RhetIraq

Who: Safia Taleb al-Suhail (Iraqi Ambassador to Egypt)
Sources: The White House & Reuters
Quotes:

MY NOTE: As leader of the leader of the Iraqi Women's Political Council at the time, Safia Taleb al-Suhail was present and showcased at the 2005 State of the Union address. Her comments about the proposed Iraqi constitution;

"Human rights should not be linked to Islamic Sharia law at all. It should be listed separately in the constitution," said Safia Souhail, Iraq's ambassador to Egypt.

"This will lead to creating religious courts. But we should be giving priority to the law," she said.

"When we came back from exile, we thought we were going to improve rights and the position of women. But look what has happened -- we have lost all the gains we made over the last 30 years. It's a big disappointment."

"We have received news that we were not backed by our friends including the Americans. They left the Islamists to come to an agreement with the Kurds," she said.

Who: Dr. Raja Khuzai (a.k.a. Kuzai)
Sources: The White House & Gadsden Times
Quotes:

March 12, 2004 - President, Mrs. Bush Mark Progress in Global Women's Human Rights

PRES. BUSH: I want to thank my friend, Dr. Raja Khuzai, who's with us today. This is the third time we have met. The first time we met, she walked into the Oval Office -- let's see, was it the first time? It was the first time. The door opened up. She said, "My liberator," and burst out in tears -- (laughter) -- and so did I. (Applause.)

August 24, 2005 - Secular Iraqis Say New Charter May Curb Rights

"This is the future of the new Iraqi government - it will be in the hands of the clerics," said Dr. Raja Kuzai, a secular Shiite member of the Assembly. "I wanted Iraqi women to be free, to be able to talk freely and to able to move around."

"I am not going to stay here," said Dr. Kuzai, an obstetrician and women's leader who met President Bush in the White House in November 2003.

Who: Washington Post Editorial
Source: The Washington Post
Quotes:

There is no cause for despair, or for abandoning the basic U.S. strategy in Iraq, which is to support the election of a permanent national government and train security forces capable of defending it with continuing help from American troops. But it is dispiriting, and damaging to the chances for success, that President Bush still refuses to speak honestly to the country about the challenges the United States now faces, or how he intends to address them. In two major speeches on national security this week, Mr. Bush simply repeated the misleading description of Iraq he offered during his national television address in June, conflating the war with the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and describing the enemy as terrorists akin to al Qaeda.

Mr. Bush breezily praised the constitutional process as if it were the antithesis of the military conflict, rather than a political expression of the same Iraqi power struggle. He boasted that Iraq will have a constitution that "honors women's rights" and "the rights of minorities" even though the prevailing draft raises serious questions about both.

In fact, depending on the future balance of power in the Iraqi parliament, the constitution as it stood late this week could allow the emergence of a Shiite mini-state in Iraq's south closely allied to Iran, with de facto rule by clerics and a continuation of the oppression of women and non-Shiites already widely reported in the region. American military defense of such an entity would be hard to justify.

Who: Britain's Foreign Office
Source: The Observer
Quotes:

The Foreign Office's top official warned Downing Street that the Iraq war was fuelling Muslim extremism in Britain a year before the 7 July bombings, The Observer can reveal.

Despite repeated denials by Number 10 that the war made Britain a target for terrorists, a letter from Michael Jay, the Foreign Office permanent under-secretary, to the cabinet secretary, Sir Andrew Turnbull - obtained by this newspaper - makes the connection clear.

The letter, dated 18 May 2004, says British foreign policy was a 'recurring theme' in the Muslim community, 'especially in the context of the Middle East peace process and Iraq'.

'Colleagues have flagged up some of the potential underlying causes of extremism that can affect the Muslim community, such as discrimination, disadvantage and exclusion,' the letter says. 'But another recurring theme is the issue of British foreign policy, especially in the context of the Middle East peace process and Iraq.

'Experience of both ministers and officials ... suggests that ... British foreign policy and the perception of its negative effect on Muslims globally plays a significant role in creating a feeling of anger and impotence among especially the younger generation of British Muslims.'

The letter continues: 'This seems to be a key driver behind recruitment by extremist organisations (e.g. recruitment drives by groups such as Hizb-ut-Tahrir and al Muhajiroon). The FCO has a relevant and crucial role to play in the wider context of engagement with British Muslims on policy issues, and more broadly, in convincing young Muslims that they have a legitimate and credible voice, including on foreign policy issues, through an active participation in the democratic process.'

Who: Dr. Martin Luther King
Source: Information Clearing House
Quotes: From "Beyond Vietnam" speech; New York's Riverside Church on April 4, 1967

A time comes when silence is betrayal.

Perhaps a new spirit is rising among us. If it is, let us trace its movement well and pray that our own inner being may be sensitive to its guidance, for we are deeply in need of a new way beyond the darkness that seems so close around us.

Here is the true meaning and value of compassion and nonviolence when it helps us to see the enemy's point of view, to hear his questions, to know his assessment of ourselves. For from his view we may indeed see the basic weaknesses of our own condition, and if we are mature, we may learn and grow and profit from the wisdom of the brothers who are called the opposition.


This is the message of the great Buddhist leaders of Vietnam. Recently one of them wrote these words:

"Each day the war goes on the hatred increases in the heart of the Vietnamese and in the hearts of those of humanitarian instinct. The Americans are forcing even their friends into becoming their enemies. It is curious that the Americans, who calculate so carefully on the possibilities of military victory, do not realize that in the process they are incurring deep psychological and political defeat. The image of America will never again be the image of revolution, freedom and democracy, but the image of violence and militarism."

The world now demands a maturity of America that we may not be able to achieve. It demands that we admit that we have been wrong from the beginning of our adventure in Vietnam, that we have been detrimental to the life of the Vietnamese people. The situation is one in which we must be ready to turn sharply from our present ways.

Meanwhile we in the churches and synagogues have a continuing task while we urge our government to disengage itself from a disgraceful commitment. We must continue to raise our voices if our nation persists in its perverse ways in Vietnam. We must be prepared to match actions with words by seeking out every creative means of protest possible.

A true revolution of values will soon cause us to question the fairness and justice of many of our past and present policies. n the one hand we are called to play the good Samaritan on life's roadside; but that will be only an initial act.

Who: Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati (Head Cleric of Guardian Council)
Source: Iran Focus
Quotes:

“Fortunately, after years of effort and expectations in Iraq, an Islamic state has come to power and the constitution has been established on the basis of Islamic precepts”.

“We must congratulate the Iraqi people and authorities for this victory.”

Who: American Legion
Source: Editor & Publisher
Quotes:

Speaking at its national convention in Honolulu, the group's national commander called for an end to all “public protests” and “media events” against the war.

"The American Legion will stand against anyone and any group that would demoralize our troops, or worse, endanger their lives by encouraging terrorists to continue their cowardly attacks against freedom-loving peoples," Thomas Cadmus, national commander, told delegates at the group's national convention in Honolulu.

The delegates voted to use whatever means necessary to "ensure the united backing of the American people to support our troops and the global war on terrorism."

"No one respects the right to protest more than one who has fought for it, but we hope that Americans will present their views in correspondence to their elected officials rather than by public media events guaranteed to be picked up and used as tools of encouragement by our enemies."

Who: General Richard Myers (Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff)
Source: Telegraph UK
Quotes:

An early withdrawal of troops from Iraq could send Middle Eastern regimes tumbling, destabilise the world economy and unleash a massive wave of terrorist attacks, America's top soldier warned yesterday.

"It would be instant instability in that region, in Saudi Arabia, on down the Gulf states, perhaps Iran, Syria, Turkey."

"Just economically, it would be instability of the sort that would affect the globe, and then they [the terrorists] would keep pressing on, they would continue their movement and it would involve, in my view it would involve terrorist incidents certainly that would expand.

"The most important thing we have... right now in this kind of conflict is our will and our resolve. I think it's incumbent on the national leadership, writ large, to help communicate this to the American public."

Who: Scott Ritter (U.N. Chief Weapons Inspector in Iraq from 1991-1998)
Source: Alternet
Quotes:

"So long as I am President, we will stay, we will fight and we will win the war on terrorism," President Bush recently declared. "I made a decision. America will not wait to be attacked again," he added. "We will confront emerging threats before they fully materialize."

If President Bush wants to add substance to his rhetoric, then he must first be willing to re-evaluate, in its totality, where the United States is going vis-à-vis Iraq and the entire Middle East.

