What Happened in Iraq?
KDE | 11.05.2003 23:07
DECEIPT AND DOUBLE DEALING IN IRAQ
NOT A US VICTORY
After the tough resistance in Basra and the other small towns in the south and north of Iraq, the whole world remained stunned with the handover of Baghdad without the slightest resistance. In wars in cities, body by body the outcome of the struggle is determined by moral forces.
Even the Iraquis were superior in morale and militancy. They were defending their families, their country from the uncalled for American attack, subjugation and brigandry. Confronting them they had an armed army made up of the most poor layers of American society who sought in the meagre wages of the soldier a means of survival, not a meas to die by. They had no reason to fight and risk their lives for the interests of the multinationals and the gangsters who rule Washington.
That is why they were unable to take Basra and even smaller towns of 200-300,000 citizens, in the weakest fronts of the south. The American political and military leadership was shocked and frightened by the threat of a bloody fiasco. Richard Perle Chairman of the Defence Policy Board, an architect of the policy of "aggressive wars" was overthrown from his thrown. The politicians condemned the CIA for inability and the CIA condemned the politicians. The generals asked for another 150,000 soldiers so as to aid the stuck US-British forces. Having failed in the fronts of the south, how would it be possible for the Americans with their small forces to become victors in the battle for Baghdad? In a city of 7 million with a land mass of 80x120km which was defended by the well armed 120,000 men of the "republican guard", the special forces of the Fedayeen and thousands of volunteers who arrived from every corner of the Arab world, ready to give their lives in this "holy war"?
If the Americans didn't suffer a total disaster, they would be obliged to be involved in a long, costly and bloody war with unknown consequences and an unknown end. Instead of this Baghdad was handed over without resistance! How on earth could everything go pearshape?
The people of Iraq, baathists, sunnites, or shiites in Baghdad, Tikrit and Najaf saw and heard enough not to be doubtful. They give the clear and decisive answer. The Pentagon and the Baath Party leadership made a "saifgoua" ('secret deal' in Arabic) for the handing over of the city. The "saifgoua" was closed behind the backs of the people for the handing over of the city and has conditions and guarantees for the politicians and the military leaders and their families! Referring to the end Saddams regime, the Iraqui Ambassador in the United Nations, Mohammed Al Dourri chose not incoincidentally the infamous last words "The game is over"! As if it was a poker game. According to the Al-Jazeera station, Al Douri himself got guarantees for his safe transfer to Syria and maybe he will be an Ambassador to the UN in the new government of occupation. The Americans have every reason to cultivate myths for their superiority. Many analysts influenced by the systematic misinformation believe that a fundamental change has occurred in the nature of current warfare. The idea that there exists some type of new war where high technology gives the USA an unbelievable military superiority and it is able to impose itself with a low cost for itself, isn't only hyperbole, it is also dumb. In reality the technological advantages can be extinguished and overturned using the required use of tactics. For example the crushing defeat of the Americans in Vietnam. If the same type of war was to be repeated today the USA would lose it again. There was no American military victory in Iraq. There was only deceipt and double dealing. In Iraq and the whole of the Arab world no one disputes that the 'fall' of Baghdad was pre-planned. There are many crucial questions which need answering. The Americans will be the last who will have the willpower to give them.
-How did the Americans take the risk with a few forces against Baghdad whilst all the other fronts remained open in the Iraqui south and their reaguard uncovered?
-How did they attempt to enter the centre of Baghdad without having taken over the airport and having secured their air support?
_ Why did 1200 Iraqui armaments leave Baghdad when they were defending it? Where did they dissapear to?
-How did thousands of men dissapear when they were the defenders of Baghdad without having given themselves up or becoming captives?
-Why wasn't there cooperation between between the Baathist defenders of Baghdad and the "mujahedeen" who came to help from Syria, Algeria, Yemen and Egypt?
