So how's the occupation going?

My intention for this thread is to be an ongoing chronicle of the ups and downs of the occupation of Iraq. I think it will be really interesting over time.

From the NYT, there's trouble in Mosul.
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/15/international/worldspecial/15CND-NORT.html

"At least 10 Iraqis were reported killed and 16 injured today in a clash in northern Iraq that Marines called a gun battle and Iraqis described as the shooting of unarmed civilians. The deaths further complicated the already troubled arrival of American troops in Mosul, a city considered a center of Iraqi nationalism.

(snip)

"These are to break up the crowd," he said, referring to groups of young men still gathering near the governate building this afternoon. "It's a show of force, but people don't understand it. They're not grateful."

And from WaPo

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A30858-2003Apr15.html

"The first U.S.-sponsored meeting of Iraqi political and religious leaders debating the political future of postwar Iraq took place today near Nasiriyah, the town that saw the most intense combat of the war. The shooting may have subsided, but if today's gathering is any indication, the struggle for power could be just as ferocious in a different way and could last longer.

Participants in the meeting-selected by the United States and invited by the U.S. Army Central Command, which automatically makes them suspect to nationalist-minded Iraqis-agreed to reconvene in 10 days. But this accomplishment was clouded by the fact that one of Iraq's most important Shiite Muslim groups boycotted the meeting, a leading Iraqi cleric demanded an early withdrawal of U.S. forces and thousands of demonstrators who objected to any U.S. role in Iraqi politics denounced the event with a noisy protest.

"No to America, no to Saddam," they shouted."

To my way of thinking, that's like looting on day one and two and three. It's to be expected. But you would hope that in a few weeks, things will have calmed down somewhat.

 

Dan, pointless carping isn't the point of this thread. Let's see what happens over time. I mean, the looting "crisis" is already over.

Obviously, the big news today is that they found the Achille Lauro guy, which has to be counted as a big, big plus.

I'll add some other stuff around lunch time after looking at the NYT and WaPo.

 

Well, I'm at the WaPo site, and there's not really any interesting news, which is probably good news. There was a big meeting held to try to get the new gvt. going, and there was a group of thousands of Shiites outside demanding a very short transition/occupation. They denounced the meeting as illegitimate. Yadda yadda yadda.

Upon further review, more trouble in Mosul.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37798-2003Apr16.html

So this is two days in a row there. Still, it's just one city. Not a good sign, but nothing to overreact to.

Over at the NY Times, the same story(s).

In a somewhat related development, the terror alert has been lowered to yellow.

Those Bolsheviks at BBC.com downplayed the capture of Abu Abbas (whose name is clearly inspired by an INXS album.)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2952879.stm

Which conjures up the image of a Middle East equivalent of Pink Floyd's Fletcher Memorial Home for Incurable Tyrants and Kings.

 

Well, if that happens, in about a month this will be the hottest thread on bigsoccer.

BTW, people, that "sex" link refers to goingson in Bosnia.

That'd never happen. Muslims don't eat pork.

 

Well, today is a good day. The main stories are that power is still out in Baghdad. That's a pretty big deal, as many of the water plants don't have generators. The US seems to be working hard on this. I hope there will be good news soon.

And there's the INC guy obie put up the article about.

Nothing really bad at CNN, WaPo, or the NYT.

The only really negative story I found in my quick tour of the big sites is at MSNBC. (Which is a surprise to me. They've been just this side of Fox when it comes to being pro-Bush.)

http://www.msnbc.com/news/870749.asp?0cv=CB10

I put that part in bold because it's darkly funny. Again, it's not good that things are so anarchic, but it IS good that we're taking more police-type responsibilities on.

Here's a comment that, to my cynical eye, sounds cherry-picked to make us look bad. It's from someone in Mosul, which saw incidents on consecutive days of US forces killing Iraqis.

I hope that's a minority opinion, and I expect it is.

And then there's this

To me, it's interesting that this out-of-step negative article is on MSNBC, and not where I'd expect it, the NYT, or maybe CNN.

There are various explanations for that. Either CNN, WaPo, and the NYT are moving on to the next story. Maybe MSNBC has decided to carve out a new, new, new identity as a Bush critic. Maybe the editor who complied this piece has an agenda.

 

manny, there were more people there than at the statue-tipping.

And yeah, I can't believe the depths of cynicism in posts that open with this:

And with this

I did find some cynicism, tho.

 

I wish I had been smart enough to predict his yesterday, but today is NOT a good day. But then, that's to be expected, it's Friday.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A50762-2003Apr18.html

It is important that electricity and water be restored by next Friday.

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/international/international-iraq-demonstration.html

There's an irony here. Our biggest problem may turn out to be a new Sunni-Shiite unity.

Would it be churlish of me to point out that there was a hundred times as many people at this march as at the Saddam-toppling? (The more I think about that, what a cheap, shallow, made for TV moment that was. The newsies were so pathetically desperate for a Berlin Wall moment, that even something as contrived as that would do.)

 

Apparently, the US is planning 4 bases in Iraq.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/20/international/worldspecial/20BASE.html

That deserves its own thread. My God, that strikes me as a bad idea. The article does say that we're going to withdraw some troops from other nations. But if you're Iranian, what does that look like to you??? I'm sorry, but in this era of nationalism and terror, you can't rule the world by fear.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/20/international/worldspecial/20MOSU.html

More from Mosul.

Once again, it's clear that Rumsfeld should have had more troops in theater. The article is a good read, a good blow-by-blow description of what's gone wrong.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A53654-2003Apr18.html
About Nasiriyah

A sad read.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A53661-2003Apr18.html

I put that phrase in bold because the rest of the article is somewhat less alarmist.

One disturbing note is that the Muslim Brotherhood may be forming in Iraq. That ain't good. They're banned in Egypt, and I think that's the group that targeted Western tourists for killing.

Riiiight.

So far, it's just words, not action.

Overall, I think this is more a bad day than a good day. But it's really about 50-50.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A58399-2003Apr19.html

Shiite clerics are, for now, filling the power void. This raises the obvious question, is Bush willing to hand power over to them?

In another article, power has been restored to parts of Baghdad.

No news is good news.

 

I'm going outside the box a bit today, just because tpm is so strong.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com

A fighting chance??? Uh-oh.

Josh also talks about the notion out there of firing up the existing oil pipeline from Mosul to Haifa. That's Haifa, Israel.

There's also some talk about Chalabi and the INC that would lead a cynical person to think that the neo-cons handpicked him/them PRECISELY because they'll do what we tell them wrt Israel.

I'll leave that for a cynic.

Jay Garner is in Baghdad.

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/international/news-iraq-garner.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A64336-2003Apr20.html

This is an article about the guy who proclaimed himself governor of Baghdad. He's an INC man, who hasn't been in Iraq fror 24 years. Sounds perfect for the job.

The man comes across as a total clown in this piece.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A64457-2003Apr20.html

Here's the piece Josh Marshall was working from for tpm.

A disturbing read. There's one key, unarguable point at the end. Where the US has made a sustained commitment, Germany, Japan, SKorea, we've been wildly successful. Where we've tried this on the cheap, we've failed.

It's like making love to a woman. It's easy for you to get in and get your rocks off and get out. It's not so easy to please the woman. It takes time.

The Times says our strategy isn't working in Baghdad yet.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/21/international/worldspecial/21STRA.html