.jpg)
It's strange how a man can know so many things in few hours that he couldn't know through searching and asking for years.
Few days ago I was in a "Gahwa" which is a café for men where they drink tea or coffee, smoke Hubble-Bubbly and play Backgammon, cards or dominos….this "Gahwa" was in Adhamiya , it was very authentic and in the old alleys of Adhamiya…I went there with two friends and we were supposed to meet their friends (whom I don't know) there….I thought that would be fun since it has been more than 3 years since I went to a "Gahwa" . We reached there and waited for a while and then the friends came…they were ordinary good looking young men, but then I realized they were not that ordinary.
At the beginning I felt uncomfortable as they begun to talk and remember situations that I don't know about….until it was the time when they begun to talk about things that I'm really interested in.
It appeared that two of them were in the resistance (I couldn't know to which organization they belong but they really hated AlQaeda) I'll call them N and J.A., another was in the Islamic army I'll call him O and the last one has recently joined the awakening council and I'll name him A.
It was like finding a treasure for me to sit with these guys, because I'll be able to know things that I've been wondering for a long long time and get the information from insider people. People who really knows what is happening, how, where and why.
I'll mention the important parts of our conversation because we talked for about 4 hours, so it's very hard to remember everything and write it. It started when J.A started to talk about his release from Buka jail and what is the real situation there, he was released a month ago, after 8 months in jail, he was released because they didn't find anything on him, and he really didn't have anything, he was with them but he didn't carry out any operation (as he said)….and then he started to talk about how AlQaeda is controlling the jail…so I immediately asked him" did you watch the show on Al-Arabyia? It was about this, was it true what they have said?" he laughed and said they talked about half the truth…the situation is much worst there, he said:
" I'll tell you something, I knew a guy who was our friend in college (he and his friends who were in the jail), he was a playboy…and he drinks and have girlfriends and stuff like that….as I reached Buka jail I was amazed to find out that he was a prince of Jihad for AlQaeda?!!? Can you imagine, he was walking with bodyguards, and everyone was afraid of him…all the camp are fearful of him, I smiled when I saw him and he was really confused…I told him hi ……. How are you? He said thank god I'm fine….come here I want to talk to you, then he asked his guards to go away and then he whispered in my ears…I'm a prince now, and no one knows what I was…so don't you dare talk about anything you know and I'll provide you with safety and everything you need, just keep your mouth shut…OK….I replied OK, I will not talk but me and my friends need cigarettes because you idiots made it a sin to smoke…also we need some good clothing…he said tonight it will reach you…….at that night two men came and they were carrying four boxes, they said the prince send his greetings and this is a gift from him…one box was cigarettes, one was clothes and two boxes were full of fruits, can you imagine that this looser is a prince now!"
And then I asked him if it was true that they have swords and they kill people and make courts and if they were really the ones who control the jail and he replied sure, everything you've heard is true.
Then I started talking with the two of them J.A and N about why innocents die in the name of the resistance? If it's a resistance no Iraqi should die by the resistance….J.A said that's the sad truth, many things caused this….our organization doesn't kill innocents, the one who does this is the corrupted members of AQ who joined it for money and power and don't forget a very important thing that anyone can blow a market full of Iraqis and they blame the resistance for it, there are criminal gangs, there is the Americans who wants to scar the image of the real resistance so the people will hate them…..there are countries who pays for people to kill, the more they kill, the more they get. And I'd like to add to your information that in the last few months our main concern was to get rid and kill those pigs who kills the innocents and stop the violence against Iraqis…….then N started to talk" do you know that the highest priority for us was to get rid of "Alja`asa" (translation- squeezers - that's a new Iraqi term which means the ones who kills Iraqis for sectarian reason or for money or for no reason at all) , we got rid of so many of them and I think you don't know that many of them are with the awakening right now….they are our second enemy after the Americans"
And then O started to talk " I think you heard about the confrontations between AQ and the Islamic army and I think you imagined that it was a fight over power and control, but it wasn't like that, the fight was to kill the murderers of AQ, we were killing "Alja`asa" they are worst than the Americans, we almost got rid of them and clean the neighborhood and make it like what it is like now, but then the awakening started and they took the credit for it, although many "Ja`asa" are in the awakening, do you know that my father was killed by AlQaeda two months ago, because he was the leader of a squad that is responsible for getting rid of the criminal gangs and AQ criminals, we wanted to put an end to this miserable situation because resistance is not to harm Iraqis, it's for their benefit"
Then I asked them" but don't you think the awakening is good, at least people are feeling safe, and life is getting back to the neighborhood?" and O answered me" if you think of it like this then sure it's a good thing, but don't forget that the awakening ended the true resistance, the awakening is a very smart plan by the Americans, now the Americans are walking in Adhamiya without any fear, now we can't resist the occupation, it's a sad thing that some good men in the resistant became dogs for the Americans, if we want to attack the Americans we must attack the awakening members first and that's something I will not do, I'll not kill an Iraqi….so you see, awakening is a tool for Americans to keep them safe….look in all Adhamiya do you see any writing that says anything about the occupation? No , it's all "Die AlQaeda or die Awakening……no one mentions the occupation anymore…..and that's what the Americans wants, they want us to fight each other and forget about the true goal which is getting the occupation out of our country".
I asked them "let's imagine that the occupation is gone and you have given the chance to select a president or the members of the government? Do you have someone in mind? Do you have someone that you really trust to take control?" My two friends laughed and said" that's the sad truth….there is no one" but O answered "there are, they are the leaders of the clean and true resistance" ….. I laughed and said" don't imagine that they will keep their words, look at the history….no politician keeps his words after he wins… majority of them cares about their profit and benefits, so the true solution is in real democracy….which is something so close to impossible in Iraq"
We talked and argued for hours, but at least I understood the different views of people. On our way back they showed me the house of the leader of the first Adhamiya's awakening council his name was Wathiq, his council had failed to take control, and they showed me his house which was totally blown up to the ground by AlQaeda.
All the initials are false and they don't give any clue about the real characters, the picture above is not for the cafee (Gahwa) that I'm talking about, it's just from the internet and the views in this post are the views of the talkers only.
Few days ago I was in a "Gahwa" which is a café for men where they drink tea or coffee, smoke Hubble-Bubbly and play Backgammon, cards or dominos….this "Gahwa" was in Adhamiya , it was very authentic and in the old alleys of Adhamiya…I went there with two friends and we were supposed to meet their friends (whom I don't know) there….I thought that would be fun since it has been more than 3 years since I went to a "Gahwa" . We reached there and waited for a while and then the friends came…they were ordinary good looking young men, but then I realized they were not that ordinary.
At the beginning I felt uncomfortable as they begun to talk and remember situations that I don't know about….until it was the time when they begun to talk about things that I'm really interested in.
It appeared that two of them were in the resistance (I couldn't know to which organization they belong but they really hated AlQaeda) I'll call them N and J.A., another was in the Islamic army I'll call him O and the last one has recently joined the awakening council and I'll name him A.
It was like finding a treasure for me to sit with these guys, because I'll be able to know things that I've been wondering for a long long time and get the information from insider people. People who really knows what is happening, how, where and why.
I'll mention the important parts of our conversation because we talked for about 4 hours, so it's very hard to remember everything and write it. It started when J.A started to talk about his release from Buka jail and what is the real situation there, he was released a month ago, after 8 months in jail, he was released because they didn't find anything on him, and he really didn't have anything, he was with them but he didn't carry out any operation (as he said)….and then he started to talk about how AlQaeda is controlling the jail…so I immediately asked him" did you watch the show on Al-Arabyia? It was about this, was it true what they have said?" he laughed and said they talked about half the truth…the situation is much worst there, he said:
" I'll tell you something, I knew a guy who was our friend in college (he and his friends who were in the jail), he was a playboy…and he drinks and have girlfriends and stuff like that….as I reached Buka jail I was amazed to find out that he was a prince of Jihad for AlQaeda?!!? Can you imagine, he was walking with bodyguards, and everyone was afraid of him…all the camp are fearful of him, I smiled when I saw him and he was really confused…I told him hi ……. How are you? He said thank god I'm fine….come here I want to talk to you, then he asked his guards to go away and then he whispered in my ears…I'm a prince now, and no one knows what I was…so don't you dare talk about anything you know and I'll provide you with safety and everything you need, just keep your mouth shut…OK….I replied OK, I will not talk but me and my friends need cigarettes because you idiots made it a sin to smoke…also we need some good clothing…he said tonight it will reach you…….at that night two men came and they were carrying four boxes, they said the prince send his greetings and this is a gift from him…one box was cigarettes, one was clothes and two boxes were full of fruits, can you imagine that this looser is a prince now!"
And then I asked him if it was true that they have swords and they kill people and make courts and if they were really the ones who control the jail and he replied sure, everything you've heard is true.
Then I started talking with the two of them J.A and N about why innocents die in the name of the resistance? If it's a resistance no Iraqi should die by the resistance….J.A said that's the sad truth, many things caused this….our organization doesn't kill innocents, the one who does this is the corrupted members of AQ who joined it for money and power and don't forget a very important thing that anyone can blow a market full of Iraqis and they blame the resistance for it, there are criminal gangs, there is the Americans who wants to scar the image of the real resistance so the people will hate them…..there are countries who pays for people to kill, the more they kill, the more they get. And I'd like to add to your information that in the last few months our main concern was to get rid and kill those pigs who kills the innocents and stop the violence against Iraqis…….then N started to talk" do you know that the highest priority for us was to get rid of "Alja`asa" (translation- squeezers - that's a new Iraqi term which means the ones who kills Iraqis for sectarian reason or for money or for no reason at all) , we got rid of so many of them and I think you don't know that many of them are with the awakening right now….they are our second enemy after the Americans"
And then O started to talk " I think you heard about the confrontations between AQ and the Islamic army and I think you imagined that it was a fight over power and control, but it wasn't like that, the fight was to kill the murderers of AQ, we were killing "Alja`asa" they are worst than the Americans, we almost got rid of them and clean the neighborhood and make it like what it is like now, but then the awakening started and they took the credit for it, although many "Ja`asa" are in the awakening, do you know that my father was killed by AlQaeda two months ago, because he was the leader of a squad that is responsible for getting rid of the criminal gangs and AQ criminals, we wanted to put an end to this miserable situation because resistance is not to harm Iraqis, it's for their benefit"
Then I asked them" but don't you think the awakening is good, at least people are feeling safe, and life is getting back to the neighborhood?" and O answered me" if you think of it like this then sure it's a good thing, but don't forget that the awakening ended the true resistance, the awakening is a very smart plan by the Americans, now the Americans are walking in Adhamiya without any fear, now we can't resist the occupation, it's a sad thing that some good men in the resistant became dogs for the Americans, if we want to attack the Americans we must attack the awakening members first and that's something I will not do, I'll not kill an Iraqi….so you see, awakening is a tool for Americans to keep them safe….look in all Adhamiya do you see any writing that says anything about the occupation? No , it's all "Die AlQaeda or die Awakening……no one mentions the occupation anymore…..and that's what the Americans wants, they want us to fight each other and forget about the true goal which is getting the occupation out of our country".
I asked them "let's imagine that the occupation is gone and you have given the chance to select a president or the members of the government? Do you have someone in mind? Do you have someone that you really trust to take control?" My two friends laughed and said" that's the sad truth….there is no one" but O answered "there are, they are the leaders of the clean and true resistance" ….. I laughed and said" don't imagine that they will keep their words, look at the history….no politician keeps his words after he wins… majority of them cares about their profit and benefits, so the true solution is in real democracy….which is something so close to impossible in Iraq"
We talked and argued for hours, but at least I understood the different views of people. On our way back they showed me the house of the leader of the first Adhamiya's awakening council his name was Wathiq, his council had failed to take control, and they showed me his house which was totally blown up to the ground by AlQaeda.
All the initials are false and they don't give any clue about the real characters, the picture above is not for the cafee (Gahwa) that I'm talking about, it's just from the internet and the views in this post are the views of the talkers only.
103 comments:
That is a riveting and important account, Mohammed. Well remembered, well done.
I feel very sorry for O who has recently lost his father.
Take good care of yourself.
Nice to read, but i want more hehehe. Really very interesting. Please tell everything you found out.
It feels something strange because now it looks a if things were going well for the americans who brought disaster to Iraq, and well i know that insurgence and fighting in general always bring trouble and all iraqis want now is to preserve the calm that has recently returned, and that the americans caused relatively little harm compared to militias and the like. But i´m also sure most iraqis feel positive, feel satisfaction whenever they hear that an american patrol was blown up somewhere, most people in the world do because after all they´re "the hated occupiers" and it´s always a delight to see the bully in the classroom being given a lesson. It seems as if they were in power now although as i see it the awakening is the real power in the sunni areas.