-Why did Saddam sack the defenders of the airspace of Baghdad and the hundreds of the anti-aircaft guns cease when they were defending successfully the Iraqui capital?
-What did Ivanov and Primakov bargain in Baghdad right up till the last moment of the war?
-What role did the game or threat of ships arriving in the Persian gulf?
-What did Putin mean when he promised to get the Americans out of the cul de sac without destroying their standing?
-Or that when he declared that the Russian government didn't want the defeat of the USA? Did he take practical measures for this to happen? With what in return?
-What deals have been hatched with the 'troika of peace' and why did Simitis (Greek President) state the day after the American 'victory' that a Greek force of 500 would go to Iraq in June?
-What did the Russian diplomatic mission know and leave Baghdad just before the US forces arrive there?
-Why didn't the "republican guard" and the Fedayeen not destroy a single bridge in Baghdad - a decisive tactic to delay the American invaders and to force them into great battle casualties?
-Why weren't any of the oil-wells in the north and south of Iraq bombed a tactic which Saddam had already used in Kuwait in 1991?
-How did the whole of the Iraqui government dissapear including his sons? Are they still in Iraq or in Saudi Arabia and essentially in Mecca, as many strong rumours are circulating in the Arab world?
Does the Saudiarabian Prince Abdullah now harbor Saddam as he maintains good relations with the Bush family and was working for months to achieve a peaceful resignation of the Saddam regime? Abduallah who waorks on the same wavelength as the Americans wanted to stop by any means possible a long and bloody guerilla war which could have lasted for months, if not years? The Palestinisation of such a large area with many millions of Arab citizens would turn the whole of the Middle East into a volcano. The Americans realised that the resistance of even sections of the 'republican guard' would be able to transform their attempt at occupying Baghdad into a hell for them. When they neared the Iraqi capital they had ready their agreements for the political leadership in Iraq. The Times of Asia wrote that they offered the officers of the guard much money in cash and a 'safe exit' out of Iraq and the offer of a new cooperation in the post Saddam regime. The deal was then hatched. When the American tanks arrived (without meeting any resistance) at the Palestine Hotel- where the base of the international media was the 'game' was essentially over. The officers of the republican guard were ready to be airlifted out of Iraq and their soldiers had orders to become de-militarised and to become citizens again. The Media who weren't directly controlled and would have been able to reveal what exactly was happening, with difficulties being surfaced had to be terrorised and silenced. That is the reason they were hit with rockets. Al-Jazeera was hit, the tv network of Abu Dhabi, the Palestine Hotel and Reuters. Parallely the deliberate cutoff of news and the electrical 'blackout' occurred with a plan which foresaw the Pentagon and the 'republican guard' to dance in the night! If something was revealed in Iraq (as in Yugoslavia previously) isn't the overwhelming strength of the USA, but that the priviliged national elites fear the masses more than American imperialism. Today's crisis is much more difficult than the era of Vietnam for the USA. The Iraqi leadership knew that the defeat and disaster of the US would place an end to its role as the world policemen and terrorist. Even worse it would increase its economic freefall. As a consequence the old world would be convulsed totally in the whole planet. The zionist state would find it impossible to survive. The oligarchic and autarchic regimes of the Middle East would collapse. The fate of the Baath Party would have the same fate. Saddam's regime (and the French Germans and Russian) didn't have the desire to provoke revolutionary overthrows. It didn't want the defeat of the Americans. It wants double dealing and compromise. When this proved to be impossible, only the path of betrayal and compromise was open to them. The Americans unable to militarily hold Iraq are even more incapable of holding it. The war isn't over. Now it is starting. The peoples constitute the undefeatable superpower. They must unite. From the Atlantic to the Urals and China. To bring closer and make unnavoidable the defeat of American imperialism and its government. This is the reply to the barbarity which the US represents. Chirac, Shroeder and Putin will never dare that. It can only be the task and strategy of a reborn from the ashes, communist movement.
