The US military says it has launched a major air offensive against insurgents near the central Iraqi city of Samarra.

More than 50 aircraft and 1,500 Iraqi and US troops have been deployed in the operation, according to a military statement.

The air assault is the biggest since the 2003 invasion, the military said.

A bomb attack on the al-Askari shrine in Samarra, 100km (60 miles) north of Baghdad, last month sparked widespread sectarian violence.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4814094.stm

Good hunting, boys

Of course, this could be a totally "wag the dog" exercise conceived by Rove to cover up the massive corruption and failures of the Chimpy Mcbushitlerburton Administration. It is also designed to take the wind out of the Feingold Hillary steam roller as it gears up to take the government back for the democrats and all the sane people of the world…

yeah divert from VP´s shooting lawyers and stuff....

Remember how they bombed iraq last time round to keep afghanistan and taliban out of the news....

Iraq, poor country is turning into a klown of a scapegoat for this administration.

"Dick, I think everything is going wrong, and we are losing popularity. What should we do?"

"Well, George, er... " BANG, another friend drops dead... " George, I just contemplated the case, and I reckon we should... we should... BOMB EYERAK!"

Funny how you mention "Wag the Dog" (I liked that movie by the way).

I don't suppose you've noticed how all these various events seem to happen one after another, each knocking the previous story off the "front page" ?

It seems every time the administration gets into hot water, another major event crops up.

Hurricane Katrina, NSA wiretaps, Cheney shooting incident, Dubai Ports deal, Presidential Censure motion, New offensive in Iraq.

I think the people in the White House have the most-watched copy of that movie ever

From what Faux news just reported, this "major offensive" is a lot of huff and puff, but little flame or fire (almost no shots fired, 41 "suspects" rounded up).

Bill O'Reilly, that icon of Independents everywhere was just trying to justify why the US should be allowed to make pre-emptive strikes on suspected terrorists, ANYWHERE in the world (even if they have no proof that the terrorists plan on attacking the US or any of it's interests). This is in response to Bush's recent speech.

Then he tried to blame everything on Clinton, saying that Bin Laden running around was Clinton's fault, because he (Clinton) didn't take out OBL when he had the chance (which ignores the fact that GWB had plenty of opportunity to do the same thing between the time he was elected and 9/11, and didn't).

Gotta love those "Independents" !

Good hunting, boys

You got that right, what's the score now ? 2,500 ? progress indeed

The US military says it has launched a major air offensive against insurgents near the central Iraqi city of Samarra.

More than 50 aircraft and 1,500 Iraqi and US troops have been deployed in the operation, according to a military statement.

The air assault is the biggest since the 2003 invasion, the military said.

A bomb attack on the al-Askari shrine in Samarra, 100km (60 miles) north of Baghdad, last month sparked widespread sectarian violence.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4814094.stm

Among the good news from the same site:

Iraqi PM 'prepared to step down'

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4811574.stm

Yeah, everything is doing great in Iraq. When is the UK pulling out ?

Good hunting, boys

You got that right, what's the score now ? 2,500 ? progress indeed

More than that die on America's highways in any given weekend.

Maybe we should ban cars?

More than that die on America's highways in any given weekend.

Maybe we should ban cars?

Funny you mention that. I've used that arguement quite often when ever the topic of gun-control, or suing gun-manufacturers comes up.

Nobody ever suggests suing GM, Ford, Toyota or any other car maker, for all the deaths caused by automobiles every year. Same as nobody sues the companies that make beer/alcohol when people are killed in drunk-driving accidents. Yet fire-arms manufacturers are the targets of numerous lawsuits involving gun-related deaths. (Guns don't kill people, People kill people. Sometimes they use guns, sometimes cars, or knives, or baseball bats.)

B.o.T.

So, the "Largest Air Assualt" since the initial invasion of Iraq isn't quite what it seems.

Even the 101st Airborne Division admits the operation may have been "over sold".

Some are now claiming this was done intentionally to deflect attention away from other issues (where have we heard that before ?)

Even today, military spokesmen report that no missiles, rockets or bombs have been used, no casualties, no firefights, and many of those initially arrested as possible "suspects" have been released.

Turns out this operation (Operation Swarmer) wasn't as large as some other operations (involving "air assualts") conducted since the invasion.

So why all the hype ?

"The reasons for it being given such high-profile publicity are clearly open to speculation.