Rather than continuing to reinforce failure by supporting a fatally flawed process, the Bush administration should allow the current government in power in Baghdad to collapse, walk away from the policy of direct meddling in the internal affairs of Iraq, and seek a more nuanced approach to achieving stability inside Iraq through a strategic shift in overall American policy in the Middle East as a whole.

... the Bush administration has done everything in its power to shape the course of domestic events in Iraq, with disastrous results. The incompetence of American meddling in Iraqi internal affairs all but guarantees that civil war will break out in Iraq.

The harsh reality is that if left to run its own course, a civil war in Iraq would result in a hard-line, radical Islamic mini-state in southern Iraq, with extremely close ties with Iran; a Kurdish state in the North engaged in its own internal civil war between rival factions; and Baghdad reduced to a modern-day Beirut, divided into fortified Shi'a and Sunni communities at war with one another. It would all be "governed" by a weak central authority lacking the means to effect any meaningful change.

The United States needs to disengage from trying to resolve the problems of post-Saddam Iraq through internal interference, and instead fall back to a posture that uses external forces to shape events in a manner that mitigates against anything that facilitates the expansion of an Al Qaeda recruitment base in Iraq.

American relations with Turkey should be revamped, centering our diplomacy within Europe on Turkish membership in the European Union while giving the Turks a green light to retard Kurdish independence movements both in Turkey and Iraq. America should foster increased ties between the Turkish government and secular Sunni elements inside Iraq in order to prevent the Kirkuk oil fields from being absorbed by any independence-minded Kurdish faction in Iraq. It is important that a semblance of Kurdish autonomy be preserved in Iraq, and expanded in Turkey, but the notion of a unified, independent Kurdistan must be quashed once and for all.

Jordan and Saudi Arabia should become the conduit of support, both financial and political, for a strong Sunni center in Iraq. American assistance -- material, fiscal and diplomatic -- should be filtered through these two governments, instead of being provided directly ...

All of these initiatives must be implemented in conjunction with a rapid, yet phased withdrawal of American military forces from Iraq.

The United States needs to stop confronting Iran about a non-existent nuclear weapons program, and accept as a reality the full-scope of the desired Iranian nuclear energy program, provided it is carried out in accordance with international law and carefully monitored by international inspectors.

President Bush could take the lead by being the first to acknowledge that events have not gone the way he had envisioned, and that a new approach is required in order to safeguard the security of the United States. The Democrats have failed to articulate any strategy regarding Iraq, other than to point a critical finger at Bush and the Republicans.

If the President had the courage to maneuver America into a new, winnable posture vis-à-vis Iraq and the Middle East, there would be nothing the Democrats could do except sit back and watch the President reap the political rewards for not merely doing what was politically expedient, but rather doing what was best for America. In this way, the President could give America a "total victory" in Iraq worthy of the name, and worthy of the sacrifices of so many brave Americans.

... the Sunni population of Iraq, disenfranchised and impoverished, would be compelled to embrace radical Islam, providing a perfect recruiting and training ground for the forces of Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda.

This is the future of Iraq should the Bush administration continue to "stay the course," as the President recently promised to do.

Who: Army Maj. Gen. Joseph Taluto (Commander for Task Force Liberty)
Source: Associate Press (via USA Today)
Quotes:

Taluto described the insurgency in north-central Iraq, where his troops are operating along with five brigades of U.S.-trained Iraqi soldiers, as resilient but not increasing the volume of its attacks in recent weeks.

"We expect that the enemies will increase their attacks, particularly as we run up to the referendum," he said. "The divergent groups all have their own strategies and they select a time for these attacks. But they go up and then we'll have a week or two where the attacks will go down, and they seem to rearm themselves and then re- attack."

Asked why the U.S. military has been unable thus far to defeat the insurgents, Taluto said progress is being made and it is not widely recognized that U.S. troops stop many attacks before they can be executed. On the other hand, he said, it also is true that the insurgents have become part of the fabric of Iraqi life.

"They are intrinsic, and so it seems like they can act with impunity," Taluto said. "And then they do escalate their activities, so they surge and so on and so forth."

Who: The Guardian UK
Source: The Guardian UK
Quotes: From article titled, "Under US noses, brutal insurgents rule Sunni citadel"

A three-day visit by a reporter working for the Guardian last week established what neither the Iraqi government nor the US military has admitted: Haditha, a farming town of 90,000 people by the Euphrates river, is an insurgent citadel. ... They are the sole authority, running the town's security, administration and communications.

A three-hour drive north from Baghdad, under the nose of an American base, it is a miniature Taliban-like state. Insurgents decide who lives and dies, which salaries get paid, what people wear, what they watch and listen to.

There is no fighting here because there is no one to challenge the Islamists. The police station and municipal offices were destroyed last year and US marines make only fleeting visits every few months.

Two groups share power. Ansar al-Sunna is a largely homegrown organisation, though its leader in Haditha is said to be foreign. Al-Qaida in Iraq, known locally by its old name Tawhid al-Jihad, is led by the Jordanian-born Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

A year ago Haditha was just another sleepy town in western Anbar province, deep in the Sunni triangle and suspicious of the Shia-led government in Baghdad but no insurgent hotbed.

Then, say residents, arrived mostly Shia police with heavyhanded behaviour. "That's how it began," said one man. Attacks against the police escalated until they fled, creating a vacuum filled by insurgents.

From attacks on US and Iraqi forces it is clear that other Anbar towns, such as Qaim, Rawa, Anna and Ramadi, are to varying degrees under the sway of rebels.

In Haditha hospital staff and teachers are allowed to collect government salaries in Ramadi, the capital of Anbar, but other civil servants have had to quit.

Twice in recent months marines backed by aircraft and armour swept into Haditha to flush out the rebels. In a pattern repeated across Anbar there were skirmishes, a few suspects killed or detained, and success was declared.

In reality, said residents, the insurgents withdrew for a few days and returned when the Americans left. They have learned from last November's battle in Falluja, when hundreds died fighting the marines and still lost the city.

Who: General Peter Schoomaker (Army's Chief of Staff) & Sen Chuck Hagel (R-NE)
Source: Independent UK
Quotes:

A senior army commander has said the US might have to keep more than 100,000 troops in Iraq for the next four years, a scenario that apparently contradicts recent White House noises about a gradual pull-out.

General Peter Schoomaker, the Army's Chief of Staff, said such a protracted troop deployment was a "worst-case scenario" but that he and other planners were already considering their options up to 2009.

"I don't know where he's going to get these troops," Senator Hagel said. "There won't be any National Guard left ... no Army Reserve left ... there is no way America is going to have 100,000 troops in Iraq, nor should it, in four years. It would bog us down, it would further destabilise the Middle East, it would give Iran more influence, it would hurt Israel, it would put our allies over there in Saudi Arabia and Jordan in a terrible position. It won't be four years. We need to be out."

Who: Frank Rich
Source: NY Times
Quotes: Excerpt from article titled, "The Swift Boating of Cindy Sheehan"

When the Bush mob attacks critics like Ms. Sheehan, its highest priority is to change the subject. If we talk about Richard Clarke's character, then we stop talking about the administration's pre-9/11 inattentiveness to terrorism. If Thomas Wilson is trashed as an insubordinate plant of the "liberal media," we forget the Pentagon's abysmal failure to give our troops adequate armor (a failure that persists today, eight months after he spoke up). If we focus on Joseph Wilson's wife, we lose the big picture of how the administration twisted intelligence to gin up the threat of Saddam's nonexistent W.M.D.'s.

The hope this time was that we'd change the subject to Cindy Sheehan's "wacko" rhetoric and the opportunistic left-wing groups that have attached themselves to her like barnacles. That way we would forget about her dead son. But if much of the 24/7 media has taken the bait, much of the public has not.

Who: Celeste Zappala (mother of Sgt. Sherwood Baker - killed in Iraq, April 26, 2004)
Source: NY Daily News
Quote: Letter titled, "I Need to Know Why

A week after my son, Sgt. Sherwood Baker, arrived in Baghdad last year, President Bush held court for journalists at the 60th annual Radio and Television Correspondents' Association dinner in Washington. Part of the show that night was to pretend to look for WMD under the lectern. There were staged pictures of Mr. Bush looking for them under the rug in the Oval Office. Everyone present got a great laugh.

With a crucial election looming last year, the President thought it politically prudent to simultaneously indulge in self-deprecating humor about not finding WMD while he kept American soldiers in the dangerous search for those weapons.

I talked to Sherwood shortly after the President's circus show. He wasn't finding anything funny about his mission in Iraq. Sherwood was knee deep in the real search for WMD. He was providing security for the Iraq Survey Group, which was still looking for those weapons well beyond the admission by David Kay that they didn't exist.