KDE (Greek Trotskyists)
1st May 2003
NOT A US VICTORY
After the tough resistance in Basra and the other small towns in the south and north of Iraq, the whole world remained stunned with the handover of Baghdad without the slightest resistance. In wars in cities, body by body the outcome of the struggle is determined by moral forces.
Even the Iraquis were superior in morale and militancy. They were defending their families, their country from the uncalled for American attack, subjugation and brigandry. Confronting them they had an armed army made up of the most poor layers of American society who sought in the meagre wages of the soldier a means of survival, not a meas to die by. They had no reason to fight and risk their lives for the interests of the multinationals and the gangsters who rule Washington.
That is why they were unable to take Basra and even smaller towns of 200-300,000 citizens, in the weakest fronts of the south. The American political and military leadership was shocked and frightened by the threat of a bloody fiasco. Richard Perle Chairman of the Defence Policy Board, an architect of the policy of "aggressive wars" was overthrown from his thrown. The politicians condemned the CIA for inability and the CIA condemned the politicians. The generals asked for another 150,000 soldiers so as to aid the stuck US-British forces. Having failed in the fronts of the south, how would it be possible for the Americans with their small forces to become victors in the battle for Baghdad? In a city of 7 million with a land mass of 80x120km which was defended by the well armed 120,000 men of the "republican guard", the special forces of the Fedayeen and thousands of volunteers who arrived from every corner of the Arab world, ready to give their lives in this "holy war"?
If the Americans didn't suffer a total disaster, they would be obliged to be involved in a long, costly and bloody war with unknown consequences and an unknown end. Instead of this Baghdad was handed over without resistance! How on earth could everything go pearshape?
The people of Iraq, baathists, sunnites, or shiites in Baghdad, Tikrit and Najaf saw and heard enough not to be doubtful. They give the clear and decisive answer. The Pentagon and the Baath Party leadership made a "saifgoua" ('secret deal' in Arabic) for the handing over of the city. The "saifgoua" was closed behind the backs of the people for the handing over of the city and has conditions and guarantees for the politicians and the military leaders and their families! Referring to the end Saddams regime, the Iraqui Ambassador in the United Nations, Mohammed Al Dourri chose not incoincidentally the infamous last words "The game is over"! As if it was a poker game. According to the Al-Jazeera station, Al Douri himself got guarantees for his safe transfer to Syria and maybe he will be an Ambassador to the UN in the new government of occupation. The Americans have every reason to cultivate myths for their superiority. Many analysts influenced by the systematic misinformation believe that a fundamental change has occurred in the nature of current warfare. The idea that there exists some type of new war where high technology gives the USA an unbelievable military superiority and it is able to impose itself with a low cost for itself, isn't only hyperbole, it is also dumb. In reality the technological advantages can be extinguished and overturned using the required use of tactics. For example the crushing defeat of the Americans in Vietnam. If the same type of war was to be repeated today the USA would lose it again. There was no American military victory in Iraq. There was only deceipt and double dealing. In Iraq and the whole of the Arab world no one disputes that the 'fall' of Baghdad was pre-planned. There are many crucial questions which need answering. The Americans will be the last who will have the willpower to give them.
-How did the Americans take the risk with a few forces against Baghdad whilst all the other fronts remained open in the Iraqui south and their reaguard uncovered?
-How did they attempt to enter the centre of Baghdad without having taken over the airport and having secured their air support?
_ Why did 1200 Iraqui armaments leave Baghdad when they were defending it? Where did they dissapear to?
-How did thousands of men dissapear when they were the defenders of Baghdad without having given themselves up or becoming captives?
-Why wasn't there cooperation between between the Baathist defenders of Baghdad and the "mujahedeen" who came to help from Syria, Algeria, Yemen and Egypt?
-Why did Saddam sack the defenders of the airspace of Baghdad and the hundreds of the anti-aircaft guns cease when they were defending successfully the Iraqui capital?
