Raghad (Saddam's daughter) is in Jordan. I do not feel sorry for her. She may have been less a party to the disgusting acts, but she is part of the propaganda. With a lovely, freshly colored, hair-do, this women (who appeared to have dined regularly) attempted to tell us that Daddy was a nice man. The nasty traitors performed treasonous acts against Iraq. HA!

She has been living in her father's purposely-created vaccum. Even so, her father killed Raghad's children's father. You can say Saddam killed her husband, but that might have been a good thing for her. I doubt she chose her husband--more likely Saddam made the choice. Raghad's children may eventually resent their father's death at the hands of Saddam. Since this is the poster family of disfunctional families, it is possible that all the grandchildren will carry photos of dear, old Saddam close to their hearts. Or worse, there will be those who believe Saddam Hussein was a great man. I just want to believe that he is gone, dead, and his ability to control is ended (period.)

The troops are hot, tired; they'd like to go home. Their friends are being shot and a soldier can't tell who the enemy is. When threatened, they have a few seconds to decide...who, which, where. And yet, they are struggling to get the scum off the streets, without harming the innocent. It puts them at a grave disadvantage, but it's necessary. That's one tough job!

We're working on the security, the electricity, the water, the trash; and yes, the oil. At the moment, it's suspected the previous budget for Iraq had been $30B. The oil revenues may be close to $18B. We know that we will have to pay for lots of reconstruction and that may leave us with $12B, plus cost for reconstruction and military. It's more than your family, and my family (and a whole heaping lot of families together) will ever hear or discuss. We just don't think in terms of figures that high--of that much money! But, this is more than money. It's you...and us...and maybe a better world (if we're really lucky and work hard.)

What to do with the bodies: Well, my preference is to drop them in Mt. Aetna; but, I guess someone would try to make a shrine out of it. It might be wise to consul the Iraqi Interim Council. When it was said that the family could retrieve the bodies, I say NO. (Well, unless it's Saddam who comes to pick them up.)

The bodies belong to the Iraqi people and the decision of what to do should be by Iraqis. When you consider that most of the family is of the regime, it seems like an undeserved favor to turn the bodies over to them. Thoughts of dragging bodies through the streets are not pleasant, and that may be why the decision was made to turn the bodies over to the family. But...it might be wiser to have a some service, cremate them, and scatter the ashes in an unknown spot in the ocean.

I never felt that you shouldn't "speak ill of the dead." If a person were disgusting in life, speak the truth when they are dead--within reason. You don't get to do horrific acts while living and become saintly in death.

This week, Q & U were killed. It seems that questions about whether or not it was really the two sons of Saddam are fading away. Should we have killed them, maybe capture was better? Why did it take so long? Why were the bodies displayed? On and On..... Looks like the Fedayeen believed it. We must have convinced an enemy, but not those considered allies or "friends."

Did anyone (in the media) take a deep breath before they jumped on to the next...darn those Americans?

Okay, I admit it, I'm an American. I do look at information with a bias toward the U.S. position. But, I'm not blind; and, we aren't perfect. Who is? We won't always do everything 100% correctly. That doesn't mean we can't improve. It doesn't mean we won't try to improve. And, it doesn't mean that we are bad people.

We didn't capture them. It took a few hours just to kill them. To those who yell that we did it wrong, you should have told us that before we did it. I believe it was better that it was swift, sure, and final. They won't be coming back. And, every self-respecting body-double should ....run.

To the technologically challenged, any change could be frustrating. To the old, "new and improved" are not kind, gentle words. Upgrades are a challenge to overcome; and, I'll keep trying. You can get little accomplished if you don't try, and try, and try. Wow, sometimes, it's really trying. (It worked and could be edited...)

SP has a job with the Guardian, a British newspaper. Terrific! Hope this doesn't mean he will tire of writing his very good blogs. I'll miss reading them if he becomes too busy to write. Nevertheless, I wish him well.

Another part of the opinion is that Chalabi had not lived in the country for decades. He may have his finger on information, but he didn't live it. This would make it difficult to trust the man. Well, he may not be interested in an interim position, but he is (probably) interested in a long-term position. I hope there is a better choice.

It's very interesting to read the Blogs from Iraq, not always good news, but very interesting. There is a new blogger and I'm hoping there will be more information coming out of Baghdad about what is going on.

News reports about Chalabi are not impressive. He seems to be cause for worry. It isn't the reports of the embezzlement; we don't know whether or not they are true. There would be reason for the regime to smear his image.