The days were long and hot. They began to ration his food and water. On April 26, 2004, a month after Mr. Bush's standup routine, Sherwood's unit was in Baghdad inspecting buildings. That building exploded. Sherwood was killed.

Sher's death brings me on an unlikely journey to Crawford, Tex. I join Cindy Sheehan, who has established a camp here.

My family is gathering with me as we hold our own vigil. We believe that we finally deserve a meeting with the President, one that has been denied us for the last 16 months.

We bring with us here the desire to share our humble story. We want the President to hear us talk about Sherwood. Perhaps he can answer some questions for us. We want to know why Sher, a case worker for the mentally handicapped, had to say goodbye to his wife and 10-year-old son to participate in the negligent endeavor that is the Iraq War.

We'd like to know what he finds noble about instigating and maintaining a war with a country that posed no threat to our country.

We'd like to know if he still finds humor in the fabrications that justified the war that killed my son.

I have a good feeling that we're going to finally have our face-to-face. We're a Christian family, and we believe in miracles. We share that faith with the President. Therefore, I need to believe that he has the humility to hear our story. I need to believe he has the courage to embrace our grief. I want to believe he has the capacity to talk to us like human beings without injecting his party-line rhetoric.

I want to believe all of these things. For I am witness to a truth shared by too many families in this country. As a Gold Star mother and as a citizen of this country, I believe our vacationing President has the time to hear that truth.

Who: Linda Bilmes (Professor, Budgeting and Finance, Kennedy School of Government at Harvard)
Source: NY Times Op-Ed
Quotes:

THE human cost of the more than 2,000 American military personnel killed and 14,500 wounded so far in Iraq and Afghanistan is all too apparent. But the financial toll is still largely hidden from public view and, like the suffering of those who have lost loved ones, will persist long after the fighting is over.

The cost goes well beyond the more than $250 billion already spent on military operations and reconstruction. Basic running costs of the current conflicts are $6 billion a month - a figure that reflects the Pentagon's unprecedented reliance on expensive private contractors. Other factors keeping costs high include inducements for recruits and for military personnel serving second and third deployments, extra pay for reservists and members of the National Guard, as well as more than $2 billion a year in additional foreign aid to Jordan, Pakistan, Turkey and others to reward their cooperation in Iraq and Afghanistan. The bill for repairing and replacing military hardware is $20 billion a year, according to figures from the Congressional Budget Office.

But the biggest long-term costs are disability and health payments for returning troops, which will be incurred even if hostilities were to stop tomorrow. The United States currently pays more than $2 billion in disability claims per year for 159,000 veterans of the 1991 gulf war, even though that conflict lasted only five weeks, with 148 dead and 467 wounded. Even assuming that the 525,000 American troops who have so far served in Iraq and Afghanistan will require treatment only on the same scale as their predecessors from the gulf war, these payments are likely to run at $7 billion a year for the next 45 years.

All of this spending will need to be financed by adding to the federal debt. Extra interest payments will total $200 billion or more even if the borrowing is repaid quickly. Conflict in the Middle East has also played a part in doubling the price of oil from $30 a barrel just prior to the invasion of Iraq in March 2003 to $60 a barrel today. Each $5 increase in the price of oil reduces our national income by about $17 billion a year.

Even by this simple yardstick, if the American military presence in the region lasts another five years, the total outlay for the war could stretch to more than $1.3 trillion, or $11,300 for every household in the United States.

Who: Vice President Dick Cheney
Source: The White House
Quotes: We will not relent in this effort, because we have the clearest possible understanding of what is at stake. None of us wants to turn over the future of mankind to tiny groups of fanatics committing indiscriminate murder, enslaving whole populations, oppressing women, imposing an ideology of hatred on an entire region, and arming to create death and destruction on an unbelievable scale. And so we must direct every resource that is necessary to defending the peace and freedom of our world, and the safety of the people we serve. That is the commitment the United States -- that we've made to ourselves and to other nations. And with good allies at our side, we will see this cause through to victory.

Who: MoveOn.org
Source: MoveOn.org
Quotes: On Wednesday, August 17, hundreds of thousands of supporters gathered at 1,627 vigils in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The vigils were the largest event we've organized. From Alaska to Florida, Maine to Mississippi, Oregon to South Carolina and New York to Texas — we gathered together to acknowledge the sacrifices made by Cindy Sheehan, her son, Casey and the more than 1,800 brave American men and women who have given their lives in Iraq—and their moms and families. Thank you so much for participating and making these vigils a success.

Who: Senator Russell Feingold (D-WIS)
Source: Washington Post
Quotes: Sen. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.) called on the White House yesterday to withdraw all U.S. forces from Iraq by the end of next year and criticized fellow Democrats for being too "timid" in challenging the Bush administration's war policy.

"There's a deepening feeling of dismay in the country about the way things are going in Iraq," Feingold said. He rejected Bush's assertion that a deadline would make it easier for insurgents to simply hang on. "I think he's wrong. I think not talking about endgames is playing into our enemies' hand."

Who: U.S. State Department
Source: Washington Post
Quotes: From article titled, "Prewar Memo Warned of Gaps in Iraq Plans"

One month before the U.S. invasion of Iraq, three State Department bureau chiefs warned of "serious planning gaps for post-conflict public security and humanitarian assistance" in a secret memorandum prepared for a superior.

The State Department officials, who had been discussing the issues with top military officers at the Central Command, noted that the military was reluctant "to take on 'policing' roles" in Iraq after the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. The three officials warned that "a failure to address short-term public security and humanitarian assistance concerns could result in serious human rights abuses which would undermine an otherwise successful military campaign, and our reputation internationally."

The Feb. 7, 2003, memo, addressed to Paula J. Dobriansky, undersecretary for democracy and global affairs, came at a time when the Pentagon was increasingly taking over control of post-invasion planning from the State Department. It reflected the growing tensions between State Department and Pentagon officials and their disparate assessments about the challenges looming in post-invasion Iraq.

The memo was one of several documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act and made public yesterday by the National Security Archive, a nonprofit research group.

Who: U.S. Department of State (with comment by ex-CIA Agent Michael Scheuer)
Source: NY Times
Quotes: From article titled, "State Dept. Says It Warned About bin Laden in 1996"

State Department analysts warned the Clinton administration in July 1996 that Osama bin Laden's move to Afghanistan would give him an even more dangerous haven as he sought to expand radical Islam "well beyond the Middle East," but the government chose not to deter the move, newly declassified documents show.

Critics of the Clinton administration have accused it of ignoring the threat posed by Mr. bin Laden in the mid-1990's while he was still in Sudan, and they point to claims by some Sudanese officials that they offered to turn him over to the Americans before ultimately expelling him in 1996 under international pressure. But Clinton administration diplomats have adamantly denied that they received such an offer, and the Sept. 11 commission concluded in one of its staff reports that it had "not found any reliable evidence to support the Sudanese claim."

The State Department assessment, written July 18, 1996, after Mr. bin Laden had been expelled from Sudan and was thought to be relocating to Afghanistan, said Afghanistan would make an "ideal haven" for Mr. bin Laden to run his financial networks and attract support from radicalized Muslims. Moreover, his wealth, his personal plane and many passports "allow him considerable freedom to travel with little fear of being intercepted or tracked," and his public statements suggested an "emboldened" man capable of "increased terrorism," the assessment said. While a strategy of keeping Mr. bin Laden on the run could "inconvenience" him, the assessment said, "even a bin Laden on the move can retain the capability to support individuals and groups who have the motive and wherewithal to attack U.S. interests almost world-wide."

Michael F. Scheuer, who from 1996 to 1999 led the Central Intelligence Agency unit that tracked Mr. bin Laden, said the State Department documents reflected a keen awareness of the danger posed by Mr. bin Laden's relocation.

"The analytical side of the State Department had it exactly right - that's genius analysis," he said in an interview when told of the declassified documents. But Mr. Scheuer, who wrote a book in 2004 titled "Imperial Hubris," under the pseudonym "Anonymous," that was highly critical of American counterterrorism strategies, said many officials in the C.I.A.'s operational side thought they would have a better chance to kill Mr. bin Laden in Afghanistan than they did in Sudan because the Sudan government protected him.

"The thinking was that he was in Afghanistan, and he was dangerous, but because he was there, we had a better chance to kill him," Mr. Scheuer said. "But at the end of the day, we settled for the worst possibility - he was there and we didn't do anything."