The operation came at a time when support at home for President Bush and his campaign in Iraq was running very low, and when the international media were preparing to focus on the third anniversary of the war, just three days later. (BBC News, 17 Mar 2006)

Certainly not of a "Wag the Dog" quality of diversion from other issues.

Good hunting, boys

You got that right, what's the score now ? 2,500 ? progress indeed

More than that die on America's highways in any given weekend.

Maybe we should ban cars?

you got that right. More than that died on 911, should we invade every terrorist loving country ?

Good hunting, boys

You got that right, what's the score now ? 2,500 ? progress indeed

More than that die on America's highways in any given weekend.

Maybe we should ban cars?

you got that right. More than that died on 911, should we invade every terrorist loving country ?

Sounds like a good idea to me - better than sunbathing in Guam.

you got that right. More than that died on 911, should we invade every terrorist loving country ?

Wasn't that the gist of GWB's last speech ? That the US would continue with it's policy of "pre-emptive" strikes against terrorists, where ever they may be ?

(note that he didn't specify just terrorists that were possibly targeting the US or US interests, but terrorists in general).

Based on his speech, it's probably a good thing the IRA has "disarmed", along with the FLQ in Quebec, the Red Brigades in Japan, the Shining Path in Peru and other "terrorist" groups. The US would have it's hands full trying to launch pre-emptive strikes against all those groups.

(oh yeah, 9/11 was caused by terrorists being harboured in Afghanistan. The invasion of Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. I think it had to do with settling a score. Daddy invaded first, but didn't finish the job. So junior eventually found an excuse to go in and finish what daddy started).

From Chris Albritton of TIME, someone I met last summer, a fascinating guy:

“Operation Swarmer” is really a media show. It was designed to show off the new Iraqi Army — although there was no enemy for them to fight. Every American official I’ve heard has emphasized the role of the Iraqi forces just days before the third anniversary of the start of the war. That said, one Iraqi role the military will start highlighting in the next few days, I imagine, is that of Iraqi intelligence. It was intel from the Iraqi military intelligence and interior ministry that the U.S. says prompted this Potemkin operation. And it will be the Iraqi intel that provides the cover for American military commanders to throw up their hands and say, “well, we thought bad guys were there.”

It’s hard to blame the military, however. Stations like Fox and CNN have really taken this and ran with it, with fancy graphics and theme music. The generals here also are under tremendous pressure to show off some functioning Iraqi troops before the third anniversary, and I won’t fault them for going into a region loaded for bear. After all, the Iraqi intelligence might have been right!

But Operation Overblown should raise serious questions about how good Iraqi intelligence is. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been told by earnest lieutenants that the Iraqis are valiant and necessary partners, “because they know the area, the people and the customs.” But when I spoke to grunts and NCOs, however, they usually gave me blunter — and more colorful — reasons why the Iraqi intelligence was often, shall we say, useless. Tribal rivalries and personal feuds are still a major why Iraqis drop a dime on their neighbors.

So I guess it’s fitting that on the eve of the third anniversary of a war launched on — oh, let’s be generous — “faulty” intelligence, a major operation is hyped and then turns out to be less than what it appeared because of … faulty intelligence.

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/03/op...aled-to-be.html

It doesn't matter, it's just more innocent civilians to kill anyhow and they won't vote on the upcoming US elections. Faux News fans have their week-end party, it's all that matters

Yes, yes, it's all absolutely despicable and a cryin' shame to boot. What a fcuked up world we live in.

YAWN

There were worldwide protests against the Iraq war today, but they didn't seem to amount to much. AFP describes the turnout at demonstrations as "light."

These guys typify the quality of opposition to the war:

"Islam Is Peace"--just like Che Guevara? And I like the "Free Ahmed Saadat" sign. Saadat is the terrorist who was just seized by the Israelis from his "prison" in Jericho.

Link

How about angry chicks dressed in bed sheets?

Among the good news in Iraq

Iraq in civil war, says former PM

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4821618.stm

Even Saddam couldn't have dream of a better scenario to kill his own people

We are losing each day as an average 50 to 60 people throughout the country, if not more - if this is not civil war, then God knows what civil war is

Among the good news in Iraq

Iraq in civil war, says former PM

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4821618.stm

Even Saddam couldn't have dream of a better scenario to kill his own people

We are losing each day as an average 50 to 60 people throughout the country, if not more - if this is not civil war, then God knows what civil war is

Are you honestly saying that the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein was better than the fight for freedom and democracy?