The most interesting and sad thing is that truly, the resistance is becoming powerless, if it really has no influence over the awakenings and it´s losing so many fighters, the americans can really buy off the fighters and make it look like a victory. Furthermore the story that the resistance isn´t fighting any more because they don´t want to clash with the awakenings has also been heard from other reputed sources. Everybody was making the same question, why the resistance isn´t resisting???
Doesn´t the resistance really have a conection with the awakening, an influence or a collaboration of some type?
Your comment also showed what al-qaeda in iraq is really all about, religion is just a pretext for sick criminals, it isn´t clerics who are leading al-qaida. Outside the jails they´re finished but inside they´re still in control.
I would also fear the awakenings over the long term specially when al-qaida is finally defeated, after all they´re just militias, if nobody puts a stop to them they´ll do whatever they want...they´re not going to kill and displace people as the mahdi army and al-qaeda did, but you know it, whenever they want to steal something they can do it. The awakening could become a force with no interest on anything...just a militia for the sake of militia, like the ones in Basra, just interested in keeping power on a mafia-style and stealing.
Still it´s a wonderful change for the better that the awakening is now in charge but remember, in democracies presidents are elected every few years and anyway you can protest if you wish. In iraq that´s a dream and i´d bet no one in adhamiya dares criticize the awakening, right?
And by the way, didn´t they mention the militias and the mahdi army?It´s still out there although it´s in ceasefire now
Hey Mohammed,
I liked the legal stuff at the end, very proffesional ;-)
Riveting stuff, really eye opening. I wish Baghdad had no gangs, none of this at all. Its sad that ordinary people have to become vigilantes, the state is failing big time.
Stay safe and be careful what you say and who to.
Happy New Year!
Sarah
Well, because they've done such a good job getting rid of the bad guys, they are closer to their wish of ending the occupation. US troops are scheduled to drawdown this summer. How well Iraq performs in governing itself and keeping the peace within the country determines how many and how fast the withdrawl will go. So if that helps these guys think that what they've done has helped them defeat the occupation, then I'm all for it. The people of the United States really don't want to occupy Iraq. We never did.
I am happy to read that Iraq is safe enough you are able to go to a cafe and meet with friends for 4 hours. It's not much, but it is progress.
That was really interesting, Mohammed. Thanks...
Hey M,
please speak sometime about the contribution of homicide bombers to the chaos. I understand that much of the violence is simply criminal in nature, hiding behind some Islamic group like AQ, Jihad... But where do the homicide bombers fit in? Surely they are not criminals. Do criminals now kill themselves for their cause? Are the criminal duping people to kill themselves and dozens of others?
Half way across the world I(we) seem to learn that the homicide bomber people are committing the most horrific acts of violence against innocents. True? Not True?
You thoughts seem to say that there are many groups who simply want to get occupiers out in order to regain Iraqi sovereignty. Please speak your opinion about why one-vote-one-Iraqi would not be the way to achieve peace and sovereignty. IE: Why is democracy in Iraq so impossible? I think many in the world, including Iraq, are afraid of an Iraqi-Iraqi blood bath will result if the Americans left without a stable, working Iraqi government.
PS. I think you are a good writer. Iraq needs more people who speak with their words, not with their weapons. Words are more powerful. Thanx again for your postings.
I hope they didn't recruit you, Mohammed!
So J.A. is in the "Resistance" and was in jail, but got released anyway. Interesting. He has the best line though: "I replied OK, I will not talk but me and my friends need cigarettes because you idiots made it a sin to smoke"
What did A from the Awakening say when J.A. and O. were talkin' trash about the Awakenings?
Very interesting post, Mohammed.
The US planned from the start to have permanent bases in Iraq, if it´s now seriously thinking about total pull-out it´s because it suffered many losses there.
Answering to a question above about suicide bombers, it seems to me that about 90% of them are foreigners, BUT this is not because the foreigners were specially violent.
Foreigners are a tiny minority, mostly young people with no experience and no weapons that come to Iraq from different countries and isolated. "Al-qaida in iraq" is that, it´s an iraqi organization that sprung after the 2003 invasion. Foreigners who go to iraq are much much much easier to force or mislead by militants into doing suicide attacks because they have no future there, they´re isolated in another country and after all they´ve gone there to fight. An iraqi can flee underground or take refuge some where and he will not be misled, he knows where there are targets and above all common sense, he doesn´t want to blow up a market.
Interestingly iraqi militants who comprise the bulk of al-qaeda have "some problems" committing suicide attacks THEMSELVES, but they have no problem cutting heads, putting car bombs, massacring whole families and blowing up villages. It seems that all violence is acceptable EXCEPT obviously the suicide, they guy in mohammed´s message who was an al-qaida prince in the jail obviously wasn´t interested in martyrdom.
Although of course there must be suicide bombers who die for their cause but...it seems to me that most are young foreigners who essentially don´t know what they´re doing.
They resisted Americans,because the U.S. kept them from overthrowing the Iraqi government. They weren't after a democracy. They wanted a caliphate or dictatorship,with a Sunni strongman running the show again. Sheiks are more pragmatic than the Wahhabis and Baathists that ran the insurgency. Tribes have seen all manner of governments come and go in the last several thousand years. They have little reason to fear democracy.
Mohammed,
Great post. It confirms a lot of what I've been reading and has also added new information to our understanding of the current situation in Iraq. I'm glad that these guys have vowed not to attack Iraqis anymore. Also, as an American, I'm glad they're constrained from attacking American soldiers.
I know it's tough for young Iraqi men to accept defeat, but we defeated the Iraqi military in 21 days four years ago and, militarily, we've never been seriously challenged (by the Iraqi resistance) since then. The first battle of Fallujah was stopped by politicians. Fallujah II, in November, 2004, was the only foreign Jihadi/Iraqi resistance full-on battle with the Americn forces -- and it was won decisively by the American military. This is a hard truth, but one that the young Iraqi men should accept without shame.
In WW II we defeated the German and Japanese militaries at the same time -- and these militaries were far, far more lethal than the Iraqi military was or ever will be. Americans truly want Iraq to succeed and Iraqis, I think, have finally started to understand this (even many of its young men).
This is my view as an American, of course, and you may not agree with me.
Thanks again for this much-needed post.
*
If I understood correctly, those guys more or less said:
The Awakenings are against Al Qaeda and works with the Americans and some of them are former sectarian killers.
Al Qaeda are targeting the Awakenings and trying to fight the Americans outside of Baghdad and they are in control within the jails that hold so many prisoners.
The rest of the resistance who are not Al Qaeda and do not want to cooperate with the Americans are lying low because they don't want to fight the Awakening first in order to be able to then continue fighting the Americans.
You never mentioned any of the Shia militias and what the guys you met thought of them. Or was it never a topic of discussion?
To me it seems like there is a real mess with gangs and militias and terrorists and criminals and occupation forces all fighting eachother and switching alliances from time to time. It's hard to try to vision an end to it all.
It's great to read your observations. Keep posting and stay safe!
Indigo,
Thank you very much, I try to take care as much as possible
Derfel,
Sure there is more…I'll update some more lines later about the sectarian violence and their view about Almahdi army and the sectarian violence.
Some of the members of the awakening were in the resistance and sure there is some kind of connection between them, but if they allowed the resistance to attack the troops then they will not be doing their job!!! Confusing right? And that's what keeps me speculating that things will not continue like this….
And not all of them are inside the jail….they call them selves clerics but for me they are gang leaders…..and AlQaeda is not about religion because Islam is not like this. Islam is totally against the one killing him self for any reason….there are many straight and obvious words in Quran that anyone who kills him self will go straight to hell.
Nooooo, you are so mistaken, there are many who criticize the awakening but at the same time they like the somehow stable situation,….and I should say that I'm afraid the awakening and the situation as a whole will not continue like this…I wish this is just a fear.
Sarah,
Thank you very much, I try to do that.
LJM,
You have a point in that, and I'm sure majority of the Americans didn't want the war to happen at the first place and they are totally against what is happening……but you should know that anyone who is in the resistance and many of the Iraqis don't believe that the US government sent their soldiers and paid this great amount of money and sacrificed many soldiers to give Iraq democracy, they believe they sent them to control oil and the area as a whole and some other reasons like making Iraq a battlefield with it's enemy.
And you should know that it was possible in 2006 and before to go to Gahwa but I didn't go because I was having fun more with my wife (fiancé at that time)
Jg,
You welcome thanks.
California,
They fit in hell, that's what Islam says….but the leaders of the so called Islamic group (who are the furthest thing from Islam) is convincing them that they will go immediately to heaven because they are Jihading!!!! Although there are countless lines in Quran that is saying anyone who kills him self for any reason will go to hell…..suicide bombers are brain washed…..and by the way this is a very interesting and important subject….I'll make a good research about it and make a post…I'll do that soon.
And I'll tell you why I think it's impossible to achieve democracy in Iraq….I'm an Iraqi at the first place and I know the how the majority of my society thinks and second of all I have read many books about the nature of the Iraqi society and how was it developed and what were the things that affected it.
It's a very long subject but I'll give a major reasons….many slices of the Iraqi society are still affected by the laws of nomad, that means they believe in achieving things through power and strength not politics….they believe in the tribe or sect more than in the government and the best of the country as whole……If I continue to talk I'll never stop…it's a very long subject…I'll try to make a post about that too someday.
Rhuslancia,
Hahhahaha, no they haven't don't worry, I'll never be recruited by anyone…even before the war when every one was in Baath party and it was obligatory in my high school to join Albaath party, I joined it…..but never attended a meeting and as soon as I finished high school they gave me my file to deliver it to the college….I ripped it…..I'm independent and will stay like that.
"A" have a resistance ideas but he didn't join them because he was afraid….it didn't bother him because he believes in the resistance but he is sick of the "Ja`asa" and the terrible situation in general, that's why he joined the awakening and I think that money was another reason.
Perry 1961
You might have a point there, but I strongly believe it's not about Sunni or Shiite it's about justice and a government that isn't sectarian…..and the simplest proof is that so many Sunnis from Adhamyia and all over Baghdad , in fact about 90% of the Sunni people I know have elected Ayad Alawi (who is Shiite)!!!!
Jeffery,
These guys have vowed, but sadly there are people who aren't like this.
Well to be honest with you…..personally I'm so ashamed of the defeat, I was sure that Iraqi will be defeated for a simple reason which the strength of the strong air force US have….but I didn't think that it will happen in this short time, and the blame goes to the traitor generals in the Iraqi army because as you know US troops entered Baghdad while Basra was still resisting!!! It was the generals who sold the country….and ordered the soldiers to go home and leave the battle….. and of course the way Saddam has treated the soldiers and the army in general….but what happened has happened and now we need to rebuild our country in the best way.
I'm sure you will understand my feeling and agree with me because I'm an Iraqi after all….imagine your country was invaded and your army was defeated in 21 days…wouldn't you feel ashamed?
Marcus,
We have talked about that of course, I’ll talk about it in an update to this post….I though that the post will be long and boring….but it seems that many are interested to know that…I'll update it soon.
Mohammed,
It was the generals who sold the country…...
They didn't sell out the country, Mohammed, they sold out Saddam. There's a difference.
imagine your country was invaded and your army was defeated in 21 days…wouldn't you feel ashamed?
They didn't fight. They chose not to fight because they were tired of Saddam and hoped for something better for themselves and their country. That is not something to be ashamed of.
The other day during the Army Day celebration there was a suicide bomber. Three Iraqi army soldiers threw themselves on him in an effort to stop him from detonating. Unfortunately he did and they died, along with others there. But that took courage, Mohammed. They are the true heroes of Iraq.
Sorry for jumping on your question to Jeffrey, but I couldn't not say something.
Funniest thing in your story is the part about your dandy friend who became an Emir. Seems that u never saw real life man. This gives u the pattern of how extremists r made & recruited.
I have seen many like this before like my own cousin i.e. (that was many many yeeeears ago). He was exactly in the same situation & suddenly became an extremist. Don't worry. That was on the Shiite side.
To shorten things up, there is a pattern like I said in this situation. It shows how people r turned from one extreme to the other.
AQs & all religious extremists always look for people like that playboy of yours to recruit. Of course he will be 'riper' if he was perfectly brainless & even better ... had had a deep problem that shook him thoroughly : Here u have the ideal candidate. Then using a word here & word there & 'plop' here he falls. Then they can make of him whatever they please.
Guess what : Zarqawi was like that (not a dandy but a real life criminal >> extreme situation) before 'switching' sides. Then see what happened. Not difficult to fill the white blanks using the pattern.
Best recruiting places ? Prisons & mosques.
Apply this to reality & u will get surprises.
Marcus above said,
"To me it seems like there is a real mess with gangs and militias and terrorists and criminals and occupation forces all fighting eachother and switching alliances from time to time. It's hard to try to vision an end to it all."
Ha! Well u will get that every time u lack a real govt to provide law & order. Funny u didn't notice that.