-What did Ivanov and Primakov bargain in Baghdad right up till the last moment of the war?
-What role did the game or threat of ships arriving in the Persian gulf?
-What did Putin mean when he promised to get the Americans out of the cul de sac without destroying their standing?
-Or that when he declared that the Russian government didn't want the defeat of the USA? Did he take practical measures for this to happen? With what in return?
-What deals have been hatched with the 'troika of peace' and why did Simitis (Greek President) state the day after the American 'victory' that a Greek force of 500 would go to Iraq in June?
-What did the Russian diplomatic mission know and leave Baghdad just before the US forces arrive there?
-Why didn't the "republican guard" and the Fedayeen not destroy a single bridge in Baghdad - a decisive tactic to delay the American invaders and to force them into great battle casualties?
-Why weren't any of the oil-wells in the north and south of Iraq bombed a tactic which Saddam had already used in Kuwait in 1991?
-How did the whole of the Iraqui government dissapear including his sons? Are they still in Iraq or in Saudi Arabia and essentially in Mecca, as many strong rumours are circulating in the Arab world?
Does the Saudiarabian Prince Abdullah now harbor Saddam as he maintains good relations with the Bush family and was working for months to achieve a peaceful resignation of the Saddam regime? Abduallah who waorks on the same wavelength as the Americans wanted to stop by any means possible a long and bloody guerilla war which could have lasted for months, if not years? The Palestinisation of such a large area with many millions of Arab citizens would turn the whole of the Middle East into a volcano. The Americans realised that the resistance of even sections of the 'republican guard' would be able to transform their attempt at occupying Baghdad into a hell for them. When they neared the Iraqi capital they had ready their agreements for the political leadership in Iraq. The Times of Asia wrote that they offered the officers of the guard much money in cash and a 'safe exit' out of Iraq and the offer of a new cooperation in the post Saddam regime. The deal was then hatched. When the American tanks arrived (without meeting any resistance) at the Palestine Hotel- where the base of the international media was the 'game' was essentially over. The officers of the republican guard were ready to be airlifted out of Iraq and their soldiers had orders to become de-militarised and to become citizens again. The Media who weren't directly controlled and would have been able to reveal what exactly was happening, with difficulties being surfaced had to be terrorised and silenced. That is the reason they were hit with rockets. Al-Jazeera was hit, the tv network of Abu Dhabi, the Palestine Hotel and Reuters. Parallely the deliberate cutoff of news and the electrical 'blackout' occurred with a plan which foresaw the Pentagon and the 'republican guard' to dance in the night! If something was revealed in Iraq (as in Yugoslavia previously) isn't the overwhelming strength of the USA, but that the priviliged national elites fear the masses more than American imperialism. Today's crisis is much more difficult than the era of Vietnam for the USA. The Iraqi leadership knew that the defeat and disaster of the US would place an end to its role as the world policemen and terrorist. Even worse it would increase its economic freefall. As a consequence the old world would be convulsed totally in the whole planet. The zionist state would find it impossible to survive. The oligarchic and autarchic regimes of the Middle East would collapse. The fate of the Baath Party would have the same fate. Saddam's regime (and the French Germans and Russian) didn't have the desire to provoke revolutionary overthrows. It didn't want the defeat of the Americans. It wants double dealing and compromise. When this proved to be impossible, only the path of betrayal and compromise was open to them. The Americans unable to militarily hold Iraq are even more incapable of holding it. The war isn't over. Now it is starting. The peoples constitute the undefeatable superpower. They must unite. From the Atlantic to the Urals and China. To bring closer and make unnavoidable the defeat of American imperialism and its government. This is the reply to the barbarity which the US represents. Chirac, Shroeder and Putin will never dare that. It can only be the task and strategy of a reborn from the ashes, communist movement.
KDE (Greek Trotskyists)
1st May 2003
KDE
Comments
Display the following comment