Middle East Conflict

Netanyahu "Admits Israeli Strike"
BBC News | Thursday 20 September 2007

The Israeli opposition leader, Binyamin Netanyahu, has made the first apparent admission of Israel's involvement in an alleged air strike against Syria.

In a live interview on Israeli TV, Mr Netanyahu said he had congratulated Prime Minister Ehud Olmert on the raid.

"I was a partner in the issue from the start, and I gave my backing," he said.

Mr Netanyahu was criticised for his remarks, after Israel had maintained an official policy of silence on the reported incident two weeks ago.

Speaking on Channel 1 news, Mr Netanyahu said: "When a prime minister does something that is important in my view and necessary to Israel's security... I give my backing."

When asked if he had personally congratulated Mr Olmert on the operation, Mr Netanyahu said: "Yes". But the Likud party leader refused to give details of the attack.

Rockets, Napalm, Torpedoes & Lie
Israel's Attack on the USS Liberty, Revisited
By JEFFREY ST. CLAIR | June 8, 2007

In early June of 1967, at the onset of the Six Day War, the Pentagon sent the USS Liberty from Spain into international waters off the coast of Gaza to monitor the progress of Israel's attack on the Arab states. The Liberty was a lightly armed surveillance ship.

Only hours after the Liberty arrived it was spotted by the Israeli military. The IDF sent out reconnaissance planes to identify the ship. They made eight trips over a period of three hours. The Liberty was flying a large US flag and was easily recognizable as an American vessel.

A few hours later more planes came. These were Israeli Mirage III fighters, armed with rockets and machine guns. As off-duty officers sunbathed on the deck, the fighters opened fire on the defenseless ship with rockets and machine guns.

A few minutes later a second wave of planes streaked overhead, French-built Mystere jets, which not only pelted the ship with gunfire but also with napalm bomblets, coating the deck with the flaming jelly. By now, the Liberty was on fire and dozens were wounded and killed, excluding several of the ship's top officers.

[UPDATE]: I updated this diary to remove three temporary (now expired) links which led directly to portions of H.R. 1585. The "master link" to H.R. 1585 remains valid. I revised the "above the fold" text accordingly.

For all of us who are frustrated over the outcome of the FY2007 Iraq supplemental that passed when Congress acted like the co-dependent spouse of an alcoholic and are being told "wait until September", here is something to consider: September will be too late because the FY2008 budget will be done by then. In fact, the House of Representatives voted 397 to 27 on May 17, 2007 to approve H. R. 1585, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008, which authorizes defense spending for FY2008, including Iraq. (Select option 3, the version of the bill that passed the House, then scroll down to "Title CC--Authorization of Additional Appropriations for Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom", about three-quarters of the way down the page.)

To add insult to injury, the bill wound its way through the sausage factory beginning on March 20, 2007, while the debate to force an end to the Iraqi Occupation by cutting funding by defeating the supplemental was in progress. You can see the rollcall vote for H.R. 1585 here.

Also, the DoD budget request is on line. To see the details of what the Pentagon requested and their justification, click here, then follow the links. (Caution: the link leads to many pdf files and lots of "green eyeshade" reading.) Keep in mind the links are to the budget requests from the services and DoD, not necessarily what Congress will approve.

It is also important to remember that H.R. 1585 is the defense authorization bill, not the appropriations bill. An Authorization is "permission" to spend money. An Appropriation is the actual allocation of cash.

Nevertheless, this isn't good. We should have had a lot more than 27 NO votes.

We need to highlight what has happened and apply pressure to influence what happens next. Let's keep our eyes open for the Appropriations measure in the House and both the Authorization and Appropriations measures in the Senate.

From The Republican Plan For 2008 Begins Today, by Thom Hartmann:

It's difficult to watch Democrats play checkers while Republicans play Chess with Iraq. It's particularly difficult on Memorial Day as more Americans and Iraqis die.

Enough is enough. Let's play some chess. Click "read more" to continue.

At this very moment as you read this, a courageous and dedicated Iraq War veteran who insists on remaining anonymous is walking around the State Capitol in Sacramento in the memory of his fallen comrades and the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians killed by George Bush in an illegal war based on lies.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
A NEW CONFERENCE to update the news media on the progress will be
held at 9:30 a.m. TUESDAY MORNING on the North Side of the Capitol.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

MEMORIAL DAY MARCH BY IRAQ VETERAN
Scores, including Casey Sheehan's Dad, greet Iraq Vet
in his quest to walk around Capitol for every CA,
US trooper killed in Iraq, and protest the war

SACRAMENTO (3:41 p.m., Monday) – An Iraq veteran was greeted early this
morning by nearly one hundred fellow veterans, parents of US troops in Iraq
supporters – including the father of Casey Sheehan, who was killed in Iraq
– and other as he began a round-the-clock effort to march around the State
Capitol for all U.S. troopers killed in Iraq.

http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2007/05/09/18413375.php

Iraq vet who refused to go back to the war
makes 1st public appearance since military prison
in Germany when he speaks in Sacramento Thursday

SACRAMENTO – An Iraq combat veteran – who refused to load his weapon in Iraq because of his opposition to the war – will make his first public appearance since his recent release from military prison in Germany when he speaks in Sacramento Thursday.
Agustin Aguayo is expected to address fellow veterans, and other war opponents THURSDAY, 7 p.m. at Newman Center (5900 Newman Court, near CSUS). He will be available for interview to members of the news media before and after the Newman Center appearance.

Aguayo, a conscientious objector who was denied his military discharge, served eight months in prison for refusing to return to Iraq following a court martial for desertion and missing movement.

Aguayo first applied for CO status in February, 2004 but while the application was being processed he was sent to Iraq as a medic where he refused to load his weapon. The Army denied his CO claim, and when his unit was to be sent back to Iraq in 2006, Aguayo missed the deployment and turned himself in.

Wait a minute, I thought he was The Decider,™ now he's The Commander-Guy™?

Iraq's Civil War

James D. Fearon

From Foreign Affairs, March/April 2007

Summary: The White House still avoids the label, but by any reasonable historical standard,
style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow">the Iraqi civil war has begun. The record of past such wars suggests that
style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow">Washington cannot stop this one -- and that Iraqis will be able to reach a power-sharing deal only after much more fighting, if then.
style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow">The
United States can help bring about a settlement eventually by balancing Iraqi factions from afar, but there is little it can do to avert bloodshed now.

James D. Fearon is Geballe Professor in the School of Humanities and Sciences and Professor of Political Science at Stanford University.

NO GRACEFUL EXIT

As sectarian violence spiked in Baghdad around last Thanksgiving, Bush administration spokespeople found themselves engaged in a strange semantic fight with American journalists over whether the conflict in Iraq is appropriately described as a civil war. It is not hard to understand why the administration strongly resists the label. For one thing, the U.S. media would interpret a change in the White House's position on this question as a major concession, an open acknowledgment of dashed hopes and failed policy. For another, the administration worries that if the U.S. public comes to see the violence in Iraq as a civil war, it will be even less willing to tolerate continued U.S. military engagement. "If it's a civil war, what are we doing there, mixed up in someone else's fight?" Americans may ask.