Who: Fred Kagan (Resident Scholar @ American Enterprise Institute)
Source: Washington Post
Quotes: From transcript of Live Discussion titled, "Troop Withdrawal and the War In Iraq"

(Note: Bolding is mine)

KAGAN: The key point here is that people are not being killed simply because of our presence in Iraq. The various opposition groups actively oppose the idea of creating a democracy in Iraq, some, like Zarqawi, because of their anti-democratic ideology, others because they are confident that they will not benefit from a democratic Iraq. Many of the former Ba'athists and Sunni revolutionaries fall into this category. These groups will not stop attacking the nascent Iraqi democratic regime just because America withdraws. On the contrary, there is every reason to expect their attacks to increase in intensity if we leave prematurely. One of the keys to political success in Iraq is to convince all of the discontented parties that there is no solution for them in violence. The U.S. presence is helping with that process and will continue to help. It would be dreadful to withdraw prematurely and thereby stoke the hopes of those unhappy with the new order that they might be able to destroy it rather than persuading them that they must work within it to achieve their goals.

KAGAN: ... I am confident that it makes a great deal of difference whether we withdraw now or in several years' time. The outcome of the democratic experiment in Iraq is still very much in doubt. There is no way to know what the Iraqi government will ultimately look like until there is a stable democratic process up and running. The insurgents are trying their best to prevent that from ever happening, and our presence or rapid withdrawal will play a critical role in determining whether or not they will succeed. The development of a theocracy in Iraq is, of course possible, but by no means a foregone conclusion.

... It does seem that there is confusion within the administration about priorities, with some preferring for a variety of reasons to push for withdrawal as rapidly as possible, and others, including the President, arguing for the importance of staying until the mission is really accomplished. It would definitely help the President retain and improve public support for the war if he could establish a single agreed-upon policy for Iraq accepted throughout the administration.

WASHINGTON DC: What sort of message should the Bush administration be sending to the American people? ... Is it too late for the administration to send out a credible message on Iraq, given their early insistence that it would be a short war of liberation and their unwillingness to admit to having been mistaken?

KAGAN: I think that the truth would serve here very well. The Iraqis have taken great strides both in establishing a new government in a short period of time--something that is amazingly difficult to do well--and in crafting a military from scratch in the midst of an insurgency. U.S. soldiers and civilians are helping in both tasks every day and are essential to success. The road from this point forward will not be short, but with a real commitment to pay the necessary price, there is every reason to believe that victory will be ours. The lack of candor in the administration's response to its mistakes in the past has certainly been harmful, in my opinion, but I don't think that a mea culpa by the president would help now. I think we need to see a more positive and less defensive message from the White House.

KAGAN: We went into Iraq with too few troops and an insufficiently developed plan for the post-war situation. We focused too heavily on destroying Saddam's regime and not enough on what would come after that. We were then too slow to increase the number of U.S. troops in Iraq as it became clear that international assistance would not be as forthcoming as some had hoped and as the insurgency took root. These were all disappointing decisions. I am hopeful that we are finally beginning to recover from them somewhat, as the military situation improves (despite the suicide bombings) and as more Iraqi troops come on line. If we can stay the course over the next two years, I think we stand a good chance of seeing excellent progress.

KAGAN: I think we are really beyond the point, unfortunately, where we can increase the troop presence in Iraq for any period of time. ... But if we would only sustain the current troop level now, the situation will gradually improve as more and more trained Iraqi troops become able to walk the streets and perform key missions. I would propose, therefore, holding the U.S. military presence pretty constant until at least the summer of 2007, when we can re-evaluate. Should the situation suddenly deteriorate, of course, we would need to be able to reinforce our presence there; should it miraculously improve sooner than that, we could certainly think about withdrawing more quickly, but only if we are confident that we are leaving behind an Iraqi military and police force able to handle the challenges it will continue to face.

KAGAN: Fred Kagan: ... Numerous reports from U.S. soldiers working with the Iraqis now make it clear that the Iraqis are indeed fighting bravely and with determination to secure their country.

Who: 17 Families of Slain British Soldiers in Iraq
Source: Independent UK
Quotes: From article titled, " Families of British soldiers begin court bid to force war inquiry"

Families of British soldiers killed in Iraq are to go to the High Court today to demand an independent inquiry into the war.

Legal documents to be lodged at the court in London set out the case for a full independent inquiry into the legality of the war and the circumstances that led to the deaths of the soldiers. Lawyers for the families argue that under the Human Rights Act the Government has a duty to establish such an inquiry.

But ministers have refused the families' request, arguing that the war was legal. The families now intend to rely on the advice given by the Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith, to ministers in the run-up to the conflict. The Attorney General's advice was leaked to the media during this year's general election campaign.

The families want the inquiry to cross-examine the Prime Minister, the Attorney General, the Defence Secretary at the time, Geoff Hoon, and the Foreign Secretary, Jack Straw. They want the inquiry to establish why Lord Boyce, the former chief of defence staff, was given an unequivocal assurance that the war was legal.

The case is being supported by the Stop the War Coalition and Military Families Against the War.

Who: Robert Fisk (Middle East Correspondent)
Source: Independent UK (via Truthout.org)
Quotes:

July was the bloodiest month in Baghdad's modern history - in all, 1,100 bodies were brought to the city's mortuary; executed for the most part, eviscerated, stabbed, bludgeoned, tortured to death. The figure is secret.

Thus there has been no disclosure of the fact that in July 2003 - three months after the invasion - 700 corpses were brought to the mortuary in Baghdad. In July of 2004, this rose to around 800. The mortuary records the violent death toll for June of this year as 879 - 764 of them male, 115 female. Of the men, 480 had been killed by firearms, along with 25 of the women. By comparison, equivalent figures for July 1997, 1998 and 1999 were all below 200.

Between 10 and 20 per cent of all bodies are never identified - the medical authorities have had to bury 500 of them since January of this year, unidentified and unclaimed.

While Saddam's regime visited death by official execution upon its opponents, the scale of anarchy now existing in Baghdad, Mosul, Basra and other cities is unprecedented. "The July figures are the largest ever recorded in the history of the Baghdad Medical Institute," a senior member of the management told The Independent.

It is clear that death squads are roaming the streets of a city which is supposed to be under the control of the US military and the American-supported, elected government of Ibrahim al-Jaafari. Never in recent history has such anarchy been let loose on the civilians of this city - yet the Western and Iraqi authorities show no interest in disclosing the details. The writing of the new constitution - or the failure to complete it - now occupies the time of Western diplomats and journalists. The dead, it seems, do not count.

Who: Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN) - Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee
Source: CNN Late Edition
Quotes: From transcript of interview with Wolf Blitzer in which Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL) also took part;

BLITZER: What do you think, Senator Lugar? Does the United States have adequate military forces in Iraq?

LUGAR: We do not have adequate forces to provide the kind of security after our forces work with Iraqis to get rid of insurgents in particular cities and provinces. When the withdrawal occurs, sometimes the insurgents return, and this comes from the fact that we cannot leave forces behind. They are at a premium to find other places.

What I think has been apparent for a long time has been a running argument, as Senator Nelson points out, from the very beginning with regard to occupation and preparedness, in which those at least in charge felt that we wanted to get by with a minimum of force. And we have attempted to do that.

Now, having said that, at this stage I agree with Bill Nelson that it's very unlikely that we are going to send more troops to Iraq. We are going to have to train the Iraqis faster and harder. And the metrics of how well we're doing really are of the essence in giving this new government some opportunity to operate and give real civil government to Iraqis that deserve it.

Who: Senator John McCain (R-AZ)
Source: Fox News Sunday
Quotes: From transcript of interview with Chris Wallace;

WALLACE: First, military commanders, in fact, it was General Casey (search), the top military commander on the ground in Iraq, started talking about the real possibility of withdrawals by next spring. Then an unnamed military official, who apparently was General Casey, said: No, no, but we can get them out starting next summer.

Then the president at a news conference at the ranch in Texas this week said: You know what? I don't want to talk about drawdowns or deadlines at all. We've got to finish the job.

And then today there is a story in The Washington Post that talks about lowered expectations, that we can get out even if we don't have a lot of things accomplished.

Question: What's going on here?

MCCAIN: I don't know, because the president, I think, very appropriately made it very clear in the strongest terms that we are there until Iraqis are capable of carrying out their own security responsibilities. He could not have been more forceful or more clear, in my view.

And I totally agree with him, and I think his statement was unequivocal. And now you're seeing these statements, both before and after, which are in contradiction to what he had to say.

Look, I've got an idea for our pentagon planners: The day that I can land at the airport in Baghdad and ride in an unarmed car down the highway to the green zone is the day that I'll start considering withdrawals from Iraq. We not only don't need to withdraw, we need more troops there. And if we aren't able to get more troops there, which I've been advocating for years, as you know, then the Iraqi military, as they're trained up, should be a supplement to the American forces that are already there, not a replacement for.

