Bent Corner

If only Saddam Hussein didn’t have all those weapons of mass destruction mothers wouldn’t have to leave their young children for months at a time and go to Iraq. Terri Gurrola comes back from Iraq and embraces her daughter. Gurrola served in Iraq for 7 months.

Link

If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!

This from the Associated Press (Via Yahoo! News):

The Iraqi government Monday ordered Blackwater USA, the security firm that protects U.S. diplomats, to stop work and leave the country after the fatal shooting of eight Iraqi civilians following a car bomb attack against a State Department convoy.

The order by the Interior Ministry, if carried out, would deal a severe blow to U.S. government operations in Iraq by stripping diplomats, engineers, reconstruction officials and others of their security protection.

The presence of so many visible, aggressive Western security contractors has angered many Iraqis, who consider them a mercenary force that runs roughshod over people in their own country.

The reason many Iraqis consider them to be a mercenary force is because that is precisely what they are. They are mercenaries. They are professional soldiers that perform military work for money. They are often referred to as “contractors” because it sounds better.

Contractors usually need a contractors license. Mercs don’t.

Not that this was news to me. Of course it was about the oil. It was always about the oil. This from The Sunday Times (UK):

AMERICA’s elder statesman of finance, Alan Greenspan, has shaken the White House by declaring that the prime motive for the war in Iraq was oil.

In his long-awaited memoir, to be published tomorrow, Greenspan, a Republican whose 18-year tenure as head of the US Federal Reserve was widely admired, will also deliver a stinging critique of President George W Bush’s economic policies.

However, it is his view on the motive for the 2003 Iraq invasion that is likely to provoke the most controversy. “I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil,” he says.

Greenspan, 81, is understood to believe that Saddam Hussein posed a threat to the security of oil supplies in the Middle East.

Britain and America have always insisted the war had nothing to do with oil. Bush said the aim was to disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction and end Saddam’s support for terrorism.

Not only was the invasion about the oil, but the continued occupation of Iraq is about making money for Halliburton and KBR. Money from the U.S. taxpayer. Where are all of the fiscal conservatives when you need them?

A recent congressional analysis shows the Iraq war is now costing almost $2 billion a week. It might be different if we were actually getting something of value for our money. The middle-east is more unstable then before. There are more Islamic fundamentalist terrorists now then there was before Bush invaded Iraq. One of the goals in The War On Terror™ should be to make the number of terrorists go down, not go up.

I’m old enough to remember when being a Republican was all about fiscal responsibility. That seems like a long time ago.

Our illustrious president spoke last night on the television about his most favorite subject - the Iraq war. From his speech:

Anbar province is a good example of how our strategy is working. Last year, an intelligence report concluded that Anbar had been lost to al-Qaida. Some cited this report as evidence that we had failed in Iraq and should cut our losses and pull out. Instead, we kept the pressure on the terrorists. The local people were suffering under the Taliban-like rule of al-Qaida, and they were sick of it. So they asked us for help.

The al-Qaida he should be worried about is the al-Qaida in the mountains of Afghanistan and Pakistan. That is the real al-Qaida. That is the al-Qaida that attacked the United States on 9-11. The al-Qaida in Iraq? They just call themselves that to give themselves some cheap terrorist credibility. Everyone knows that al-Qaida attacked the United States six years ago and Bush has failed to bring them to justice. Bush has failed to make them pay. Bush and his inability to make al-Qaida pay turn them into the terrorist organization that every two bit terrorist wants to be apart of.

Just because they call themselves al-Qaida doesn’t make them al-Qaida. The al-Qaida in Iraq is as much al-Qaida as American skinheads are Nazis. Sure, they may have a photo of Hitler in their mom’s basement, but that doesn’t mean they are the same bunch that fought Patton’s Third Army in the Battle of the Bulge. Those were real Nazis. They weren’t pretending to be Nazis.

Just because someone identifies themselves as a Nazi on their MySpace page doesn’t mean they are a Nazi. Just because someone in Iraq says they are al-Qaida doesn’t make them al-Qaida.

I was going through some old pictures of my Air Force days and found this. It’s of aircraft B-52G 0248. It’s probably too small to see, but the nose art shows that this aircraft had the nickname of “In Harms Way”. There is a story that goes along with the nickname. Then again, don’t most nicknames have a story? This is the B-52G that was accidentally hit with an AGM-88 HARM anti-radiation missile fired from an F-4G Wild Weasel on the first night of operation DESERT STORM. The B-52’s tail gunner mistakenly locked his anti-aircraft radar on the Wild Weasel thinking it was an Iraqi MIG. The Wild Weasel immediately detected the B-52 tail gun radar locking on to him and misidentified the radar signature as that of an Iraqi anti aircraft artillery (AAA) site. The Wild Weasel crew fired a HARM missile and watched in horror as it headed not towards the non existent Iraqi AAA site, but to the very B-52 is was trying to protect.

Luckily the missile failed to hit the plane, but instead detonated directly behind the bomber. These missiles are designed to hit nonmoving ground targets, not moving airplanes. The resulting shrapnel and missile debris caused an excessive amount of damage to the tail section of the B-52. It ripped off everything aft of the vertical stabilizer. This included much of the tail gun system, the aft electronic warfare suite, and the drag chute. The B-52 was able to land safely on the island of Diego Garcia at Jedda, Saudi Arabia.