Be careful you will soon be giving appeasement a bad name.

Today (I guess it's still yesterday in the US) marks the 3rd anniversary of the invasion of Iraq.

Operation Swarmer is still in progress, with little to show for all the hype (a few small weapons caches, up to 80 "suspects" arrested, many who have since been released, virtually no resistance though I suspect they were hoping for some to substantiate the hype).

Former Iraqi PM quoted as saying Iraq is in a civil war now.

Infrastructure (roads and utilities) still in worse shape than before the invasion, despite billions of dollars being poured into the country.

No WMDs found. Now they are claiming that documents show Saddam had WMDs prior to the invasion. Supposedly he managed to smuggle the WMDs (and all evidence of them) out of the country just weeks before the invasion (at a time when the eyes of the world were focused directly on Iraq).

(if that is the case, who has those WMDs now ? Interesting to note that no one in the administration, the military or the media has commented on that)

Shi-ites and Sunnis slaughtering each other in droves. Terrorism rampant. The elected members of the government has just recently (finally, after almost 3 months) submitted their list of who is going to fill what position.

Yep, real progress, in only 3 short years.

I think taking out Saddam was a good thing, but I also think the planning for the whole operation was flawed.

On the military side, things probably went better than expected (with the initial invasion).

How ever, the planning for what to do with Iraq after the invasion leaves a lot to be desired. One almost gets the impression that "they" forgot to plan anything other than the invasion and capture of Saddam.

I think they went in in such a hurry, that planning for a post-war Iraq was left until after the battle had been won. I think the "coalition" expected the people of Iraq to welcome them with open arms, and to dutifully accept western democracy overnight.

They may have done that except for one small detail. When the US (er, a different coalition) invaded in 1991, the people of Iraq started to rise up against Saddam, expecting the US to take him down.

But the allies stopped short of invading Baghdad, leaving Saddam in power. While the allies established "no fly zones", (mainly to protect the Kurds in the north and the Shia in the south), Saddam was still free to retaliate against all those that sought to depose him (as long as he didn't use aircraft).

This left a majority of the Iraqi population feeling that they were betrayed by the US led allies. Many blamed the US for the retaliations that Saddam subsequently carried out.

As a result, when the US led coalition invaded this time, the general population was suspicious of their motives and commitment. The removal of Saddam resulted in a power vacuum that the coalition couldn't fill. Various groups saw this as an opening for a power grab. How ever, the coalition has been trying to prevent any one group from dominating the other, using democracy, free elections and military force as required.

Unfortunately, all sides see the coalition as invaders this time, not liberators. They seem to have taken the same age-old stance that "if you are not with us, you are against us". The idea of trying to treat everybody equally doesn't play well in a society dominated by relious intolerance, tribal loyalties and revenge retribution.

It appears that the US somehow believed that, virtually overnight, they could change Iraq into a Middle Eastern version of the US. It hasn't worked and they are now starting year 4.

How much longer will it go on ?

Among the good news in Iraq

Iraq in civil war, says former PM

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4821618.stm

Even Saddam couldn't have dream of a better scenario to kill his own people

We are losing each day as an average 50 to 60 people throughout the country, if not more - if this is not civil war, then God knows what civil war is

Are you honestly saying that the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein was better than the fight for freedom and democracy?

Be careful you will soon be giving appeasement a bad name.

I don't know, TM, what would you choose for your family ? living under a dictatorship with a chance to raise safely your family or a Democracy in chaos where anarchy is everywhere ?

Liberating a nation without proper planning should be considered a war crime. Hopefully, the Iraq War will serve as a text book example for future conflicts.

3rd anniversary, hmm. "Mission accomplished"?

Them boys haven't learned anything form 'nam, I doubt they'll learn anything when they'll be leaving Iraq with their tails between their legs.

YAWN

3rd anniversary, hmm. "Mission accomplished"?

Them boys haven't learned anything form 'nam, I doubt they'll learn anything when they'll be leaving Iraq with their tails between their legs.

Back already zzap?

Thought you went on a much longer vacation!

Moronic Convergence in Hollywood:

And up in that city by the bay…

Back already zzap?

Thought you went on a much longer vacation!

Back by popular demand.

Back already zzap?

Thought you went on a much longer vacation!

Back by popular demand.

Hey zzap where have you been ? Boon Mee was having nightmares without you on his side