---
Saad
one last thing I forgot to say about that 'resistance' u were talking about. Very funny of them letting themselves getting dented by a bunch of tribal mercenaries lacking arms & brains, like the sahwa boys. I doubt they r a real resistance -had they ever existed- if they got themselves neutralised that easily.
---
Saad
Mohammed,
Rhus isn't the only one who suspects those guys might have been trying to recruit you. The same thought occurred to me. Watch your back!
And I don't think you should be ashamed of the performance of the Iraqi Army. Nor blame it solely on the generals. We saw a lot of things on our television that I'm sure you never saw, mainly that thousands and thousands of common soldiers refused to fight. After all, they were conscripts who didn't want to be there, and Saddam's Iraq wasn't exactly worth fighting for was it? I think your new Iraqi Army will be a huge improvement over the old one, and the best in the middle east.
Bridget
Mohammed, I think most Iraqis would be surprised to know that most Americans think the Bush administration went to war in Iraq, because of oil, also. Only the Bush true believers bought into the "democracy" story. Most people here had serious doubts how that would ever work out there, although most sincerely wish the Iraqi people well and wish it had worked out for the best for them somehow. As for the oil, seems to have worked out well for Iran and China, probably also the Russians. At least Iraq will make money from the oil from someone. I only hope good comes from it for the Iraqi people and not just corrupt people looking to get rich off your oil.
Mohammed,
Well to be honest with you…..personally I'm so ashamed of the defeat
Listen, of course I understand. But Iraq was a small country taking on the best-equipped, most lethal military in the world. There is no shame in losing to our military. And remember that the 4th Infantry Division was not allowed to come down through Turkey and into Iraq from the north. A third of our forces were held back on ships off the coast of Turkey. The defeat, to be honest, could have been much quicker.
As you say, the Americans had air-dominance from the very beginning and any military with would have been cut up quickly in that situation. So what I'm saying is that there should be no shame in losing to the US.
I'm sure you will understand my feeling and agree with me because I'm an Iraqi after all….imagine your country was invaded and your army was defeated in 21 days…wouldn't you feel ashamed?
Yes, I absolutely understand your feeling. The Japanese and the German militaries, two of the best militaries ever created, were also defeated by the Americans and our allies. In the European theater, we had help from the British, Canadians, and the Soviets, among others. In the Pacific Theater, against the Japanese, we were alone. I know that facts might not ease your shame completely, but you should hope that the Iraqi military learns as much as possible from us now and re-build a really good military for the future.
About the Iraqi generals, you're right, from I've read. Some of them were indeed flipped by our intelligence agents on the ground in Iraq before the war started. I might have to look at Gordon and Trainor's "Cobra II" to see if they discuss that part of the story in any detail.
*
Mohammed,there's a difference between going to war FOR the oil,or going to war BECAUSE of the oil. Without oil,Saddam wouldn't have had dozens of palaces or the 4th largest army in the world. He wouldn't have been any more of a threat than the Baathist President for life next door in Syria. Iraq is free to sell its oil to anyone it chooses. That isn't going to change.
I think you're wrong on Iraq's chance for democracy. Power can be gained through the ballot box,and at regular intervals. Happens all over the world. The Awakening Movement has proclaimed its desire for Provincial elections,and intends to compete nationally next year. I think they'll do well. Better than the clerics even.
@Jeffrey, 14 January 2008 10:37 PM
In WW II we defeated the German and Japanese militaries at the same time
Gaargh - the Hollywood version of World War II. Take no notice of Jeffrey, folks, he gets his "history lessons" from Disney and Fox.
Hi Mohammed,
I am so glad that you found out the answers to your questions… At least now you know who your real enemy is!!!
Here is a video about what most American soldiers are thinking when they are killing innocent Iraqis on the streets; they are thinking that they are in a movie or something!
Generation Kill – Iraq
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3y_5vxM8PYM&feature=related
They think that Iraqi blood is worthless! So let them all fight each other and die… Divide and Conquer has always worked for them................!
Don’t be sad!
Even though you Iraqi people might feel disheartened and defeated; just know that good will prevail against the evil!
You all are in our prayers! Smile :)
Mohammed, that was an excellent, excellent post. Perhaps your best so far. Thank you very much for it. It confirms a lot of my beliefs.
Oh, ad you are right about the nature of Iraq's defeat. Generals, starting with so-called "chemical Ali" right at the top told their men to go home and not to fight. They had been made a lot of promises and under-the-table deals by the Americans as a means to stop serious resistance.
*gag* Bruno, must you? It was a good discussion until you came with the under-the-table deals crap. *sigh*
Mohammed,
For the record I just want to state that I am not a Bush true believer. I voted for Al Gore in 2000 and George Bush in 2004. And I do not believe for one minute that Bush's reason for invading Iraq was to steal its oil.
I think he fell into the trap of reading the ME as one big threat and wanted to try to change that scenario by removing Saddam in an effort to create a domino effect of democracy in the region. Unfortunately, you don't get a system that has relied on dictatorships to survive, to change that easily. You said it here...
….many slices of the Iraqi society are still affected by the laws of nomad, that means they believe in achieving things through power and strength not politics
Damn straight they will fight back tooth and nail. They haven't survived this long by being push overs. Thomas Friedman used the term "Hama Rules" in his book "From Beirut to Jerusalem". If President Bush had read that book he might have gotten an inkling of how difficult it would be.
Rachel (Indigo),
Gaargh - the Hollywood version of World War II. Take no notice of Jeffrey, folks, he gets his "history lessons" from Disney and Fox.
In WWII my father and two uncles fought in the Pacific theater; three other uncles fought in the European theater. The American military was, without doubt, the primary factor in the defeat of both the German and the Japanese armies and navies. There were, to be sure, contributions from other countries: the Soviets, British, Canadians, and Austrialians. But many of the key battles were conducted by the American forces. The Battle of the Bulge, just to take one example, occurred at the end of 1944 and into 1945 when the American forces led by General Patton pushed the Germans out of Belgium and Luxembourg (where many of my ancestors are from) and back across the Rhine. In that operation, there were 80,000 American casualties (19,000 killed in action). You can visit today in France, Belgium, and Luxembourg, if you want, vast cemetaries of graves of American soldiers who died just to liberate Europe.
My father was on Saipan and my Uncle Chuck was a Marine who was on the front lines at Pelilieu and Okinawa. Mr. Ament, a neighbor across the alley from us as I was growing up, survived the Bataan Death March. You have no idea how personal WWII still is to Americans. There is nothing "Disney" about the sacrifices made by my family and the people in my hometown during WWII.
Many Americans died in those wars against Germans and Japanese (around 300,000) as we fought in many parts of the world (at the same time), from North Africa, to Europe, to Southeast Asia, to the islands of the Pacific. These are facts, Rachel. And on D-Day, you will recall, we fought alongside both the Canadian and British forces. For the British in WWII, after Europe had been overrun by the Nazis, the Americans were your only allies. Ask your parents' generation about the importance of the Yanks to your country's survival.
*
"Fallujah II, in November, 2004, was the only foreign Jihadi/Iraqi resistance full-on battle with the Americn forces -- and it was won decisively by the American military."
I believe this is wrong. That second attack on Fallujah spread the resistance across Iraq, and it took almost three years to calm down - and that may or may not be permanent. I would say that the American military did a great job of destroying the town of Fallujah and killing a LOT of people, but even today they have checkpoints and a driving ban on that town - not a success in my eyes.
After the resistance spread, Negroponte showed up and started working with the Interior Ministry and the death squads went to work. As Rumsfeld said, they applied the "salvadorian option" - and hey, the Sunni sectarian death squads were right behind the development of the Interior Ministry death squads.
I personally don't believe the calm we are seeing will last, but I hope I am wrong.
Someone above started calling suicide bombers "homicide bombers" - that is just confusing to start calling them that, and it sounds silly also. All bombers are homicidal, but suicide bombers have bombs on themselves and kill themselves in the process.
Here are the names of the three brave Iraqis who hurled themselves on an exploding suicide bomber.
Malik Abdul Ghanem
Asa’ad Hussein Ali
Abdul-Hamza Abdul-Hassan Rissan
Read the story here:
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/totten/1867
Tom in Texas
Mohammed, it's up to you how much credibility you give those guys and the things that they told you. But I think you probably know that when it comes to things people are ashamed of, they don't tell the whole story. There are things in my past that I've never told anyone, including my wife or my parents. I just mentioned some of the parts that didn't bother me too much. I don't think Iraqis are different.
That's one of the reasons I tend to heavily discount "horror stories" told by US military veterans. I've known a lot of combat veterans both when I was in the service and after I got out, and I've NEVER heard any of them recount the kind of tale of cruelty and brutality I've seen so often in the press, except when they were so drunk they couldn't even stand up. And in those cases they broke down crying before they finished the story.
If I was you, I'd be a bit leery of anyone who seems to be discussing such matters casually. They are either sociopaths, or they're making it up.
Dear Mohammed,
your post is truly amazing and most interesting.
I linked to it at your brother-in-law Zeyad's comment page.
I hope you'll keep expanding on the subject of the Iraqi patriotic resistance ...
in your experience, does it exist, or RhusLancia and Co. are right ?
On another topic (totally unrelated to your post), what this Jeffrey Schuster writes is completely comical.
The US of America got SOUNDLY DEFEATED in South-East Asia in the Seventies, by much weaker enemies (i.e., the population of three countries these mad imperialists occupied), and I'm sure that such will be their destiny in Iraq and Afghanistan as well.
On top of that, what he writes about WW2 is grotesque, and out of some silly comics as well.
From Jeffrey's narrative one gets the impression that the US of America won single-handedly the war against the Axis.
It is FALSE, and UTTER BALONEY.
Out of more than 60 million people (yes, 60,000,000 !) killed in WW2, less than half a million were Americans.
Even on the Pacific front against Japan those who took the brunt of the fighting were 1) the Chinese (who had some tens of millions casualties), and 2) the forces of the British Empire and Commonwealth.
While in Europe, against Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy, those who actually defanged the Axis were 1) the Soviets, 2) the European Resistance, and 3) the Brits.
The (relevant, and possibly indispensable) part of the US of America in the victory was not so much in the fighting, but in the logistics, technology and mass production that enabled the Allies to defeat Nazi-Fascism.
So, the boastful version proposed by Jeffrey is unfounded, ridiculous, and actually slighting the real, precious contribution the Americans of the 1940s gave to freedom in the world.
Dancewater,
I believe this is wrong. That second attack on Fallujah spread the resistance across Iraq, and it took almost three years to calm down - and that may or may not be permanent.
It didn't spread "the resistance" across Iraq, Dancewater. Unless you consider AQ and affiliates murdering Iraqis in th tens of thousands, to be "resistance".
When AQ lost Falluja as a safe haven, they did move to other cities. Most notable, they began infiltrating Mosul before the battle in Falluja was even over.
The point being made is that Falluja was one of the only places the terrorists ever tried to hold their ground. And they failed, miserably.
I would say that the American military did a great job of destroying the town of Fallujah and killing a LOT of people, but even today they have checkpoints and a driving ban on that town - not a success in my eyes.
Then your judgment isn't very good. Falluja is one of the most peaceful cities in Iraq right now. The difference from even a year ago, is night and day. There hasn't been a US casualty in Falluja in months.
Se Micheal Totten's two recent articles on Falluja for details, if you are interested. If not, then don't bother, but your information is way out of date.
http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/2008/01/the-rings-on-za.php
http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/2008/01/a-plan-to-kill.php
According to the conventional wisdom, Al Qaeda makes up only a very small part of Iraq’s insurgency. Maybe that’s true, overall. But I have not been able to find a single person on the ground in Western Iraq – not American, and not Iraqi – who says anyone other than Al Qaeda has played a significant role in the insurgency.
This part is relevant to Mohammed's post. Some of the men he spoke to claimed to have been in resistance groups that were opposed to Al Qaeda. According to Michael Totten, there isn't anyone (Iraqi) in Anbar or in the US military who believes such groups have ever existed. All the active insurgent groups were working with Al Qaeda. That's why there basically is NO INSURGENCY in Anbar, right now. Iraqis in Anbar don't support Al Qaeda anymore, and Al Qaeda *is* the insurgency.
I suspect things are still bad in Mosul, because Al Qaeda still has friends in Mosul. When those friends of Al Qaeda are caught or flipped, things will hopefully become quiet there as well.
By now I recognize the writing style and perspective of many of the frequent posters on some Iraqi blogs. So, I'm reading one of the comments above thinking to myself, this is Saad's writing style, but this comment shows much too much perceptiveness to be the Saad I know. Scroll down, and lo and behold...it IS Saad! Will wonders never cease.
Bridget
Indigo, what's your version of WWII? Did the US not defeat the Germans and the Japanese at the same time?