WALLACE: But what I don't understand, you seem to be suggesting -- and I don't want to put words in your mouth. You seem to be suggesting that it's coming from the pentagon, and that they are pushing for withdrawals, when the political people at the White House, who you think would be the most sensitive on that issue, are saying: No, the president -- we're going to stand firm.

Why would the Pentagon be softer in this regard than the White House?

MCCAIN: I have no idea, unless there's also some political considerations of the '06 election amongst some. But it's very clear that the president of the United States is not worried about that.

The president of the United States has said it absolutely, unequivocally. And it should be disturbing to hear these leaks both before and after very strong statements on his part.

Who: Frank Rich
Source: NY Times
Quotes: From column titled, "Someone Tell the President the War Is Over"

A president can't stay the course when his own citizens (let alone his own allies) won't stay with him. The approval rate for Mr. Bush's handling of Iraq plunged to 34 percent in last weekend's Newsweek poll - a match for the 32 percent that approved L.B.J.'s handling of Vietnam in early March 1968. (The two presidents' overall approval ratings have also converged: 41 percent for Johnson then, 42 percent for Bush now.)

But our current Texas president has even outdone his predecessor; Mr. Bush has lost not only the country but also his army. Neither bonuses nor fudged standards nor the faking of high school diplomas has solved the recruitment shortfall. Now Jake Tapper of ABC News reports that the armed forces are so eager for bodies they will flout "don't ask, don't tell" and hang on to gay soldiers who tell, even if they tell the press.

The president's cable cadre is in disarray as well. At Fox News Bill O'Reilly is trashing Donald Rumsfeld for his incompetence, and Ann Coulter is chiding Mr. O'Reilly for being a defeatist. In an emblematic gesture akin to waving a white flag, Robert Novak walked off a CNN set and possibly out of a job rather than answer questions about his role in smearing the man who helped expose the administration's prewar inflation of Saddam W.M.D.'s.

The resolutely pro-war New York Post editorial page begged Mr. Bush (to no avail) to "show some leadership" by showing up in Ohio to salute the fallen and their families. A Bush loyalist, Senator George Allen of Virginia, instructed the president to meet with Cindy Sheehan, the mother camping out in Crawford, as "a matter of courtesy and decency." Or, to translate his Washingtonese, as a matter of politics. Only someone as adrift from reality as Mr. Bush would need to be told that a vacationing president can't win a standoff with a grief-stricken parent commandeering TV cameras and the blogosphere 24/7.

Such political imperatives are rapidly bringing about the war's end. That's inevitable for a war of choice, not necessity, that was conceived in politics from the start.

The endgame for American involvement in Iraq will be of a piece with the rest of this sorry history. "It makes no sense for the commander in chief to put out a timetable" for withdrawal, Mr. Bush declared on the same day that 14 of those Ohio troops were killed by a roadside bomb in Haditha. But even as he spoke, the war's actual commander, Gen. George Casey, had already publicly set a timetable for "some fairly substantial reductions" to start next spring. Officially this calendar is tied to the next round of Iraqi elections, but it's quite another election this administration has in mind. The priority now is less to save Jessica Lynch (or Iraqi democracy) than to save Rick Santorum and every other endangered Republican facing voters in November 2006.

Nothing that happens on the ground in Iraq can turn around the fate of this war in America: not a shotgun constitution rushed to meet an arbitrary deadline, not another Iraqi election, not higher terrorist body counts, not another battle for Falluja (where insurgents may again regroup, The Los Angeles Times reported last week). A citizenry that was asked to accept tax cuts, not sacrifice, at the war's inception is hardly in the mood to start sacrificing now. There will be neither the volunteers nor the money required to field the wholesale additional American troops that might bolster the security situation in Iraq.

WHAT lies ahead now in Iraq instead is not victory, which Mr. Bush has never clearly defined anyway, but an exit (or triage) strategy that may echo Johnson's March 1968 plan for retreat from Vietnam: some kind of negotiations (in this case, with Sunni elements of the insurgency), followed by more inflated claims about the readiness of the local troops-in-training, whom we'll then throw to the wolves. Such an outcome may lead to even greater disaster, but this administration long ago squandered the credibility needed to make the difficult case that more human and financial resources might prevent Iraq from continuing its descent into civil war and its devolution into jihad central.

Thus the president's claim on Thursday that "no decision has been made yet" about withdrawing troops from Iraq can be taken exactly as seriously as the vice president's preceding fantasy that the insurgency is in its "last throes." The country has already made the decision for Mr. Bush. We're outta there. Now comes the hard task of identifying the leaders who can pick up the pieces of the fiasco that has made us more vulnerable, not less, to the terrorists who struck us four years ago next month.

Who: Maj. Gen. Jeffrey A. Sorenson (Army's Deputy for Acquisition and Systems Management) & Maj. Gen. William D. Catto (Head of the Marine Corps Systems Command)
Source: NY Times
Quotes: From article titled "U.S. Struggling to Get Soldiers Updated Armor"

For the second time since the Iraq war began, the Pentagon is struggling to replace body armor that is failing to protect American troops from the most lethal attacks by insurgents.

The ceramic plates in vests worn by most personnel cannot withstand certain munitions the insurgents use. But more than a year after military officials initiated an effort to replace the armor with thicker, more resistant plates, tens of thousands of soldiers are still without the stronger protection because of a string of delays in the Pentagon's procurement system.

"We are working as fast as we can to complete it as soon as we can," Maj. Gen. Jeffrey A. Sorenson, the Army's deputy for acquisition and systems management, said Wednesday in an interview at the Pentagon.

"Nobody is happy we haven't been able to do it faster," Maj. Gen. William D. Catto, head of the Marine Corps Systems Command, said Wednesday in the interview.

"If I had the capability, I'd like to see everybody that needs enhanced SAPI to have it and at the rate we have now, we're going to have months before we get the kind of aggregate numbers we want to have," General Catto said, referring to the thicker plates, known as the Enhanced Small Arms Protective Insert. "That's just a fact of life because of the raw materials paucity and the industrial base."

Pentagon officials said the pending addition of two more vendors to the four that are now producing enhanced SAPI would increase production to 25,000 sets of the plates a month from 20,000. Each vest requires two plates. Worldwide, the Army would need nearly 2 million plates to supply all 996,000 troops using body armor with the enhanced plates.

Industry officials say they are charging the military roughly $600 each for enhanced SAPI plates, compared with $400 for the original plate.

Who: Various Present and Former U.S. Officials, and CIA Personnel
Source: Washington Post
Quotes: From article titled, "U.S. Lowers Sights On What Can Be Achieved in Iraq"

"What we expected to achieve was never realistic given the timetable or what unfolded on the ground," said a senior official involved in policy since the 2003 invasion. "We are in a process of absorbing the factors of the situation we're in and shedding the unreality that dominated at the beginning."

Administration officials still emphasize how much they have achieved despite the chaos that followed the invasion and the escalating insurgency. "Iraqis are taking control of their country, building a free nation that can govern itself, sustain itself and defend itself. And we're helping Iraqis succeed," President Bush said yesterday in his radio address.

U.S. officials say no turning point forced a reassessment. "It happened rather gradually," said the senior official, triggered by everything from the insurgency to shifting budgets to U.S. personnel changes in Baghdad.

"We set out to establish a democracy, but we're slowly realizing we will have some form of Islamic republic," said another U.S. official familiar with policymaking from the beginning, who like some others interviewed would speak candidly only on the condition of anonymity. "That process is being repeated all over."

"We didn't calculate the depths of feeling in both the Kurdish and Shiite communities for a winner-take-all attitude," said Judith S. Yaphe, a former CIA Iraq analyst at the National Defense University.

"We are definitely cutting corners and lowering our ambitions in democracy building," said Larry Diamond, a Stanford University democracy expert who worked with the U.S. occupation government and wrote the book "Squandered Victory: The American Occupation and the Bungled Effort to Bring Democracy to Iraq."

"Under pressure to get a constitution done, they've lowered their own ambitions in terms of getting a document that is going to be very far-reaching and democratic. We also don't have the time to go through the process we envisioned when we wrote the interim constitution -- to build a democratic culture and consensus through debate over a permanent constitution," he said.

"There has been a realistic reassessment of what it is possible to achieve in the short term and fashion a partial exit strategy," Yaphe said. "This change is dictated not just by events on the ground but by unrealistic expectations at the start."

"We've said we won't leave a day before it's necessary. But necessary is the key word -- necessary for them or for us? When we finally depart, it will probably be for us," a U.S. official said.

