the prisoners behind a cage-like structure, the families on the other side of the fence, in a courtyard with a playground for the children. Again, it is part of the whole effort to create a different atmosphere.
More than any other name, “Abu Ghraib” can cause a heck of a shudder when it strikes the ears of those who’ve watched Bush’s war develop. When CNN says it’s going to take a lot more than some new decorations to fix the prison’s image, they’re partially right. I don’t think there’s anything to change the stain that Abu Ghraib has left on our tenure in Iraq. But in changing it to Iraqi control, giving it a new name, and transforming it for the better, the Iraqis can prove that they’re ready to move forward.
By Hanlon, on January 29th, 2009 at 04:06 PM
I’m not sure this quite qualifies as winning hearts and minds…
A sofa-sized sculpture – a single copper-coated shoe on a stand carved to resemble flowing cloth – was formally unveiled to the public Thursday in the hometown of the late Iraqi ruler Saddam Hussein.
Officials and visitors walked around the outdoor sculpture during the brief ceremony, pondering on its eccentricities – such as a tree poking up from the shoe’s interior.
Its sculptor called it a fitting tribute to the shoe hurler, Iraqi journalist Muntadhar al-Zeidi, and his folk hero reputation in parts of the Muslim world and beyond.
The Baghdad-based artist, Laith al-Amari, said the work honors al-Zeidi and “is a source of pride for all Iraqis.” He added: “It’s not a political work,”
Bosnia has a statue of Bill Clinton. Iraq has a statue of a guy who threw shoes as Bush. How fitting.
By Hanlon, on January 12th, 2009 at 11:51 AM
 Can’t make this stuff up, though. What’s most remarkable is not that Bush is admitting that the chances of democracy surviving in Iraq aren’t certain, we all knew that even if it is noteworthy that Bush is finally coming out and agreeing. No, the remarkable part is his attitude toward the situation.
Summing up his legacy as president, Bush told a news conference he did the right thing in sending an additional 30,000 American troops there to lower the level of daily violence and to stabilize life in the wartorn country.
Bush told reporters that, “The question is, in the long run, will this democracy survive, and that’s going to be a question for future presidents.”
Newsflash, soon to be ex-President Bush: that question was for you. If you weren’t positive that democracy would last in Iraq, then sending a few hundred thousand of our troops, killing a few thousand of them, and completely obliterating the Iraqi populace wasn’t the right thing to do. Period.
The world is not a game of SimCity, you can’t just send our military to countries to “see if this’ll work”. Bush pushed for the war, Bush drafted this big plan, the question of if democracy could hold was one he should have had answered before he started. We’re rearing up on six years of occupation and Iraq hasn’t even been stabilized yet. Suggesting that “future presidents” have to answer the question of whether or not Bush’s cockeyed project is probably the greatest example of what Bush’s legacy will be in the history books.
|
|
|