Bruno,
Mohammed, that was an excellent, excellent post. Perhaps your best so far. Thank you very much for it. It confirms a lot of my beliefs.
You shouldn't be so transparent. You claim it's his best post so far, and in the same paragraph say the post confirms your own opinions. Most of us already knew you're the type of person who only likes to hear support of his own opinions, and that you don't really give a damn about conflicting information, or even pesky facts. But try to at least be a little subtle about it, eh? :P
Oh, ad you are right about the nature of Iraq's defeat. Generals, starting with so-called "chemical Ali" right at the top told their men to go home and not to fight. They had been made a lot of promises and under-the-table deals by the Americans as a means to stop serious resistance.
My understanding is that many of the Generals from the Iraqi regular Army approached us before the invasion, and said that they would not fight. They simply weren't loyal to Saddam, and they knew they weren't going to win. They were not paid. The Republican Guard did in fact fight. I'm sure you recall? Saddam arranged 5 divisions of Republican Guard around Baghdad, and didn't bother trying to defend anything else. Those 5 divisions took a terrible beating, and were declared "destroyed" before US ground forces even got into the city. You seriously don't remember this stuff? It was on TV all over the world, man. You have a TV, right?
By the way, we tried to kill Chemical Ali in Nasiriya (I think) on day two of the invasion. With a big ass bomb. That was all over the news too, especially when we still thought we might have gotten him. So, I doubt Chemical Ali was one of the Generals that was collaborating with US forces. Unless he's a dumbass.
Is Fallujah better off than five years ago? Are their lives better? jobs and economic options better? water and sewer services better? educational opportunities? ability to walk and drive where they want?
Just speaking for myself, but if there were foreign troops running around my town, and they had bombed the snot out of it, killed massive numbers of people, destroyed more than half the town,and then a journalist who worked with them, and was embedded with them - I would not tell the truth when asked by a translator for that journalist.
By the way, we had a man from Fallujah visit our town last September. He had nothing good to say about the war or the US military. He did like and appreciate American people though.
if zarqawi and al qaeda in Iraq were so bad, why did the US military make them worse?
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20060411&articleId=2256
We did Mojo,but we had a bit of help. The Brits and Russians couldn't do it without us,and vice versa. The axis side might have won the war if Hitler had taken England before tackling Russia. And we'd all be members of the Baath Party if Saddam had taken over Saudi Arabia at the same time he invaded Kuwait. Thank God for the tactical errors of tyrannical megalomaniacs.
[lynnette] "*gag* Bruno, must you? It was a good discussion until you came with the under-the-table deals crap. *sigh*"
And Lynnette goes and sticks her foot into a large and smelly poo yet again. If you bothered to research the topic before yapping, you might realise that the miraculous melting away of Iraq's army wasn't such a miracle after all, thereby sparing yourself much embarrassment:
"The reason given by the U.S. for failing to hand over Hashem, according to an adviser to Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, was the public disapproval of his death sentence by President Jalal Talibani and Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi. But Iraqi officials in Maliki's office suspected that Hashem was being shielded because of his key role in secret contacts with the U.S. before the invasion of Iraq — contacts that U.S. intelligence sources say led Hashem to assist the U.S. in minimizing resistance by the Iraqi Army, which largely faded away in the face of the invading Americans. Hashem's influence was over the professional army rather than the Republican Guard or other elements personally loyal to Saddam, said a former officer of the Defense Intelligence Agency in Iraq. Yet, his actions on behalf of the U.S. "saved American lives," says the same source, and perhaps the lives of quite a few Iraqi troops as well.
A former CIA officer with long experience in Iraq told TIME that turning over Hashem for execution would be a "gross miscarriage of justice." The CIA officer also confirmed longstanding reports that the U.S. had, in fact, sought to bring Hashem into a senior role in a post-invasion Iraqi government because of his identity as a Sunni, and as a "soldier's soldier" who was respected by a broad spectrum of the military.
[...]
If the U.S. military does in fact hand Hashem over for execution, the move would stand in jarring contrast to guarantees of safety and security given to the Iraqi personally by Petraeus when Hashem surrendered in 2003. Hashem was one of the very few top Iraqis to surrender himself voluntarily to the United States. Petraeus, then commander of U.S. forces in northern Iraq, personally arranged his capitulation, guaranteeing his safety and medical treatment. "I officially request your surrender to me," Petraeus wrote in a personal letter to Hashem, noting the general's "reputation as a man of honor and integrity is known throughout this country."
Then Petraeus declared: "You have my word that you will be treated with the utmost dignity and respect, and that you will not be physically or mentally mistreated while under my custody."
http://law.case.edu/grotian-moment-blog/entry.asp?entry_id=296
[craig] "Some of the men he spoke to claimed to have been in resistance groups that were opposed to Al Qaeda. According to Michael Totten, there isn't anyone (Iraqi) in Anbar or in the US military who believes such groups have ever existed."
1: Totten is a spokesman and apologist for the Occupation. Of course he would say that.
2: Totten has not interviewed every Iraqi in Anbar. He has not interviewed even 1% of Iraqis in Anbar.
For the further education (and embarrassment, of course) of dear Lynnette:
"American cyber-warfare experts recently waged an e-mail assault, directed at Iraq's political, military and economic leadership, urging them to break with Saddam Hussein's government. A wave of calls has gone to the private cellphone numbers of specially selected officials inside Iraq, according to leaders at the Pentagon and in the regional Central Command."
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9901EED81E3DF937A15751C0A9659C8B63
It appears that this campaign caught a big fish in the form of "chemical ali", except for that Lynnette doesn't want to believe it. That's fine. What YOU believe doesn't bother me much, since you're mostly allergic to the truth anyway.
Or, gosh Lynnette, how about THIS article on the matter of whether or not under-the-table deals occurred or not:
"The unprecedented collapse of Saddam Hussein's regime, quashed with dizzying speed and negligible casualties, was not the result of good luck or overwhelming force of arms. It was largely due to cell phones manned by CIA psy-ops agents conducting a telemarketing campaign selling surrender to the enemy’s top commanders.
[...]
According to a credible account in a Lebanese newspaper it says was based on information confided by top U.S. sources, the campaign resulted in the defection of the top ranks of the Republican Guard and the Iraqi army, who defected en masse, leaving their troops to melt away as U.S. forces advanced on Baghdad, saving the lives of thousands of coalition forces. It was no secret that U.S. military intelligence agencies were making phone calls to Iraqi generals urging them to surrender once the invasion began. As far back as February, the media were reporting details of the top-secret operation. On Feb. 25, the Chicago Tribune wrote of the operation under the headline "US Targets Iraqis' Resolve with Psychological Warfare."
On March 24, USA Today went even further by reporting that U.S. intelligence officials were contacting "Iraq's generals and leaders of Saddam Hussein's ruling Baath Party with promises of safety, asylum and a role in Iraq's new government if they defect, mount a coup or agree not to use biological or chemical weapons.""
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/4/21/103502.shtml
What was it that Petraeus promised Hashemi aka Chemical Ali? Asylum and a role in the new government? Say it ain't so!
Had enough, or must I continue pasting more articles that demonstrate that the Iraqi "defeat" was less due to American skill in battle (as the deluded Jeffrey would have us believe) and MORE due to buying people off and doing shady deals with them?
[mohammed] "the blame goes to the traitor generals in the Iraqi army because as you know US troops entered Baghdad while Basra was still resisting!!! It was the generals who sold the country….and ordered the soldiers to go home and leave the battle….."
Mohammed was right.
But then, he IS an Iraqi IN IRAQ, as opposed to an American in Minnesota, so, really, it's no surprise.
@ Anti-Iraqi American 'Mojo', January 16, 2008 5:14 AM.
['Mojo'] "Did the US not defeat the Germans and the Japanese at the same time?".
NO, 'Mojo', they DID NOT.
It was NOT the US alone, nor single-handedly.
From YOUR (comical) version of WW2, 'Mojo', it truly seems that you are even more ignorant about world history than you are about Iraq ...
Italian,
You make a good point in regard to WWII. America as a whole was deeply involved in fighting that war. Both at home and abroad. And the outcome was that we prevailed, along with our allies.
The US of America got SOUNDLY DEFEATED in South-East Asia in the Seventies, by much weaker enemies...
Perhaps you are overlooking the fact that unlike WWII America was not, as a whole, involved in fighting that war. And the outcome was a defeat for us and our allies.
If Iraq ends up backsliding, it may not be because of actions taken by our enemies. Something to think about, perhaps?
Some of the things those guys in the cafe said really reveal that they clearly don't understand the American situation at all.
For instance, the idea that American troops would be withdrawn from Iraq because of violence they might encounter is exactly backwards. The most likely cause of withdrawal is of course the domestic political situation in the US, because the whole operation is very unpopular with most liberals (just over half the population) here, many of whom believe that the US should mind its own business and let Iraq be governed by whatever local militia manages to sieze power. Barring that, however, the other reason the US troops would be withdrawn would be if the elected Iraqi government were perceived (in the eyes of the American leaders) to have de facto control in Iraq, the ability to limit crime and stop any coup that might be attempted. If that were the case, there would be no further reason for the US military to maintain any significant presense there. A small token force on a base somewhere, perhaps, but nothing of any consequence.
As far as the control-of-oil angle: many Americans think that too, and it may even have played a role in how some naive politicians were convinced to go along with things, but it does not actually make any sense for the US to be involved in Iraq for that reason. For one thing, the US already has more de facto control of the crude oil market than any other country (and WAY more than Iraq), due to a combination of being substantially the largest consumer, as well as one of the leading producers. (We are a net importer, but only because we use so much of the stuff. The US actually produces more petroleum than Iraq and Iran combined.) If the US government wants crude oil prices to go up or down, there are mechanisms available to effect that. Not least, raising or lowering the excise tax on gas has a disproportionately large impact on prices at the pump in the US, which in turn has a major impact on consumption. Also, while a lot of US oil production is private, most of the Alaska reserves are under government control, so production there can be increased or decreased as desired. Increasing Alaskan production decreases the US demand for foreign oil, lowering the commodity price; conversely, reducing Alaskan production would raise the commodity price on the international market. (Did you know you can flood the market with something if you're a net importer? Yes you can, if you're also a major producer and normally produce below capacity.)
Individual Americans mostly believe that the OPEC countries control oil prices, and the American government would probably prefer that most of them go on believing that, but the only way OPEC can control oil prices is if all the member countries stick to their agreed quotas. Saudi Arabia tries to compensate when other OPEC countries go over-quota by reducing their production, and by doing so they retain some control over the commodity price. They're also the largest producer, so they have more leverage in the first place than most of the other OPEC nations. Nonetheless, the US has a good deal of leverage as well. Even if we annexed Iraq and made it the fifty-first state (which is politically impossible, but even if it _were_ possible, and if we did it), the amount of additional control over oil that would be gained is small compared to the level of control we already have. It certainly would not not be worth spending what what we have spent in Iraq to achieve that. (Please note that I am not saying the US government _does_ manipulate commodity oil prices; I'm only saying that they have the _ability_ to do so, if it would gain them anything. Most of the time it wouldn't, especially when the political disadvantages are taken into consideration. I do seem to recall a small excise-tax change after Katrina, but that was probably intended only to stop the scare-induced prices at the pump domestically; the international crude commodity price was probably not the target there.)
I don't believe it's exactly *impossible* for democracy to work in Iraq, but I do believe it will be very difficult to achieve. The elected government would have to be kept in power (at least partly via foreign military intervention, at least for a while) long enough for at least one entire generation of Iraqis to grow up living under an elected government, so that the population can begin to view that as the normal state of affairs, and also so that the loyalty of most of the fighting-age men will be to the Iraqi people and the elected government, rather than to some strong-man's regime. That takes time. The US will probably not be able to keep up our involvement that long, due to the political situation here. As soon as 2009 there is a very real chance that a President will be in power who will view Iraq's fate as largely irrelevant to American interests, or maybe even someone who views the whole operation as immoral. If that happens, the Iraqi government will have to find ways to keep control of the various insurgent movements without significant American help -- and if they fail, one or another of the insurgent groups will sieze power and the nation will revert to tyrrany. This is a very real danger that Iraq faces.
Regarding World War II, the US defeated Japan more-or-less single-handedly (albeit, not entirely; we had some assistance from allies, most notably China, which was particularly important early in the war), but we did not defeat them because the US military was so great going into the war. Indeed, the bulk of the US Pacific fleet (fortunately excepting the carriers) was *destroyed* in 1941, and the US Navy took a serious pasting from the Japanese navy for the first few months of the war. Why, then did the US defeat Japan? How were we able to push them back again and again clear across the Pacific, until finally we were able to land troops on Okinawa and fly planes over the Japanese islands at will?