Water is also a "tough, tough" situation in a desert country, said a U.S. official in Baghdad familiar with reconstruction issues. Pumping stations depend on electricity, and engineers now say the system has hundreds of thousands of leaks.

"The most thoroughly dashed expectation was the ability to build a robust self-sustaining economy. We're nowhere near that. State industries, electricity are all below what they were before we got there," said Wayne White, former head of the State Department's Iraq intelligence team who is now at the Middle East Institute. "The administration says Saddam ran down the country. But most damage was from looting [after the invasion], which took down state industries, large private manufacturing, the national electric" system.

Who: Air Force Gen. Richard B. Myers, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Source: Associated Press (via Findlaw)
Quotes: From article titled, "Government: release of Abu Ghraib prison photos could cause riots"

Myers said the release of the pictures "pose a clear and grave risk of inciting violence and riots against American troops and coalition forces."

He said it was "probable that al-Qaida and other groups will seize upon these images and videos as grist for their propaganda mill," leading to violent attacks, increased terrorist recruitment, continued financial support and a worsening of tensions between the Iraqi and Afghani populaces and U.S. and coalition forces.

The arguments were submitted July 21 in a case in which the American Civil Liberties Union seeks the release of 87 photographs and four videotapes taken at the prison.

In a response to the arguments by Myers, the ACLU submitted a declaration by retired U.S. Army Col. Michael E. Pheneger, who said Myers "mistakes propaganda for motivation."

He said he does "not underestimate the propaganda impact of the release of additional photos of the degradation of Iraqi prisoners in U.S. custody, but the photos will not be the real cause of subsequent attacks."

"The first step to abandoning practices that are repugnant to our laws and national ideals is to bring them into the sunshine and assign accountability," he wrote.

U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein, who will decide whether to release redacted versions of the pictures and videotapes, has said he believed photographs "are the best evidence the public can have of what occurred" at the prison.

Who: President George W. Bush
Source: White House
Quotes: Interview of the President by Israeli Television Channel 1

Q I won't be finishing this interview without asking you about your decision in Iraq. Knowing what you know today, you made the right decision, Mr. President?

THE PRESIDENT: Yes. I did. The world is safer without Saddam Hussein in power.

Q Is it?

THE PRESIDENT: Yes. Absolutely. Saddam Hussein -- you know, we made the decision on a lot of factors. One factor, of course, is that the world thought he had weapons of mass destruction -- not just the United States, but the entire world. I went to the United Nations. The United Nations unanimously passed a resolution that said to Saddam Hussein: disarm or face serious consequences. Once again, he defied the world.

But we also made the case that Saddam Hussein had terrorist ties. Abu Nidal was in Iraq. Zarqawi, the man who's inflicting so much murder and chaos on innocent Iraqis, was in Iraq. Saddam Hussein was an enemy of the United States -- enemy of a lot of countries. And there's no doubt in my mind that we're safer as a result of him not being in power. And there's no doubt in my mind that a democratic Iraq will be a part of a change in the broader Middle East that will lay the foundations for peace.

You know, a lot of the world says, well, unless you are a certain type of person you can't live in a free society. I strongly disagree with that. I believe that imbedded into everybody's soul is the desire to live in freedom. That's what I believe, that there is an Almighty and the Almighty plants a sense of being free. Therefore, if given a chance, people will live in a free society -- and free societies are peaceful societies.

Who: Unnamed U.S. Military Official
Source: Washington Post
Quotes:

Both Americans and Iraqis need "to start thinking about and talking about what it's really going to be like in Iraq after elections," said the military official, who spoke in an interview on the condition he not be named. "I think the important point is there's not going to be a fundamental change."

The official stressed that it was "important to calibrate expectations post-elections. I've been saying to folks: You're still going to have an insurgency, you're still going to have a dilapidated infrastructure, you're still going to have decades of developmental problems both on the economic and the political side."

On Wednesday, the military official said a significant spring withdrawal was "still possible." But while primary military responsibility for some parts of Iraq could likely be handed over even before the elections, the official said, U.S. forces would have to play a lead role in fighting the insurgency for at least a year. Even if a new government is elected on time in December, "the earliest they're going to be capable of running a counterinsurgency campaign is . . . next summer," the official said.

Who: Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice
Source: Time #1 and Time #2
Quotes:

When she met with TIME, Rice argued against focusing solely on the rising death toll in Iraq. “It’s a lot easier to see the violence and suicide bombing than to see the rather quiet political progress that’s going on in parallel,” she says. Rice told TIME she believes the insurgents are “losing steam” as a political force, even though their ability to kill and maim at will appears undiminished. When Rice points to “rather quiet political progress” while the country remains embroiled in chaos, even some of her backers cringe. Says a Republican elder statesman: “I don’t have any sense of where she thinks she’s going on Iraq.”

“I do think the insurgency has a problem, which is that as the political process matures and the Iraqis every day accept the political process as their future, the insurgents become more and more isolated from the population and they become nothing but a destructive force,”

A former government official says that when he spoke to Rice after a recent visit to Iraq, she was unresponsive to his concerns about the lack of clarity in U.S. policy. “She just looks at you, and you don’t know if she’s really listening or if she’s getting ready to give her next speech.” “The biggest problem I have with Condi and the Middle East,” says the Republican elder statesman, “is that she really has drunk the ‘democratic transformation Kool-Aid.’”

“And so when I see Iraqis struggling with really hard issues or Afghans struggling with really hard issues, I’m probably less willing to say, ‘Oh, they can’t do it.’ I look at our history, and I say what seemed impossible on one day now seems inevitable. Well, that’s the way great historical changes are. And it’s why I have enormous conviction that these people are going to make it,” Rice tells TIME.

Who: Professor Abdul Sattar Jawad (Head of English Literature at Baghdad University) & Family
Source: Telegraph UK
Quotes:

Prof Abdul Sattar Jawad, the head of English literature at Baghdad University, will leave next month to take up a post in Jordan. Two of his colleagues left recently after being intimidated.

At his home in east Baghdad the professor answered the door with an outstretched hand. In the other hand he carried a loaded revolver "because I don't trust anybody nowadays".

"I love my country but I am unable to do any service for the people because it is overrun by fanatics and extremists," Prof Jawad said. "The streets are ruled by gangs, looters and goons."

Last month he resigned a position as dean of arts after "religious animals" surrounded his office and shouted "war-like slogans".

The threats have also forced him to close down two English newspapers he ran because "it now is anti-religious to have free speech, liberal minds and civilisation in this country".

Prof Jawad's wife Sarah, a former geography teacher, said she now wore a headscarf to avoid being harassed by religious extremists.

Omar Jawad (Abdul's son): "I see a lot of educated people leaving Iraq. I talked this morning to one of my friends who has a PhD in law. He has just resigned from his job and is going. You hear so many similar stories. It is more security problems than economic. Under sanctions [imposed on Saddam Hussein by the United Nations after the Gulf war] we had no problems like this."

"I am not very optimistic," Mr Jawad said. "We have this fear of civil war because when the Americans are out it will be left to the Iraqis.

"It is two years now since the war ended and we see no development."

Who: Various U.S. Generals
Source: Knight-Ridder
Quotes:

Iraqi army and police forces now have the lead security role in eight to 10 areas of Iraq, but it remains unclear when they'll be prepared to take over security for the entire country, the Pentagon's top military officer said Tuesday.

"It's going to take time; nobody knows," Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said during a Pentagon news conference. "It's event-driven. It's going to be driven by a lot of events."

Last March, Gen. John Abizaid, of U.S. Central Command, told Congress that he believed Iraqi forces would be able to take the lead role this year, but Gen. Peter Pace, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs, told Congress two months later that only a "small number" of Iraq's 173,000 army and police troops were capable of battling terrorists on their own.

Last month, U.S. Gen. George Casey, the top coalition military officer in Iraq, said that if security conditions improve, a "fairly substantial" reduction in U.S. forces could take place by the spring or summer of 2006.

Myers named only two areas where Iraqis police and army had taken the lead in security - a portion of Baghdad and Diyala province in the south, a majority Shiite area where attacks on coalition forces have been rare since an uprising by radical cleric Muqtada al-Sadr was put down last year.

Who: Iraqi Police Brigadeer General Majeed Farraji (Chief of the Major Crimes Unit)
Source: SFGate.com
Quotes:

Three men in an unmarked sedan pulled up near the headquarters of the national police major crimes unit. The two passengers, wearing traditional Arab dishdasha gowns, stepped from the car. At the same moment, a U.S. military convoy emerged from an underpass. Apparently believing the men were staging an ambush, the Americans fired, killing one passenger and wounding the other. The sedan's driver was hit in the head by two bullet fragments. The soldiers drove on without stopping.