A part of the opinion is his entering Iraq and protesting loudly to get the electricity on. It wasn't news that there were difficulties, why wasn't he doing something about this, rather than shouting at someone else.

Axis of Weasels-one stands out:

On Newsmax.com, there is a deck of cards available-54 members of the Axis of Weasels. Of the Axis of Weasel members, in the United Nations, my favorite focus is France.

Through the centuries, we have had a friendly relationship with France. They helped us, we helped them. Was it General Charles de Gaulle who said, "France is for the French?" It's difficult to dispute that. France should be for the French; but it should be for the best interests of France with respect to internal and external relationships. The overall good must be considered. When France decided to oppose the position of the United States, it was not surprising. The extent, to which France was in opposition, was surprising.

France expended much effort around the world. They were successful in their efforts, but not in dissuading the U.S. from its objective. The more France worked against us, the deeper the hole they dug. We wondered why (for a while.) It became more apparent as information concerning French activities in Iraq came to light; and, the light was shone on greed, and alliances which involved sales of materials, and old friendships and contracts.

France built, or helped to build, the nuclear reactor at Al Tuwaitha-which the Israelis bombed. France promised Iraq they would help to build another, after the bombing destroyed the first reactor. France had 27% (approximately) of Iraq's trade. France had important oil contracts. France was determined to insure the continuation of this status.

The original intent of the war (as we understood it) was based on the "unilateral" attack by the U.S. and Great Britain on Iraq. Although there seemed to be no anticipation of United Nations discussions, differences of opinion arose, and a U.N.S.C. resolution was sought. After a struggle, the Security Council passed UNSC #1441, which required Iraq to submit the last of the "full, final, and complete declarations" of proscribed materials, munitions, delivery systems, and programs. This may have been the fifth or sixth declaration.

There came a point in the United Nations Security Council Meetings when it appeared that no one, except the Iraqis, gave any indication that they thought Iraq didn't have WMD. France wanted more rigorous inspections-more time, double or triple the inspectors. Time was running out. The longer Saddam Hussein was able to prepare, the more difficult it would be to oust him, and the more dangerous it would be for the civilians and our troops. But…ousting Saddam Hussein was the problem.

Once it was mentioned that we intended to remove the regime from power, the French became determined to prevent that change. Once the conclusion was reached that we would never be sure that the regime hadn't fooled the inspectors, thwarted the system, there appeared to be little choice in our objective. The American Public does not view itself as a country of warmongers, who trample all. We would rather see ourselves as a huge group of people who care about the events in the world. We don't like war. I know, it's hard to believe.

We need a very good reason to go to war. It cannot be easy. We cannot just march all over the globe imposing our way on others, everywhere. We had a policy of no pre-emptive strikes. Well, you can thank Osama bin Laden for the change; and, Saddam Hussein can congratulate OBL for the success. (Prior to 9/11, the U.S. policy seemed to be the enemy should feel immediate retaliation in kind. Now, the intent is to fight, hit hard, hit exponentially--anywhere, everywhere possible.) And, the French can thank the leadership of France for their situation.

There is minor government participation in a French boycott. Few are going to the Air Show, congress submitted legislation to rename food to Freedom Fries, and one state legislator is attempting to pass a law banning the sale of French Wine in the State Liquor Stores-which would effectively remove French Wine from that State, as the State Liquor Stores control all the sales of liquor. The rest of the boycott is being promoted by the people. Individuals have decided not to vacation in France; ordinary people have poured French wine in street; average folks are upset with France. Each time the boycott enthusiasm fades France seems to add more the fuel.

While France mentioned longtime friendship, then stabbed in the back; while France said, "We're your friends!," French envoys hurried 'round the world to counteract us; while France said, "We're still friends," they were telling our enemy what we were doing-giving privileged information to the regime.

France, you were wrong to participate in evading the sanctions; wrong when you urged the lifting of the sanctions. You were wrong to threaten the smaller countries in the EU; wrong when you wouldn't agree to vote for NATO defense of a NATO partner. You were wrong to state that you would not vote for another U.N. Resolution; you were wrong when you turned over privileged information to the regime; you were wrong to support the regime-which killed tens of thousands of its own people.

And so, France, you don't have to do what we say; you can say what you please. You don't have to agree; you can disagree. You have the right. And, we have the right to be angry. How long the anger lasts may have more to do with you than with us. At the moment, you are someone we only thought we knew. At the moment, we wonder what you will do next.