You can analyze individual battles and talk about certain Japanese ships being sunk at certain times or certain American carriers being saved, but when all is said and done it basically boils down to economics. Japan had a large military going into the war, but Japan was a third-world country, with limited production capacity, limited infrastructure, and so on and so forth. They were able to replace every Japanese soldier who died, but they were unable to replace lost equipment and supplies -- especially large items like capital ships -- fast enough to keep the war up indefinitely. The United States, in contrast, was a major first-world power, and once the shipyards got ramped up we were able to build new ships and planes and so forth faster than the Japanese could sink them. Indeed, training pilots turned out to be our bottleneck in the Pacific theatre, the thing that slowed us down. Given unlimited pilots we'd have been in Okinawa several months sooner. (Then we decided to use the a-bomb to terminate the war. But that didn't change the outcome; we were already winning. The a-bomb just shortened the war by a few months. Indeed, I am convinced that if Japan had had the a-bomb and we had not, we still would have won, though it would have cost us a good deal more.)
The European theatre is another matter, however. Certainly US involvement was important, but the ability of the RAF to stand up to the Luftwaffe more or less indefinitely effectively prevented Germany from landing any troops on the British isles, and that was probably even more critical. What happened at Bletchley was very key as well.
Nonetheless, Iraqis do not need to feel ashamed that their military did not repel the American armed forces. The US is a major first-world power, with something like 150 times the GDP of Iraq. That's not an even vaguely fair fight. To use a wrestling analogy, we're not in the same weight class. Indeed, the US *spent* more on the war effort than the entire Iraqi GDP. How many cruise missiles do you suppose Iraq would have been able to afford (they aren't exactly cheap), even if some first-world country with the technology to make them had been willing to sell them to Hussein's regime? Could Saddam afford to equip all of the Iraqi soldiers with the same level of state-of-the-art equipment the US forces were using? Iraq had decades-old surplus Russian tanks to work with, WWII-era technology. You can't fight a modern war with those tools. You can maybe fight *Iran* with those tools, and you could positively dominate Syria or Lebanon, but you can't fight a first-world power with those kinds of resources. It's like trying to build a skyscraper out of straw. Nobody could do it. Iraqis couldn't do it, and under equivalent conditions Americans couldn't do it either. There's no shame in that.
Frankly, if the Iraqi generals told the troops not to fight, they saved the lives of many of the men under them. Of course, those men now must choose what they will do with their lives, and if they choose to join up with various militant factions and fight one another endlessly, that will be much to the detriment of Iraq. That's the real shame.
Vietnam is another matter. There was a lot of political stuff going on there that made everything very complicated, not least that the US forces were not permitted to directly attack North Vietnam for most of the war. Also, although we on paper were only fighting North Vietnam, there were significant resources flowing in from external sources. Historians and political scientists love to argue about why the US did not succeed in Vietnam, but the short answer is, "It's complicated."
Incidentally, most Americans are not really ashamed that we failed to achieve our objectives there. Probably more are ashamed that we were over there in the first place, especially since given what we know now it was obviously totally unnecessary. (However, we didn't really know that at the time. Until the Berlin wall came down, the degree of economic deterioration in Eastern Europe was not generally known in the West. Greenspan, for instance, was surprised by exactly how bad things were over there when he finally got to see it directly, and as Chairman of the Fed he was the kind of person you would have expected to _know_ something like that.) The idea that Marxist central planning will spread and take over the world so that someone sitting in Moscow will tell me in Ohio where to live and where to work and whether I can visit my family in the city down the road on any given weekend does not seem plausible now, but as recently as the 1980s it was a real fear that many people had. At the time of the Vietnam conflict, stopping the spread of Communism in Asia seemed much more important than anyone would think it now. Hindsight, as they say, is 20-20.
Dancewater,
Is Fallujah better off than five years ago? Are their lives better? jobs and economic options better? water and sewer services better? educational opportunities? ability to walk and drive where they want?
That's a bit of a high standard, considering Falluja was literally hell on earth a few years ago. It's not hell on earth, anymore, and that's an improvement. You can't acknowledge things have gotten better recently in many places in Iraq, including some of the places that were previously places so unsafe that even Iraqis would not go there? Why not?
Just speaking for myself, but if there were foreign troops running around my town, and they had bombed the snot out of it, killed massive numbers of people, destroyed more than half the town,and then a journalist who worked with them, and was embedded with them - I would not tell the truth when asked by a translator for that journalist.
Fallujans never had problems with telling anyone how they really felt in the past, Dancewater. If what you say is true, and Fallujans are now concerned with what Americans think of them, that is also an improvement.
Italian fat sweaty slob,
NO, 'Mojo', they DID NOT.
It was NOT the US alone, nor single-handedly.
That isn't what he asked. You are the one who inserted the text about "alone" and "single handedly".
And I see from your snarky and dishonest comments about the US in Vietnam and World War II, that your pathological hatred of Americans is not relating only to Iraq and George Bush, as you have previously claimed. Thanks for the insight into your personality.
Bruno,
On March 24, USA Today went even further by reporting that U.S. intelligence officials were contacting "Iraq's generals and leaders of Saddam Hussein's ruling Baath Party with promises of safety, asylum and a role in Iraq's new government if they defect, mount a coup or agree not to use biological or chemical weapons.""
And what's wrong with that? Haven't Iraqis (and others) been complaining that the US did not treat Iraqi's military fairly after the invasion? That it was a mistake to disband it, and prevent anyone who was a Colonel or above from serving in the new Iraqi Army or Security Forces? Weren't those promises, good promises that should have been kept?
I couldn't help but notice that the actual text of those articles didn't bear much resemblance to the claims you made in your previous comment. What a shocker. I'm disappointed in you, Bruno.
PS:
Here, according to an exclusive report in the Lebanese newspaper Sawt al-`Urouba, are the details of what their correspondent Walid Rabbah called "The Deal."
You're propaganda piece only obliquely refers to USA today, and bases the conspiracy theory it's putting forward almost entirely on a Lebanese journalist who works for a Lebanese newspaper. And not even a major Lebanese newspaper. Why is that? Hmmmm? :P
Indeed, the US and its allies defeated the Germans and Japanese at the same time. How awful of me to forget about our allies!
By the way, Italian, can you elaborate on Italy's contribution to the allied victory in World war II? :D
Mohammed, I believe that the best way to end the occupation is to end all violence, including ending attacks on US soldiers. Do you disagree?
I hope you are doing well.
It's funny how many people forget all the good that America has done in the world and choose only to hate. Sure we currently have the worst president in the history of our country, but that doesn't mean the PEOPLE of America, or the country as a whole, are evil. In fact, I would say we're some of the most generous people in the world, even if we're not the most educated.
HAHA, they're trying to bash American for WWII and Vietnam....too fuckin funny!!
Good to see everyone can focus on the present and try to help find positive solutions. Oh wait, these inbreeds are doing the opposite of that. Very smart and productive those people...
Mohammed, this was an awesome post from you, and one of the most informative ones yet. We hope to see more along these lines (yes, without you being recruited).
Italian,
This is what I wrote:
[Jeffrey] The Japanese and the German militaries, two of the best militaries ever created, were also defeated by the Americans and our allies. In the European theater, we had help from the British, Canadians, and the Soviets, among others. In the Pacific Theater, against the Japanese, we were alone.
And there is no question that we fought in multiple places at the same time. In the fall, winter, and spring of 1944-45, the U.S. Marines were fighting in the Pacific Theater and the U.S. Army was fighting in Europe AT THE SAME TIME. You want examples?
1. Battle of the Bulge (Dec. 16, 1944 - Jan. 26, 1945) Who was fighting? Around 500,000 Germans, 600,000 Americans (U.S. Army), and 55,000 British. St. Vith? Bastogne? General Patton? Any of this ring a bill?
2. Battle of Iwo Jima (Feb. 14, 1945 - March 26, 1945) U.S. Marines, 3rd, 4th, and 5th Divisions -- they're NOT the same as the U.S. Army. Mount Surabachi? Ever heard of it?
3. The Italian Campaign (Sept. 43 - May, 1945) U.S. Fifth Army and the British 8th Army (which included divisions from New Zealand, India, Poland, and Brazil, and maybe a few other countries. Anzio? Gustav Line? Gothic Line? Any of these names ring a bell?
Americans and its allies in Italy:
The U.S. Fifth Army was in continuous combat in Italy for more than twenty months, the longest of any U. S. field army during World War II. Allied losses in the Italian Campaign exceeded 312,000, of which 60% were sustained by Fifth Army units. Of the total losses, 31,886 were killed, including 19,475 Americans, the remainder of the dead being British and Commonwealth troops, Brazilians, Poles, Frenchmen, free Italians, and members of the Jewish brigade from British Palestine. German dead in Italy were estimated at more than 400,000. [source]
SUMMARY:
At the end of 1944 and into 1945 at the same time that U.S. Marines were fighting on Iwo Jima and moving on to Okinawa the U.S. Army was pushing the German Army back across the Rhine (Battle of the Bulge, for example) and at the same time we were fighting alongside our allies in Italy to push the Germans out of your country.
There were many contributions by other countries, of course, but no historian would argue that the Nazis and Fascists (Italians, by the way) and the Japanese could ever have been defeated without our military forces or without our massive exports of military hardware and supplies to our allies. Many Europeans countries have military cemetaries filled with Americans who died to in those years.
Here's an example of just one in Italy:
Florence American Cemetery and Memorial
Those are graves of American soldiers who died to liberate your country.
*
Bruno,
I did not say that there was no contact between our people and Iraqis before the invasion for the purpose of trying to get the Iraqi military to stand down. My objection to your comment was the implication by your use of the term "back door deals" that there was something wrong with that. You are continually attempting to feed the paranoia of Iraqis by your twisting of events.
What was it that Petraeus promised Hashemi aka Chemical Ali? Asylum and a role in the new government? Say it ain't so!
Sure, Bruno. It ain't so. You are mixing two different men. The man that is referred to as Chemical Ali is not Hashemi.
[Dear Mohammed, sorry for this 'lateral' discussion, in part Off Topic; but if you only were able in terms of time, you should intervene more often on properly Iraqi matters.]
@ Lynnette in Minnesota, January 16, 2008 6:10 PM.
[Lynnette] "Perhaps you are overlooking the fact that unlike WWII America was not, as a whole, involved in fighting [the Vietnam] war. And the outcome was a defeat for us and our allies.
If Iraq ends up backsliding, it may not be because of actions taken by our enemies. Something to think about, perhaps?".
Something to think about INDEED, dear Lynnette: the American people as a whole was involved in the war effort and in the victory in WW2, while it was not in the Vietnam war, and it is not now.
That is because most of the Americans (differently from you, and from all your fanatical or mindless pals infesting the comments pages of Iraqi blogs) have still got some sense, and can tell the difference between a struggle to the death imposed on the US of America, such as WW2 was, and unnecessary, unjust wars of choice that some of the most criminal or insane of your politicians may promote, such as the South-East Asia war and the present one.
Wars, those of this last kind, that you are bound to lose (and your defeat means Justice as well).
@ 'We Don't Want No Education' Marine Craig, January 16, 2008 7:42 PM & (especially) 7:58 PM.
[Craig] "By the way, Italian, can you elaborate on Italy's contribution to the allied victory in World war II? :D".
Dear and Most Courteous Craig, I did INDEED "elaborate on Italy's contribution to the allied victory in World War II", and there is little to laugh about it; FYI, the Italian antifascist Resistance, 8 September 1943 - 4 May 1945, was the militarily strongest in Western Europe, and saved innumerable Allied lives, pining down as many as 11 German divisions in Northern Italy, away from the front.
I elaborated on it at Zeyad's blog, in Summer 2005, discussing with a USMC officer; a USMC officer who, differently from you, oh my most articulate of all US Marines, was able to understand what one would explain to him or tell him.
If you are interested, you can go and retrieve it from Zeyad's archives; which would be good for your education, dear Craig, ... provided you were interested in getting an education, in the first place ! :(
Italiano,
How convenient that you forgot to mention that Italy under Mussolini was the third AXIS power along with Germany and Japan and that the Italian military entered the war in June of 1940 and fought alongside Nazis in Europe, Africa, the Balkans, and even on the Eastern Front until the summer of 1943 when the Allies landed on Sicily and smashed Rome (and then it was time for the Italians to do what they do best and surrender).
Allied troops, to be sure, were killed by Italians fighting alongside Nazis, but the good news for the Allied Forces is that the Italian military was mostly a joke. I love this line:
"The Italian conquest of British Somaliland was one of the only successful Italian campaigns of World War II accomplished without German support."
Ouch! That's gotta hurt, Italiano. How Hitler must have cursed the half-assed, incompetent Italian soldiers!
If anyone wants an overview of Italy's contribution to Hitler's war, take a look here:
Military History of Italy during World War II.