It was then sent from Diego Garcia to Anderson Air Force Base on Guam for repair. I was in on the repair of this aircraft shortly after is was damaged. During the first Iraqi war, I was assigned to a squadron that was responsible for repairing B-52’s being used in Iraq being flown from Diego Garcia. I spent four months back on Guam. I had been stationed there prior for almost three years. I could have been sent to places far worse then Guam. I could have gone to Saudi. I could have spent four months on Diego Garcia. I spent two weeks there once and that was long enough for me. As it was, I loved Guam.

Cindy Sheehan is back. Her retirement evidently is over after only five short weeks. When she announced her “retirement” from the anti-war movement, she chose to make the announcement on Memorial Day. She chose to announce that she was resuming her duties as self-described Peace Mom on Independence Day. This lady certainly likes to get dramatic on patriotic holidays.

I’m only surprised she was able to keep herself out of the limelight this long. Oh well. Maybe she should have just announced last Memorial Day that she was taking a vacation.

Link

Roscoe Bartlett
2412 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C.
20515-2006
Dear Roscoe Bartlett –

I’m writing this letter in regards to comments you made shortly after your historic vote last March against the continued funding of our troops in Iraq.

You stated that you were against a time table for withdrawal. Wouldn’t you agree that our military has already accomplished everything they were asked to do? They have:

• Ensured that Iraq is free of weapons of mass destruction.
• Removed Saddam Hussein from power.
• Allowed Iraq to become a democratic and free country.

Our troops have successfully done their job. Now it’s time for you to do yours. You need to work towards bringing them home. Their mission has been accomplished.

You stated back in March that another reason you voted NO was because one-fifth of the spending bill was pork. Expenditures unrelated to our national defense. As though the continued occupation of Iraq has anything to do with the defense of our nation. Now that the Democrats have caved and removed any type of timetable for withdrawal from Iraq, voting YES on the supplemental spending bill should be fairly easy for you to do - unless you really are a fiscal conservative. All that pork is still firmly attached to the bill.

Rick Rottman

Hagerstown, Maryland

Rudy Giuliani should have been spending less time flying around the country giving paid speeches on the 9-11 terror attacks and spent more time actually learning more about them. Including the reasons we were attacked.

This following is a partial transcript from the recent Republican South Carolina Presidential debate.

REP. PAUL: No. Non-intervention was a major contributing factor. Have you ever read the reasons they attacked us? They attack us because we’ve been over there; we’ve been bombing Iraq for 10 years. We’ve been in the Middle East — I think Reagan was right.

We don’t understand the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics. So right now we’re building an embassy in Iraq that’s bigger than the Vatican. We’re building 14 permanent bases. What would we say here if China was doing this in our country or in the Gulf of Mexico? We would be objecting. We need to look at what we do from the perspective of what would happen if somebody else did it to us. (Applause.)

MR. GOLER: Are you suggesting we invited the 9/11 attack, sir?

REP. PAUL: I’m suggesting that we listen to the people who attacked us and the reason they did it, and they are delighted that we’re over there because Osama bin Laden has said, “I am glad you’re over on our sand because we can target you so much easier.” They have already now since that time — (bell rings) — have killed 3,400 of our men, and I don’t think it was necessary.

MR. GIULIANI: Wendell, may I comment on that? That’s really an extraordinary statement. That’s an extraordinary statement, as someone who lived through the attack of September 11, that we invited the attack because we were attacking Iraq. I don’t think I’ve heard that before, and I’ve heard some pretty absurd explanations for September 11th. (Applause, cheers.)

And I would ask the congressman to withdraw that comment and tell us that he didn’t really mean that. (Applause.)

MR. GOLER: Congressman?

REP. PAUL: I believe very sincerely that the CIA is correct when they teach and talk about blowback. When we went into Iran in 1953 and installed the shah, yes, there was blowback. A reaction to that was the taking of our hostages and that persists. And if we ignore that, we ignore that at our own risk. If we think that we can do what we want around the world and not incite hatred, then we have a problem.

They don’t come here to attack us because we’re rich and we’re free. They come and they attack us because we’re over there. I mean, what would we think if we were — if other foreign countries were doing that to us?

Congressmen Ron Paul is correct. Bin Laden didn’t attack the United States because of our love of apple pie and baseball. He didn’t attack us because we love Jesus.

Rudy Giuliani has made a lot of money off of 9-11. You would think he would try to learn a thing or two about it. Instead he comes off looking like an idiot.

Congressman Ron Paul was right. The so-called “America’s Mayor” was wrong.

Vice President Dick Cheney repeated his kooky assertions that al-Qaida was somehow linked to Saddam Hussein’s Iraq before the United States invaded:

Cheney contended that al-Qaida was operating in Iraq before the March 2003 invasion led by U.S. forces and that terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was leading the Iraqi branch of al-Qaida. Others in al-Qaida planned the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

“He took up residence there before we ever launched into Iraq, organized the al-Qaida operations inside Iraq before we even arrived on the scene and then, of course, led the charge for Iraq until we killed him last June,” Cheney told radio host Rush Limbaugh during an interview. “As I say, they were present before we invaded Iraq.

Granted, he said these things on The Rush Limbaugh Show. It’s not like you normally find a whole lot of truth on that particular radio program. It’s just that even Cheney has to realize that most people know he is lying when he says stuff like this. Even people that listen to Rush Limbaugh or watch Fox News.

What’s especially ironic about Cheney saying this yesterday was that yesterday the Pentagon released a recently declassified report that disputes the assertion that Saddam was in cahoots with al-Qaida.

Dick Cheney is such a silly goose. If he wasn’t such a warm and lovable soul, he would certainly face criticism from people who value the truth. People that are into facts. He tends to get a free pass on not telling the truth because he is so damn likable.

Iraq didn’t have an al-Qaida problem until George W. Bush invaded.