Such shootings are far from rare in Baghdad, but the driver of the car was no ordinary casualty. He was police Brig. Gen. Majeed Farraji, chief of the major crimes unit. His passengers were unarmed hitchhikers whom he was dropping off on his way to work.

"The reason they shot us is just because the Americans are reckless," the general said from his hospital bed hours after the July 6 shooting, his head wrapped in a white bandage. "Nobody punishes them or blames them."

"Of course, the shootings will increase support for the opposition," said Farraji, 49, who was named a police general with U.S. approval. "The hatred of the Americans has increased. I myself hate them."

Who: August Hanning (Germany's Foreign Intelligence Chief)
Source: Reuters
Quotes: "We fear developments in Iraq are radiating outwards," foreign intelligence chief August Hanning said in brief comments to Reuters.

He said it was possible that an intensification of insurgent attacks on Iraqi security forces and the U.S.-led coalition was encouraging like-minded militants to step up attacks in the wider region as well.

Hanning cited bombings that killed 64 people last month in Egypt's Red Sea resort of Sharm el-Sheikh, and security alerts in recent days forcing cruise liners carrying Israeli tourists to divert from Turkey to Cyprus.

Asked earlier at a news conference if Germany had its own intelligence on a threat to the kingdom, Hanning said: "We see the situation in Saudi Arabia in connection with developments in Iraq, Egypt, and not least Pakistan and Afghanistan."

He added: "There are no grounds to give the all clear. On the contrary ... we are reckoning with an intensification of the situation in the region as far as terrorism is concerned."

Germany opposed the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 and its security chiefs have repeatedly voiced concern since then that the war-torn country was becoming a magnet for terrorism and a recruiting card for al Qaeda.

Who: Andrew Krepinevich (Director of the Center for Strategic Assessments)
Source: Findlaw
Quotes: Article excerpts are from an essay published in the journal for Foreign Affairs

"During the Vietnam War, U.S. strategy focused on killing insurgents at the expense of winning hearts and minds. This search-and-destroy strategy ultimately failed, but it evidently continues to exert a strong pull on the U.S. military," Krepinevich wrote.

"Even when an attack manages to inflict serious insurgent casualties, there is little or no enduring improvement in security once U.S. forces withdraw from the area," wrote Krepinevich, a former U.S. Army lieutenant colonel who wrote a respected critique of the U.S. counterinsurgency effort in Vietnam.

The war has "overextended the U.S. Army and eroded support for the war among the American public," Krepinevich wrote.

The insurgents, meanwhile, are following a simple but effective strategy of fighting to perpetuate disorder and despair until the U.S. forces leave. After which, Krepinevich believes, they will launch a coup against Iraq's "weak, demoralized regime."

Krepinevich said America's effort in Iraq can only be salvaged with a costly turnaround in U.S. military strategy that requires a long-term commitment to withstand the huge expense and higher rates of U.S. combat deaths.

"If U.S. policy-makers and the American public are unwilling to make such a commitment, they should be prepared to scale down their goals in Iraq significantly," Krepinevich wrote.

Krepinevich's strategy involves winning the hearts and minds of Iraqis by focusing spending, rebuilding and law-enforcement efforts on peaceful areas in Iraq - the largely Shiite Muslim south and Kurdish north.

Krepinevich said the plan would take "at least a decade" to carry out, and cost "hundreds of billions of dollars and will result in longer U.S. casualty rolls."

"But this is the price that the United States must pay if it is to achieve its worthy goals in Iraq," he wrote.

If Americans aren't up to the task, Krepinevich said Washington would have to "leverage its waning influence to outmaneuver the Iranians and Syrians in creating an ally out of Iraq's next despot."

Who: U.S. Department of State - from the Office of the Spokesman
Source: U.S. Department of State
Quotes: From Public Announcement posted Aug 02, 2005;

Worldwide Caution

This Public Announcement updates information on the continuing threat of terrorist actions and violence against Americans and interests overseas. This supersedes the Worldwide Caution dated March 8, 2005 and expires on February 2, 2006.

The Department of State remains concerned about the continued threat of terrorist attacks, demonstrations and other violent actions against U.S. citizens and interests overseas. Americans are reminded that demonstrations and rioting can occur with little or no warning. Ongoing events in Iraq have resulted in demonstrations and associated violence in several countries; such events are likely to continue for the foreseeable future. Nation-wide elections in Afghanistan scheduled for mid-September may also trigger violent anti-American actions.

Current information suggests that al-Qa’ida and affiliated organizations continue to plan terrorist attacks against U.S. interests in multiple regions, including Europe, Asia, Africa and the Middle East. These attacks may employ a wide variety of tactics to include assassinations, kidnappings, hijackings and bombings. Extremists may elect to use conventional or non-conventional weapons, and target both official and private interests. The latter may include facilities where U.S. citizens and other foreigners congregate or visit, including residential areas, business offices, clubs, restaurants, places of worship, schools, hotels and public areas.

As the Department continues to develop information on any potential security threats to U.S. citizens overseas, it shares credible threat information through its Consular Information Program documents, available on the internet at http://travel.state.gov. In addition to information on the internet, travelers may obtain up-to-date information on security conditions by calling 1-888-407-4747 toll-free in the U.S. or outside the U.S. and Canada on a regular toll line at 1-202-501-4444.

Who: Various - see quotes below
Source: Washington Post
Quotes:The civil liberties board ordered by Congress last year has never met to discuss its job of protecting rights in the fight against terrorism, and critics say it is a toothless, under-funded shell with inadequate support from President Bush.

Asked why it was taking so long to set the board up, Rep. Christopher Shays (R-Conn.) said, "It's not a priority for the administration."

The intelligence reform law of December 2004 called for the oversight board in response to a recommendation from the Sept. 11 commission, which feared that increased governmental powers needed to fight terrorism could erode civil liberties.

The Bush-appointed panel "is a very watered-down board without the kinds of powers which I believe are necessary to provide credibility and authority, such as independent subpoena power . . . and a bipartisan process in selection," said Richard Ben-Veniste, a member of the Sept. 11 commission.

Who: John Bolton & Fayssal Mekdad (US & Syrian Ambassadors to UN)
Source: Reuters
Quotes:

Bolton urged all nations "to meet their obligations to stop the flow of terrorist financing and weapons, and particularly on Iran and Syria."

"We think this is very important, obviously, to help bring stability and security to the people of Iraq and to permit the constitutional process to go forward. It's the highest priority for the people and government of Iraq, and for the United States as well," he said, speaking after the council vote.

While Damascus had deployed around 10,000 soldiers and erected more than 300 surveillance towers along its border with Iraq, Britain and the United States had spurned a Syrian plea for assistance including night vision gear, he [Mekdad] said.

"This help has never come. We would like to ask them, what have they done on the other side of the border? They have done nothing while Syria has taken all measures," Mekdad said.

Who: UK Prime Minister Tony Blair
Source: Guardian UK
Quotes:

Note: Bolding is mine.

Tony Blair today set out a 12-point anti-terror plan that could see foreign nationals deported for encouraging terrorism.

The prime minister also announced bans on two Islamist organisations, and consultation on a new power to close places of worship used as centres for fomenting extremism.

The Home Office later proposed a list of "unacceptable behaviour" which said foreign nationals who ran websites, published material or misused a position such as teacher or youth leader could be deported from Britain if they incited, justified or glorified terrorism, or advocated violence in support of their beliefs.

British nationals could be put under control orders for the same activities.

"Let there be no doubt," he said in Downing Street, "the rules of the game are changing".

Mr. Blair added that the government was prepared to amend the Human Rights Act in respect of interpretation of the article three of the European convention on human rights if legal obstacles arise.

"Once the new grounds take effect, there will be a list drawn up of specific extremist websites, bookshops, centres, networks and particular organisations of concern," Mr Blair said. "Active engagement with any of these will be a trigger for the home secretary to consider the deportation of any foreign national."

Mr. Blair, who took questions from journalists, was asked if it was wise to run the risk of alienating the Muslim communities by "cracking down" with new legislation and falling into the trap al-Qaida had set for western governments.

"This is the balance that we have got to strike," Mr. Blair replied. "And I think people are well able to see between tough measures to drive out extremists and measures aimed at the Muslim community as a whole.