The antifascist Italian resistance, after 1943, did contribute to the hard-fought and bloody success of the Italian Campaign, but when compared to the massive military efforts worldwide by the Americans, British, and Soviets, that contribution is minor, at best.
*
[indigo] Is Fallujah better off than five years ago?"
[craig] "That's a bit of a high standard, considering Falluja was literally hell on earth a few years ago."
1: Indigo is referring to the time before the illegal American invasion
2: OF COURSE Fallujah was "hell on earth" BECAUSE America was bombing the bejeezus out of the place. How underhanded CAN one get? Gee, I WONDER if conditions have improved since the bombardment has stopped. That's a toughie.
[craig] "I couldn't help but notice that the actual text of those articles didn't bear much resemblance to the claims you made in your previous comment."
Au contraire, I'm shocked at your exceptionally poor English comprehension. The speedy fall of Iraq was directly due to Iraqi generals selling Iraq out, just as Mohammed said, and I supported.
Here's an interesting document concerning CIA "nerve warfare" aka psychological operations. It seems relevant (for those that care) given the nature of the tactics used against Iraqi generals in 2003.
http://cryptome.org/cia-nerve-war/cia-nerve-war.htm
Italian,
(and your defeat means Justice as well).
On the contrary, Italian, it opens the way for further bloodshed.
Jonadab,
I forgot to mention earlier that I thought your comment on Jan. 16 at 6:23 was very well said. It was very informative and the analysis excellent. Thank you.
Italian dirtbag,
Dear and Most Courteous Craig
What did you do with the guy who used to post under your name, and filled every comment with racist epithets and derogatory comments? Did we finally catch that bastard and send him to Gitmo, or what?
I did INDEED "elaborate on Italy's contribution to the allied victory in World War II", and there is little to laugh about it; FYI, the Italian antifascist Resistance, 8 September 1943 - 4 May 1945, was the militarily strongest in Western Europe, and saved innumerable Allied lives, pining down as many as 11 German divisions in Northern Italy, away from the front.
Oh, I see. Italians were the GOOD GUYS in World War II! They were actually ALLIES of the United States, and not allies of Adolf Hitler at all! Sill me! :O
How is it that you like to accuse everyone else of re-writing history, Italian? Are we just supposed to let that slide?
In any case, if you'd been around during World War II, I'd bet a years pay you wouldn't have been standing with the Americans, would you? So what's your point? That a few Italians were better human beings than you are, back in the day?
Next we'll have Bruno telling us how many Germans were actually fighting an insurgency against the Nazis, right? The war couldn't have been won without them, no doubt.
I elaborated on it at Zeyad's blog, in Summer 2005, discussing with a USMC officer;
I'm pretty sure you were a nutjob in 2005 as well. I recall some interesting claims you made about Falluja on Zeyad's blog, back then. So I'm skeptical your "USMC officer" was any such thing. Considering some of the things you were calling Marines at the time, I find it impossible to believe that any member of the USMC would have attempted to engage you in civil discourse.
iraqi mojo,
I agree with you. Ending all violence is the only way to rebuild your country and let all the American soldiers go home. That's what they'd really like to do. In the meantime, they've got a job to do. Ending violence would make that job easier and help them on their way home sooner.
The violence will end, in my view, when (and not before) the Americans withdraw all their troops - and their Salvador option death squads - and allow other Arab countries to hold hands with their Iraqi brothers and sisters to reinstate the true peace of Islam. Let Muslims deal with those who deal in anti-Islamic activities - it is no business of so-called Christian America.
Repeat again after me, Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11; Iraq was no threat to the West; there was no Al Qaeda in Iraq before the 2003 invasion.
Truth to tell, America is now more hated around the world than it was before 9/11. That is Bush's achievement (with the help of Cheney and co).
OK, Indigo, you hate the United States. I get it. I think everybody gets that about you.
@LJM, 18 January 2008 8:49 PM
OK, Indigo, you hate the United States. I get it. I think everybody gets that about you.
You don't really get it. Before the 2003 invasion - illegal, immoral, unnecessary - of Iraq, I could "take or leave" Americans. I have worked with a few (lawyers and academics); I have socialised with countless others in the UK and in places overseas.
However, the last five years have taught me to hate your current government. Not just for its crimes and industrial-scale killing of civilians in Iraq but also for its arming and comforting Israel in Israel's international crimes (Lebanon) and human rights abuses (Palestine). And - from where I am standing - the American people cannot sidestep their individual responsibility for their government. But for the American people, America would not now have a fascist administration. I hold all of you accountable.
Bruno, your comments amount to a whole lot of nothing, as usual.
Indigo, yours are no better but at least yours are funny :P
The violence will end, in my view, when (and not before) the Americans withdraw all their troops
It's nice that you believe that, but it doesn't seem to be what Iraqis believe. Iraqis in Anbar (where the insurgency has been at it's hottest for the last several years) are not in any hurry at all to have Americans go home. In fact, most of the tribal sheiks in Anbar predict a disaster if the US withdraws now.
- and their Salvador option death squads - and allow other Arab countries to hold hands with their Iraqi brothers and sisters to reinstate the true peace of Islam.
Reinstate the true peace of Islam? So, you mean to say, that prior to 2003 Iraq had the "true peace of Islam". Is that it? Is that the best "peace" Islam has to offer? A decade long brutal war against Iran (another Muslim country, no?) followed by a brutal invasion and occupation of Kuwait (not only a Muslim country, but an Arab country, no?), use of chemical weapons on civilians and enemy combatants both, massacres of the Shia and the Kurds (virtually all of these victims were Muslims, no?) and so on and so forth.
That's the "true peace" of Islam that you think will be "reinstated" when the US withdraws?
Let Muslims deal with those who deal in anti-Islamic activities - it is no business of so-called Christian America.
It's not? We Chrsitian Americans let Muslims deal with anti-Islamic activities (terrorism) for 30 years. Guess what? They didn't. And then one bright sunny morning the world trade center fell down.
It's very much our business.
Repeat again after me, Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11; Iraq was no threat to the West; there was no Al Qaeda in Iraq before the 2003 invasion.
There is Al Qaeda in Iraq now.
Truth to tell, America is now more hated around the world than it was before 9/11.
You certainly aren't the right person to be commenting as an objective observer about how much America is hated. You aren't the right person to be telling us all what the truth is, either.
That is Bush's achievement (with the help of Cheney and co).
I would say it's an achievement of yours, along with others like you, such as Bruno and the Italian pig. That is your self-appointed task, isn't it? To prove to the world that America is the Great Satan and all that?
Rachel (Indigo),
and allow other Arab countries to hold hands with their Iraqi brothers and sisters to reinstate the true peace of Islam.
I guess you've never watched any of those Arab League summits.
Here's a question. Why hasn't Saudi Arabia shared any of its oil-revenue wealth with, say, the Palestinians or the Syrians? Why did the Kuwaitis in 1991 kick out all the Palestinians that they had earlier allowed to work in their country? Why have Arabs themselves killed far more Arabs than any other group? Can you say "Kumbaya" in Arabic?
*
Well, for the first time ever I can honestly say I agree with indigo to some extent.
Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, Iraq was no threat to the West, and they had no Al Qaeda in Iraq prior to our invasion. I also agree (wholeheartedly) that America is more hated around the world now than it was before 9/11.
Those are truths that as a reasonable human being I wouldn't argue.
But my point is that you're looking at one god-awful administration, the worst we've ever had, and judging an entire nation (and it's people) by it. I think that's what is so retarded about all of this. People talk about the United States like we're all a bunch of nosy, arrogant, forceful people that try to cram our ideas down other's throats. While there are certainly some Americans like that, I also know there are millions that only want the best for everyone, regardless of their religion or where they're from.
And besides all that, what exactly does all the hatred of America help to do? Are you really doing anything good by coming here and ripping on the US? What do you think is going to come of it? Do you think George Bush is gonna check this blog, see your America-bashing, and pull the troops out of Iraq tomorrow? I just don't get it. It seems like we could be talking about solutions and how to help instead of ripping an entire country.
Learn to judge people individually , regardless of where they're from. Muslims attacked New York City, am I here talking badly about muslims, bringing up the negatives from their entire history in the world, etc? No. George Bush and his cronies lied to the people of America and convinced them we needed to invade Iraq (a huge, stupid mistake that was unwarranted), so should you hate the whole country of America? No, but some of you apparently do. I think it's sad, and hope someday you'll gain the wisdom to see it for yourself.
Dear Mohammed,
as you may see, our most competent American commentator (;)), Jeffrey Schuster, used only three lines to comment on your post (which was the most informative written by any Iraqi blogger in many months), and did NOT inform his (very few) readers about it at his website, which ludicrously includes 'Iraqi Bloggers' in its title.
But the same Jeffrey Schuster is devoting plenty of lengthy posts to a ridiculous pissing contest having nothing to do with what you write, trying to show that America is 'above all', or whatever ...
Just in order to make Jeffrey happy, so that after that he can shush and stop spamming your comments page:
'YES, Jeffrey, in WW2 the US military was the ONLY ONE fully mechanized. Happy, Jeffrey ?'
[this was true, BTW; but, and so what ? LOL !].
Indigo:
Don't hold back, tell us how you really feel about the U.S.
The U.S. has you on their "no-fly" list and I suspect MI-5 has you on their "watch" list.
Tom in Texas
@ Lynnette in Minnesota, January 17, 2008 6:14 PM.
[Lynnette] "On the contrary, Italian, [an American defeat in Iraq] opens the way for further bloodshed".
Why should it ?
Anyway, your defeat is most likely. Accustom yourself to the idea, my dearest :).
@ All.
And those who say (like Anti-Iraqi American 'Mojo' and 'ljm', above) that the US occupation of Iraq would end if the Iraqis stopped "violence", are just repeating a LIE.
The US occupation was from the beginning intended to be PERMANENT, with 14 big, permanent bases, etc.
Yes, of course the US would like to have those bases without having the Iraqis shooting at their soldiers ... but that is very different from an end to US occupation, that it is NOT intended by the US strategists (not even by Clinton and Obama).
@ Craig.
Oh my most polite, honourable and sincere of all US Marines, I know that your education and historical knowledge are very, very great
(I remember indeed that you weren't able to get that primary school remedial course because - according to your narrative at '24 Steps' - you were too white; or - as I instead suspect - because they saw clearly that you don't want NO education :)).
But I'm afraid that what you know about WW2 is NOT precisely in agreement with the best historiography ... (LOL !).
As for my discussion with a US Marine officer at Zeyad's blog, it is still there in his archives, in the comments to his Monday, March 21, 2005 post:
http://www.haloscan.com/comments/zeyad/111137768313819391/
It started with a post by 'A Marine' on 08.11.05 - 7:04 am, and lasted some days.
I advice you (and your pal Jeffrey) to have a read: it couldn't but be beneficial to your (and his !) education about Italy and WW2, oh my lovely Craig !
LOL !
Hi guys
it seems that a real debate is here, and I'm so glad that you found my blog is the spot in which you want to do that.
I haven't been able to read all your comments in the last few days, I could only moderate them...
please guys I have a problem and if any one can help please send me an email.
I have a problem with my laptop it started few days ago; at the morning when the room is cold, it works very very slow and the fan just sceams when I checked the procescor usage it was 98% !!! but as soon as I restart everything turns to normal, this condition only happened at the first turn on whether in the morning or noon and as soon as I restart it everything is OK.
my laptop is dell inspiron 6400 and I use Windows XP service pack 2...I decided to format the drive C and install a fresh copy of windows...as I did that and after I intlled all the softwares and drivers and installed my programs I conected to the internet and after 5 min. titjust frezed...nthing is moving even the mouse pointer, the screen looks like a picture...I had to keep pressing the power button to shut it down...I tried again but it's the same!!! I use broadband connection throgh USB Senao network adapter...through a grid and that recives signal from a repeater...all the internet connections in Iraq is like this...I though it might be because of the provider...so I connected through my neighbor's PC and everything was OK....I formatted my drive again and installeda different copy of windows and after all the intallations...the problem occured again!!! I don't know what to do. by the way you should know that in Iraq we don't use windows genuine unless it cames with the laptop...and it wasn't with my laptop....but most of us use non genuine copies...so as my neighbor, which I'm using his PC now....I suspect that it was cause by the internet explorer 7 although I always used it....anyone have a soluion please...I don't know what to do...contact me on my email...thank you guys for the comments
@Tom in Texas, 19 January 2008 3:01 AM
The U.S. has you on their "no-fly" list
So what? I have already said that I am not going to the US until it gets rid of its fascist, criminal government.
and I suspect MI-5 has you on their "watch" list.
I don't have a problem with that. I am a member of our local interfaith forum and active in building - peaceful, mutually respectful - bridges between the Cross and the Crescent; so I would expect to be watched. They are only doing their job, and I will go on doing my lawful, civilised, humanitarian thing.