Prior to the war (2003), reporters said that the Iraqi people were quite well informed. Everyone listened to the radio and kept current on the happenings. We don't know what you had or hadn't heard over the years.

My attention was drawn to Iraq in 1989 when the regime fired off a rocket. Of course, we had heard about the nuclear plant close to Tuwaitha, but not until it was bombed in the early 1980's. With a few years between the two events, most of us were living regular U.S. lives (paying bills, working, concerned about costs, medical issues, raising kids, mowing grass...whatever our usual existence was at that time.) And then, we heard that the Iraqi Army had gone into Kuwait.

Televised United Nations Sessions were on frequently. I watched as often as I could, to become more informed about activities in the world and especially in Iraq. The more I watched, the more I had to watch and was glued to the TV set, often. Speeches droned on and on, tempers sometimes flared. And then...when the meetings were over for the day, delegates would approach the microphones to add some spin to the circus. Tariq Aziz would speak and completely deny what appeared to be fact. It was similar to Al Sahaf (known here as "Baghdad Bob") stating that there are no Americans here! Tariq Aziz was the "Baghdad Bob" of the 1990's.

After watching weeks of the drama, we were eating supper (with the TV on in the other room) when we heard excited chatter and booms. We ran to the set and saw the dark skyline of Baghdad. CNN was reporting that the war had begun and Baghdad was being bombed. Journalists were huddled in hotel rooms at the El Rasheed, while reports indicated that Saddam was huddled in a bunker underneath the Hotel. Bombs were flying everywhere; explosions; anti-aircraft fire going up, exploding and falling in glowing balls; horrendous looking devastation.

The Iraqi Army eventually left Kuwait. They had been looting and taking papers and treasures back to Baghdad, as well as Kuwaitis. Why Saddam Hussein could not have marched back into Iraq is a mystery to all but the leaders. Gen. Norman Schwartzkoff stated that at each point Saddam had choices, and he took the stupid choice.

Over the next five years there were U.N. inspections for prohibited weapons, which the regime said they didn't have. In 1991, they were forced to make a full, final, and complete declaration of the weapons and programs. They did so. During the next years, they made additional full, final, and complete declarations. As each new piece of the puzzle was revealed, the regime added the minimum and submitted their next declaration, until there were 5 declarations--supposedly full, final, and complete. After denying it all, they had it all...and, they said so, finally. This included biological, chemical, and finally nuclear programs. They had thousands of liters of materials.

In 1995, the sons-in-law of Saddam Hussein escaped to Jordan. They revealed some interest information. Then the discovery of the nuclear program. This discovery came close to the time when the inspectors were considering declaring Iraq as "free of nuclear weapons." By 1998, the regime was uncooperative. U.N. inspections were halted. It was pointless. The inspections system had failed because no inspections could be conducted. About his time, France was pushing "lifting of sanctions." There was no proof of compliance; no reason to expect cooperation; the sanctions were not lifted. Clinton (U.S. President, at the time) bombed.

Although there is so much more, the next five years were not very visible to the average U.S. citizen. We were aware of a decade of northern no-fly and southern no-fly zones, and the removal of anti-aircraft sites when they turned on their radar. UNSCOM changed to UNMOVIC. Countries blamed the U.S. for the deaths of over a million Iraqi children; many in the U.S. blamed Saddam Hussein for building palaces, monuments, bunkers, living a wealthy life at the expense of the people of Iraq. We didn't know what weapons were there; and, what weapons were being developed.

Many of us have appreciated your posts over the last few months. Then, suddenly, nothing... I can't speak for everyone, but I missed the posts, I wondered, worried, watched, checked the site, and finally there you were again. Whew! (relief, that you were still there) We could only imagine what you saw, and what you heard. Our news was 24 hours a day, focused on Iraq and what was going on; but, we could not know all of what was happening and saw the same news clips over and over. Large portions of the country were not covered. Then the statue came down (Firdos "Heaven" Square)...and, it seemed like the journalists gradually faded away. We hear less about the people, the regular men, women and children. What (if anything) is going well; what is not going well; where will Iraqis be able to help Iraqis?

May 8, 2003 15:24

In checking websites this morning, one special note was posted, "Heee's BACK!" Even tho' it was a round-about way to post, the word is spreading and fans (all over the place) will be reading each word and pondering each thought. In March, I had thought about emailing you, but believed that you must have a ton of email. So, I'm taking this way to thank you for posting your thoughts and the events which were happening around you.