Who: Ayman al-Zawahri (al-Qaeda's proposed Second in Command)
Source: BBC
Quotes: Excerpts from text of video first broadcast on August 4, 2005;

Has sheikh Osama Bin Laden not informed you that you will not dream of security until we live it in reality in Palestine and before all infidel armies leave the land of Muhammad, may peace be upon him?

Our message to you is crystal clear: Your salvation will only come in your withdrawal from our land, in stopping the robbing of our oil and resources, and in stopping your support for the corrupt and corrupting leaders.

The truth which [US President George W] Bush, [US Secretary of State Condoleezza] Rice and [US Defense Secretary Donald] Rumsfeld hide from you is that the only way out from Iraq is immediate withdrawal, and any delay in this decision will only mean more deaths and more losses.

Who: Former CIA Agent Larry Johnson & President George W. Bush
Source: TPM Cafe and The White House
Quotes:

From TPM Cafe;

WOT--the War on Terrorism may still be alive. The counter terrorism community is abuzz over the President's comments yesterday at a principals meeting of the Homeland Security Council. Bush reportedly said he was not in favor of the new term, Global Struggle Against Violent Extremism (GSAVE). In fact, he said, "no one checked with me". That comment brought an uncomfortable silence to the assembled group of pooh bahs. The President insisted it was still a war as far as he is concerned.

Note: The following excerpt is a transcript available from The White House (at whitehouse.gov) of President Bush speaking on August 6, 2004;

From The White House;

THE PRESIDENT: [...] We actually misnamed the war on terror, it ought to be the struggle against ideological extremists who do not believe in free societies who happen to use terror as a weapon to try to shake the conscience of the free world. (Laughter.)

Note: "(Laughter)" is actually noted within the transcript. That is not my addition. Perhaps people laughed because of the length of the proposed alternative, as the acronym would be TSAIEWDNBIFSWHTUTAAWTTTSTCOTFW?

Who: Brig. Gen. C. Donald Alston (chief spokesman for the American command)
Source: NY Times
Quotes:

Brig. Gen. C. Donald Alston, chief spokesman for the American command, said 13 car bombings occurred in Iraq last week, only three of which were suicide bombings, the lowest weekly figures since the current counterinsurgency campaign in western Anbar Province began. The military regards car bombings, suicide bombings in particular, as a rough measure of foreign fighter activity because it contends that most of the suicide bombers are foreign militants.

"When I look at the bar charts, the statistics are a clear indication that the tempo of suicide attacks has decreased," General Alston said, noting that the percentage of car bombings involving suicide bombers was as high as 60 percent a few months ago. He expressed optimism that the flow of foreign fighters was ebbing. "This is not an expanding insurgency," he said.

Who: Larry Diamond (Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, advised the Coalition Provisional Authority in Baghdad from January to April 2004.)
Source: Slate
Quotes: From ongoing discussion with Dan Senor (Founder of Senor Strategies, chief spokesman for the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq and a senior adviser to Ambassador L. Paul Bremer III from April 2003 through June 2004.)

There is another way we could fail in Iraq. That would be for the pro-Iranian Islamic fundamentalists (the most militant among the ruling Shiite alliance) to conquer power through political force, intimidation, and intrigue, like the Leninists of a previous era. That has begun to happen in Iraq, with the steadily rising power of SCIRI (the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq—so named for a reason) and its 15,000-man militia, the Badr Organization (trained in Iran by the Revolutionary Guards). Adding to the danger is the growing mobilization of other militant Islamist militias. Perhaps that was one reason why the administration tried covertly to rescue Allawi's campaign. It is another sign of this administration's incompetence and duplicity that the very prospect it has most feared has been advanced by its bungling. To your list of possible disastrous political outcomes, one could add the prospect of the United States giving more than 2,000 lives, spending hundreds of billions of dollars, and hollowing out our military readiness so that pro-Iranian Shiite theocrats could seize power in Baghdad.

Who: Former CIA Agent Larry Johnson
Source: TPM Cafe
Quotes: WOT--the War on Terrorism may still be alive. The counter terrorism community is abuzz over the President's comments yesterday at a principals meeting of the Homeland Security Council. Bush reportedly said he was not in favor of the new term, Global Struggle Against Violent Extremism (GSAVE). In fact, he said, "no one checked with me". That comment brought an uncomfortable silence to the assembled group of pooh bahs. The President insisted it was still a war as far as he is concerned.

Who: David Broder
Source: Washington Post
Quotes: From column titled "Share the Facts on the War" concerning Defense Dept. report on progress gauging Iraq's economic and political stability, the extent of the insurgency, and the capacity of Iraqi forces to provide security for their own country, which is required by Congress every 90 days.

July 11 came and went with no report, [...]. The Senate was less patient and passed a resolution reminding Rumsfeld of the unfulfilled obligation. And on July 21 the report was delivered.

It came in two parts, a 23-page public document and a classified annex.

[...] the report includes page after page of blank forms that the coalition command in Iraq has developed to assess the quality of personnel, command and control, training, and logistics in Iraqi military and police forces. But the important question of how many of those units are capable of fighting the insurgency, independently or with help from U.S. and British troops, simply is not answered.

The Pentagon replied that "although there is variance in the rate of absenteeism, AWOL, attrition and desertion among the Iraqi army, rates have diminished significantly and are now around 1 percent for some divisions. Still, units that are conducting operations and units that relocate elsewhere in Iraq experience a surge in absenteeism."

At another point, it simply says, "The extent of insurgent infiltration [into Iraqi forces] is unknown. A vetting process is used to attempt to screen out criminals, foreign and anti-Iraq forces."

Congress has required an update on this report in 90 days, so the Pentagon has an opportunity to improve on the product.

Who: International Association of Chiefs of Police & Ibrahim Hooper (Council on American-Islamic Relations Spokesman)
Source: Washington Post
Quotes: The International Association of Chiefs of Police, which represents the heads of police departments in the United States and across the world, has issued new guidelines saying that officers who confront a suicide bomber should shoot the suspect in the head.

The police group's guidelines also say the threat to officers does not have to be "imminent," as police training traditionally teaches. Officers do not have to wait until a suspected bomber makes a move, another traditional requirement for police to use deadly force. An officer just needs to have a "reasonable basis" to believe that the suspect can detonate a bomb, the guidelines say.

The Israeli training of British and American law enforcement officials makes some groups ask whether the police are going too far. The tension is especially pronounced among Muslim community leaders, who are deeply suspicious of Israel because of the country's long-standing conflict with the Palestinians.

"The London situation where an innocent man was shot and killed was based on Israeli procedure, and I don't think that we want to be replicating the actions of a foreign government engaged in a brutal occupation of another people," said Ibrahim Hooper, spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations. "It sends the wrong message to the Muslim world."

Who: UK Foreign Secretary Jack Straw
Source: Financial Times
Quotes:

"One of the things we've got to do is give these leaders the confidence to face down terrorism justified by Islam," says the foreign secretary in an interview with the Financial Times.

First there is Iraq. "Things are not good there at the moment," he says, acknowledging the strength of the terrorist insurgency. But he believes a new Iraqi constitution can be agreed by the deadline of the middle of next month. "The more certainty you have on that, the more you can have a programme for the draw-down of troops which is important for the Iraqis," he says.

"Because - unlike in Afghanistan - although we are part of the security solution there, we are also part of the problem."

Who: Poland's Prime Minister Marek Belka
Source: Associated Press (via Yahoo! News)
Quotes:

Poland's prime minister said Monday that postwar nation-building efforts in
Iraq have "failed totally," but expressed hope that the country's different religious groups can work together to build an independent nation.

"It failed totally," Belka said at a panel discussion on nation-building at an international forum in Sweden. "Many mistakes, major mistakes, have been committed."

"The political process is moving on," Belka said.

Who: American Commander in Iraq
Source: NY Times
Quotes: From article entitled, "Worry Grows as Iraq's Defense Ministry Falls Short of Expectations"

The reformed Iraqi Ministry of Defense, a crucial element of any American plan to withdraw troops, is riddled with crippling problems that have raised concerns about its ability to keep Iraqi units paid, fed and equipped once it assumes full responsibility for the army, American and Iraqi commanders say.

"What are lacking are the systems that pay people, that supply people, that recruit people, that replace the wounded and AWOL, and systems that promote people and provide spare parts," said a top American commander in Iraq, who asked not to be identified because his assessment of Iraqi abilities went beyond the military's public descriptions.

"If they don't have that capability, we won't be able to take the training wheels off and let them operate independently," the commander said.

So concerned are military planners that, in the event that American combat troops do indeed leave over the next year, they are preparing to keep large numbers of support troops and supplies in Iraq or in nearby countries, ready to assist Iraqi units fighting insurgents, the American commander said.