By the way I used Kaspersky internet security V.7 and spy remover and made a full scan for the computer and there was nothing
Mohammed, I have e-mailed a friend of mine who until recently used to run his own computer-repair business and drawn his attention to your laptop problem and your blog.
الاخ محمد
أقرأ ما تكتبه تسنح لي الفرصة و في كل مرة أقرأ لك يشدني أسلوبك في السرد ويعيدني لأيام المراهقة عندما كنت أندمج مع أسلوب قصص أجاثا كريستي
أي والله أشعر وكأنني أتجمد بمكاني وأنا أقرأ وتكاد أنفاسي تتوقف
بعض كتاباتك لها نفس الوقع
أنا بنت الاعظمية ولكنني بعيدة عنها منذ زمن بعيد جداااااا
ما ترسمه في كلماتك ليس الاعظمية التي عشت فيها و لايزال لنا أهل وبيت فيها .
برغم أعجابي بتمكنك باللغة وأسلوبك في الكتابة ألا أنني أجدك تكتب وتصيغ أمور بطريقة هوليوودية إن صح التعبير
تحياتي
@hester,
besides all that, what exactly does all the hatred of America help to do? Are you really doing anything good by coming here and ripping on the US?
That is the wrong question, Hester. When are YOU - and those who think like you - going to take responsibility for the catastrophic damage your country has wrought in Iraq?
I just don't get it. It seems like we could be talking about solutions and how to help instead of ripping an entire country.
When are you going to talk about your country organising and delivering humanitarian aid to the millions of Iraqis displaced by the violence that your military both causes and fails to prevent? Where are the US airdrops of food and medicine to refugee camps outside Baghdad and in the north or Iraq? If America won't do it, then your military should at the very least offer protection to anyone delivering humanitarian help to the Iraqi refugees. Your country's utter indifference to the misery it has brought upon millions of blameless civilians is repulsive.
Italian,
as you may see, our most competent American commentator (;)), Jeffrey Schuster, used only three lines to comment on your post
Are you even serious? How many times have people complained about you spam-commenting anti-American propaganda into the comment sections over at Healing Iraq, without ever commenting on Zeyad's post at all?
I think this must have been an attempt at sarcasm, right?
which was the most informative written by any Iraqi blogger in many months
It's strange that both you and Bruno think this is mohammed's best post. He's written many great posts since he started blogging. Is it just because this one conforms to your agenda nicely? I find it quite painful to read some of mohammed's posts, and his "best" ones have been the ones that challenged my beliefs. Maybe I should switch to your criteria though, and become a "bandwagon" commenter, and just pile on whenever an Iraq is dumb enough to post anything that confirms my own opinions? I tend to comment the most when I disagree with the blogger, not when I agree. What is the point in all the "me too" commenting, anyway?
'YES, Jeffrey, in WW2 the US military was the ONLY ONE fully mechanized. Happy, Jeffrey ?'
Actually, that's not true. The US didn't have mechanized infantry until the 1970s. The Germans and the Soviets both had mechanized infantry in the 1930s. Who told you that,Italian, and why would you think it should make Jeffrey happy?
But I'm afraid that what you know about WW2 is NOT precisely in agreement with the best historiography ... (LOL !).
Guess the jokes on you then, as you just demonstrated.
It started with a post by 'A Marine' on 08.11.05 - 7:04 am, and lasted some days.
Oh, well, if he signed his post "a marine" he must have been one. My apologies for the error on my part!
(that was sarcasm, by the way, in case you missed it like I almost missed your earlier attempt)
However, the last five years have taught me to hate your current government. Not just for its crimes and industrial-scale killing of civilians in Iraq but also for its arming and comforting Israel in Israel's international crimes (Lebanon) and human rights abuses (Palestine). And - from where I am standing - the American people cannot sidestep their individual responsibility for their government. But for the American people, America would not now have a fascist administration. I hold all of you accountable.
I'm thinking, maybe he really did get it, Indigo :P
Maybe it's you who doesn't get it. You wouldn't be the first person who didn't have the ability to perform self-analysis.
Mohammad, my best guess is that you are having a problem with Java scripts. But I'm just guessing, based on your description. If that's the case, maybe downloading and installing the latest version of Java will clear it up. Wish I could offer better advice, but it's hard to diagnose problems this way :)
They are only doing their job, and I will go on doing my lawful, civilised, humanitarian thing.
Also known as "propaganda, lies and false accusations". Some of that isn't actually lawful, and none of it is civilized.
Whether it's the behavior of a self-proclaimed humanitarian is up to you to decide. Humanist philosophy revolves around the concept that all human beings deserve to be treated with dignity and respect. Do you treat all human beings with dignity and respect, Indigo?
Mohammed,
I'm afraid I'm no computer expert. But I am trying to get in touch with someone who is. Do you know Anarki13? He would be the go to guy for all things related to computers. And he is familiar with all the ins and outs of the computer world in Iraq.
@ All.
I'm sorry I'm not a 'techie', so I cannot give our host Mohammed any good advice about his computer problem.
Anyway, about the usual zoo:
@ Craig.
My dear Big Baby with Four Hands, it's not a matter of Mohammed's post being "one [that] conforms to [my] agenda nicely": it's the matter of Mohammed's post being INFORMATIVE, i.e., a post that instead of merely COMMENTING on what somebody did or said, or on the news we get from the media, gives new and crucial info to the debate.
Yes, I'd love to know more about Iraqi Resistance members, and about their aims and their ways, and I do hope that Mohammed will tell us more ...
[Eeeevil Eye-talian] "in WW2 the US military was the ONLY ONE fully mechanized".
[Vewy vewy informed and historically aware Marine Craig] "Actually, that's not true. The US didn't have mechanized infantry until the 1970s. The Germans and the Soviets both had mechanized infantry in the 1930s".
Oh my Kindest of All US Marines Craig, I'm very sorry to have to inform you that you are dead WRONG.
Yes, I know that for 'persons', uhm, of 'different' qualities, such as you are, some things are difficult to grasp, such as the difference between 'names' or 'definitions' given, and reality ...
But be sure that the US military was in the 1940s the ONLY ONE in the world that did NOT depend on animal or human traction, but only on fuel-propelled engines (i.e., the only one FULLY MECHANIZED).
Be sure that, despite any high-falutin' names ("The Germans and the Soviets", and I can add the Brits, and the French, and even Mussolini's Italians - LOL - to the list), all those, DIFFERENTLY FROM the Americans, DID heavily depend (so heavily that they could NOT even move without), in WW2, on mules/horses/donkeys/humans/whomever dragging their equipment along.
That was NOT the case with the American military ('infantry' has little to do with it, BTW, oh my most informed Craig: that was true for ALL parts of the military).
So, yes, you and Jeffrey, so pleased with pissing contests with the rest of the world, ought to be VERY happy about it.
I cannot understand, oh me silly, why you come about with such stupid jokes, and to what purpose, dear Craig ...
As for the 'Marine' at Zeyad's blog in 2005, yeah of course, being by and large able to reason, he was - AFAIK - a USMC officer (such as your pal, that Arizonian scoundrel RhusLancia, used to be).
Any 'sarcasm' is on YOU, my lovely Craig: and do please use your lower pair of hands to scratch your most thoughtful head, from time to time ....
:)
it's not a matter of Mohammed's post being "one [that] conforms to [my] agenda nicely": it's the matter of Mohammed's post being INFORMATIVE, i.e., a post that instead of merely COMMENTING on what somebody did or said, or on the news we get from the media, gives new and crucial info to the debate.
So, in your opinion, his other posts didn't bring any new "crucial" information to the debate? Seriously? What makes the information in THIS post so "crucial"? Hmmmm?
Yes, I'd love to know more about Iraqi Resistance members...
Question answered, eh? At least you are honest (this time) :P
Oh my Kindest of All US Marines Craig, I'm very sorry to have to inform you that you are dead WRONG.
Yes, I know that for 'persons', uhm, of 'different' qualities, such as you are, some things are difficult to grasp, such as the difference between 'names' or 'definitions' given, and reality ...
But be sure that the US military was in the 1940s the ONLY ONE in the world that did NOT depend on animal or human traction, but only on fuel-propelled engines (i.e., the only one FULLY MECHANIZED).
The word you are looking for is "Motorized", Italian. "Mechanized" means armor.
Must really suck being corrected by somebody as ignorant as me. Twice. On the same mistake. Especially when you had ample time to go and check your facts, but didn't. Oh well.
I'd go on to talk about the overwhelming advantage the Germans had in armor, particularly tanks, until the Soviets caught up with them in 1943 (note that the US always had inferior armor throughout the war) but I know how my use of high-fallutin names annoys you. Long story short, you are claiming your guys only lost because the US had better technology, right? Even though pretty much everyone acknowledges the Germans had the best equipment and the best military doctrine of any combatant in WWII.
You planning on talking about the Italians in WWII any time soon? I thought Jeffrey opened that topic up nicely, and you blew right by it like you were embarrassed or something. What's your major malfunction? You're the one who opened the can of worms, aren't you?
PS-Yes I do intend to mention your "mechanized" brainfart every chance I get from now until the end of time. Deal with it.
Indigo, do you known this British Human Rights activist?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=508543&in_page_id=1770&in_page_id=1770&expand=true#StartComments
@programmer craig, 19 January 2008 10:26 PM
Do you treat all human beings with dignity and respect, Indigo?
Wrong question, again. The correct question is: when are Americans going to start making reparation to the millions of civilian Iraqis whose lives they have turned upside down? Eg re-planting citrus and palm groves; eg spending as many dollars on food and medicine for refugees as the US spends on bombs and guns.
An Itlaian: "he was - AFAIK - a USMC officer (such as your pal, that Arizonian scoundrel RhusLancia, used to be)."
An Italian, you may not know or care about the intricacies of American military rank structure, so I have not bothered to correct you on this. However, P. Craig would be more familiar and for the benefit of both I'll clarify this: I was not a commissioned officer in the Marines. I enlisted, and became by the end a sergeant (E-5), a non-commissioned officer, sure, but please don't think I was a major or something. Also Craig, if you care, I was in the reserves and was never called up.
Mohammed,
Okay, I heard back from my computer guru. Here is his reply:
when does the error occur exactly? how can he install the drivers if the pc just freezes on first boot? sounds like a a bad sector in the c drive. i cant be too sure unless i c the thing myself :) but thats the prognosis, cuz he did say he installed two different copies, which froze. meaning that the operating system cannot access some necessary part on the harddrive. or it could be a one really nasty virus, thats installed itself on all harddrives. to check: just right-click on the harddrive icons and tell me the first item you read: if it is anything other than Open or Explore, i.e. Auto, Autoplay,Autorun, Play, run... then all drives infected. he needs to clean them all. if not, and all is normal, then it could be a program failure like he said. format once more, but DO NOT OPEN D OR E OR ANY DRIVE, just to see how long it will stay unfrozen :) sorry for the hasty reply, gotta run now. have to see a guy about a goat.
Lynnette,
thank you vry much for the help, but can you tell him that it doesn't freez unless I connect to the internet! even if the USB is connected and I haven't connected to the internet (by pessing connect)....I have scaned the computer for viruses with Kaspersky internet security v.7 and there was nothing! I have formatted and re-installed windows today....and it's the same!! I'm connecting through the same line but with a different PC, everything is OK but it freezed yesterday but after more than 30 min.! but in my laptop it freeze in less than 10 min.! I don't know what to do, nothing has worked till now.
Help me guys please help I'm going nuts.
programmer craig,
The Daily Mail is a rag.
Meanwhile, in today's Washington Post
Surge to Nowhere - Don't buy the hawks' hype. The war may be off the front pages, but Iraq is broken beyond repair, and we still own it. by Andrew J Bacevich, Sunday, January 20, 2008
the war ... has boosted anti-Americanism to record levels, recruited untold numbers of new jihadists, enhanced the standing of adversaries such as Iran and diverted resources and attention from Afghanistan, a theater of war far more directly relevant to the threat posed by al-Qaeda. Instead of draining the jihadist swamp, the Iraq war is continuously replenishing it.
Wrong question, again. The correct question is:
No, it was the right question, Indigo. You claimed to be a humanitarian. Look into your own heart, and see if you think that's true about you. It has nothing to do with Americans or anyone else. It's about what type of person you are.
Semper Fi, Rhuslancia :)
I enlisted, and became by the end a sergeant (E-5), a non-commissioned officer, sure, but please don't think I was a major or something.
Me too, except I made Staff Sergent right before I got out :)
I was a squad leader in the infantry, the last 3 years I was in. I'm not suer why I got promoted right before I was released from active duty. They don't usually do that, they usually hold promotions back as an incentive to re-up.
Also Craig, if you care, I was in the reserves and was never called up.
Where'd you go to Bootcamp? MCRD San Diego for me. Did my Infantry Training School at San Onofre, which is at Camp Pendleton. Then I was in the FMF for 6 years, mostly in the 1st Marines. What was your MOS? Something better than infantry, I hope :)
Mohammed,
Okay, I've sent along your comment.
So, if I understand you right, you have used two different computers to connect to the internet via the same line? And both at one point or another froze? Could it be something in the line then? Have you tried using your computer with a different internet line connection? Maybe at your neighbors? Do you have a surge protector on your line? Could that be an issue?
I'm off now for the day. I will check back in tomorrow.
@ Craig, January 20, 2008 12:29 PM.
[Craig] "The word you are looking for is 'Motorized', Italian. 'Mechanized' means armor.
[...] Yes I do intend to mention your 'mechanized' brainfart every chance I get from now until the end of time. Deal with it".
Yes, dear Craig, you are right insofar 'motorised' would have been a more effective way to convey what I meant; but at the end of the day the two concepts are NOT that different.
Indeed, all the (on paper) 'mechanised' divisions any army involved in WW2 apart from the US had were, at the end of the day, something different from what their name would imply today, since they were not fully motorised and so not self-sufficient (and this applies to the German panzerdivisionen as well: they had to rely for their supplies - including fuel - on animal-driven transports).
The US forces were the only ones fully motorised (AND therefore fully mechanised) in WW2.
[Craig] "Must really suck being corrected by somebody as ignorant as me. Twice. On the same mistake".
Be happy then, dear Craig.
But there is a bit of wee sophistry in this, isn't there ?
Yes, let's put 'motorised' instead of 'mechanised', but the concept does NOT change ...
[Craig] "the overwhelming advantage the Germans had in armor, particularly tanks, until the Soviets caught up with them in 1943 (note that the US always had inferior armor throughout the war)".
The better armoured vehicles the Germans had could NOT make up for the sheer volume of American production, and for the help that American logistics and technology gave to the Soviet Union as well.
Yes, a Tiger tank was a wondrous fighting machine, and all through the war the Americans did not have anything comparable; but for each Tiger tank the Germans built, by early 1943 the Americans would produce 100 Shermans, and the Soviets 50 T-34s ...
[Craig] "Long story short, you are claiming your guys only lost because the US had better technology, right?".
First of all, dear Craig, they were NOT 'my guys'. Second, the US had not just better technology, but better logistics, and an incomparable QUANTITY of everything; the Germans and the Japanese being smart couldn't change the fact that they could not compete, having to count on very limited resources.
But I cannot understand why if I say something good about the US, you try to deny it ...
funny, on your part !
[Craig] "You planning on talking about the Italians in WWII any time soon?".
We have gone far enough Off Topic, don't you think ?
I gave the link to my discussing that topic, for anybody who might be interested.
Now, dear Craig, back to the discussion of Mohammed's post :):):).
[craig] "Long story short, you are claiming your guys only lost because the US had better technology, right? Even though pretty much everyone acknowledges the Germans had the best equipment and the best military doctrine of any combatant in WWII."
The Axis lost to the Allies because :
1: The industrial capacity of the Allies was FAR greater
2: The numerical superiority of the Allies was FAR greater
3: Axis strategy was fundamentally flawed.
The actual technology itself is not really that relevant in the final analysis. It's like pitting a 100lb man against a 200lb man in a fight and speculating on the outcome based on the quality of their fighting techniques.
Mohammed --
[mohammed] "thank you vry much for the help, but can you tell him that it doesn't freez unless I connect to the internet!"
That tells you something.
Just to get this straight, if the internet connection cable is unplugged and you open Internet Explorer, it crashes? If so, then the problem lies with Windows, most likely. Perhaps you do have some sort of advanced bug on your hard drive that has attempted to hijack your computer when you connect. If you want, I can email you AVG antivirus and you can try scan with that.
Otherwise, maybe try install an alternative browser like Mozilla Firefox?
If the problem occurs on different computers but on the same connection, then perhaps the fault lies with your internet provider. Try running your laptop on somebody else's connection and login. If the freeze does NOT occur, you can be sure it is the IP that is likely at fault. Maybe the provider has been hijacked by a networked virus like Stormworm or something similar.
You DO run with the firewall up, right? If your version of windows has no firewall, then you need to get one with a firewall ASAP. Otherwise, believe me, it will be minutes before the viruses and spyware infect you.
Extracted from Defeat: Why They Lost Iraq, by Jonathan Steele, published by IB Tauris at £20, and in the United States in March by Counterpoint. To order a copy for £18 with free UK p&p, go to guardian.co.uk/bookshop or call 0870 836 0875.
In the run-up to the invasion of Iraq in 2003, experts warned Tony Blair that occupying the country and trying to impose a western-style democracy was doomed to failure. He dismissed their objections, convinced that victory was a formality.
With blithe self-confidence, and without even asking his officials for expertise, however, Blair assumed it would be easy for the US and UK to run the country after Saddam was toppled. His style was not to encourage his policy preferences to be questioned, or call for nuanced assessments of possible consequences. ... He was set on going to war at Bush's side under any circumstances.
British officials ... "weren't plugged into the state department's detailed planning exercise. We tried but couldn't get into it. It was the first warning sign that we weren't part of it," one senior diplomat told me. In the words of another: "The UK supplied 10% of the invasion force. We provided 10% of the staff of the Coalition Provisional Authority. We had 10% of input into policy." In the final weeks before the invasion, the Pentagon wrested control of postwar planning away from the state department, leaving British ministers even more in the dark.
Unlike France, Germany and Italy, the British had no embassy in Baghdad in Saddam's final 12 years of rule. This left them bereft of good on-the-ground intelligence. It also meant there were few people in the Foreign Office with direct experience and knowledge of Iraq. As a result, the British did not predict the rise of Iraq's Islamists, whose strength destroyed the American neoconservative project for a liberal, secular and US-friendly democracy. ... president Jacques Chirac argued that the war would be perceived in the Arab and Muslim world as an attack on Islam. "A war of this kind cannot help giving a big lift to terrorism," he told Time magazine. "It would create a large number of little Bin Ladens."
More at the link, about what happens when a shallow-minded and personality-obsessed man gets to be Prime Minister of the UK and then is made to believe that he is Bush's best buddy.
Cross-posted to Healing Iraq.
Mohammed, I have something for you to try with your laptop. I'm at work right now but I'll send you an e-mail with the info in a few hours when I get home.
Hopefully we can get that situation cleared up.
Italian,
You are an utter coward. After having every one of your accusations that you had thrown around recklessly disproved by Craig and myself point by point, NOW you don't want to talk about Italy's "contributions to WWII" -- Italy's years of fighting alongside the NAZI GERMANS? And you also want us to believe that the actions of a few anti-fascist Italians after 1943 somehow exonerate all Italians as if 1940-43 and all the fascist-strutting years leading up to that war never happened?!
You're a moral midget.
*
Hey Mohammed- is your PC still messed up? If so, earlier you said your CPU usage was 98%. Did you check what process was using all that CPU? You can check in Windows Task Manager (right-click an empty part of the taskbar, choose Task Manager from the menu). Click on the "Processes" tab and make sure "Show processes from all users" is checked. Click on the CPU column to sort by usage high to low. "System Idle Process" ought to be the top. When your CPU is tacking, what does it say? You can watch the CPU use before & after connecting to the 'net. Take the name of the process that's using all your CPU and google it to see if there's anything out of the ordinary. It may be that some of your software is infected or faulty, especially if it's.... ehm.... "not off-the-shelf".
Also, since your laptop is a Dell, it should have a service tag on the bottom with a number that you can enter here and it may be a problem they have a fix for.
Good luck!
Semper Fi, Craig!
I went to MCRD San Diego in the summer of '91. I was a 3043 (Supply) and then my reserve unit was bulk fuel so I was 1391 also. My personal running joke was that I counted stuff and pumped gas, except I never really did the latter...
@ Jeffrey, January 22, 2008 7:57 AM.
[Scaly Tailed Schuster] "disproved by Craig and myself point by point".
LOL ! Don't say things so stupid and manifestly unfounded, please :):):).
[Rat Jeffrey] "You are an utter coward. [...] NOW you don't want to talk about Italy's 'contributions to WWII'".
As your associate RhusLancia can witness, that is not the case (I wrote plenty about it at Zeyad's and at 24 Steps'), and you are quite simply LYING (the thing you do best).
The fact is that HERE this is a completely Off Topic subject you sillily threw in just in order to distract the attention from our host Mohammed's most interesting post on the Iraqi patriotic resistance.
So, I'm NOT going to play YOUR silly and trollish game, dear Jeffrey Schuster (quite cheeky in your talk of 'moral midgets', aren't you ?), and I won't answer any further Off Topic squeaks on your part.
I went to MCRD San Diego in the summer of '91.
Ah, you no doubt know where San Onofre is then, assuming they weer still doing 2 weeks at Edson Range and 2 weeks at San Onofre for field training during second phase.
I remember being on the "recruit" side of San Onofre and looking across the parade deck and thinking "Those are REAL marines!". Little did I know that they were just ITS students, and that I'd be over there on that side a couple months later. And then when I was in ITS, I recall the first time I saw one of the infantry battalions of the 1st Marines humping down Basilone Road on their way back to El Horno and thinking "Those are REAL Marines". Little did I know, that a couple months later I'd be in an infantry Regiment, being told I'm not a REAL marine, but just a new boot, so I better just keep my mouth shut and pay attention. In 6 years in the infantry, I don't think I ever did find the REAL Marines. Maybe Italian found one over on Zeyad's blog, eh? :O
I was a 3043 (Supply) and then my reserve unit was bulk fuel so I was 1391 also.
I know about Supply! I used to get sent there a lot on work details when I f'd up, which I did a lot for a while :D
I was 0341/0351 but (mortars and anti-tank missiles) but they moved me from Heavy Weapons to a Rifle Company after I made Sergeant. Not many Sergeant billets in Heavy Weapons, Gun Teams are run by Corporals and Gun Sections are run by Staff Sergeants. Kinda strange, that.
Yeah, 2nd phase was just like that. Gotta admit that the Grim Reaper kicked my *ss. When I joined, there was also an additional month of "Marine Combat Training" at Pendleton. Don't remember if it was San Onofre or just nearby though. And here I did much better against Mount M*th*rf*ck*r. Going up that one wasn't even required- one of our instructors just started up it and either goaded or ordered us to follow (don't remember which)...
Yeah, 2nd phase was just like that. Gotta admit that the Grim Reaper kicked my *ss. When I joined, there was also an additional month of "Marine Combat Training" at Pendleton.
It may have been a month of field training when I went through bootcamp too, come to think of it. 3rd phase was only 2 or 3 weeks long. You had 13 training weeks too? I've heard they shortened boot camp a bit and re-arranged the training schedule, but I don't know when that went into effect.
Don't remember if it was San Onofre or just nearby though.
Could be they moved the recruits to someplace else after they added the LAV battalion to San Onofre. Were there a bunch of old Quonset Huts off to one side? And an obstacle course on the other side of Basilone Road?
And here I did much better against Mount M*th*rf*ck*r. Going up that one wasn't even required- one of our instructors just started up it and either goaded or ordered us to follow (don't remember which)...
Well, that's different. It was made clear to us that NOBODY graduates Marine Corps recruit training without getting over Mount Motherfucker :)
(we can call it that I think, since that's it's name, right?)
Yeah, it was 13 weeks long, but then MCT was another 4 weeks afterwards. It wasn't bootcamp, although some of the instructors fancied themselves as DIs. 2nd phase was in three-story barracks just like MCRD had, but MCT was in old quonset huts, probably the ones you're thinking of.
Regarding your laptop problem, you want to try to isolate whether it is a hardware problem or a software problem. Since it started when you reinstalled Windows, my first instinct is to guess it's a software problem, but we don't actually know that for sure. The first thing I'd do is try running a live, boot-from-CD system (e.g., Knoppix). If the problem does not occur when running Knoppix (or whatever) from CD but _does_ occur when running WinXP from the internal hard drive, then that narrows the problem down to being either a software issue (likely) or a hard drive problem (as someone else here suggests, and certainly also possible). On the other hand, if the problem occurs even when running from a LiveCD, then it's almost certainly a hardware problem.
If you think it's a hardware problem, running diagnostics like memtest86 can sometimes provide useful information. If you suspect hard drive problems in particular, then scandisk is the first diagnostic tool to reach for. (Well, either scandisk or fsck, but since you said you use WinXP you're probably going to be more comfortable with scandisk. fsck versions for Windows filesystems do also exist, though, so e.g. if you want a second opinion on what scandisk tells you, that can be an additional thing to look into.)
If you think it's a software problem, then you look into things like RhusLancia's suggestion of trying to isolate the responsible process, or Bruno's suggestion to try a different browser, can be useful. (Trying a different browser, for instance, can tell you whether the browser is the problem or not.)
Post a Comment