Iraqi Dreams and Clintonian Fantasies

What Do the Iraqis Want?
Having served with the U.S. Army in Saudi Arabia and Iraq, I have often said our biggest problem in dealing with the occupation of Iraq is that most Americans simply have no real concept of the region or its people. Without understanding those fundamentals, there is no way to solve the problems we face there today.

Leaving aside the chatter from U.S. bureaucrats regarding how to proceed, one very important question is rarely considered: What do the people of Iraq want?

In commemoration of the fifth anniversary of the Iraq War, the Friends (Quakers) sponsored a "Speak for Peace Tour" across Michigan featuring Iraqi native Raed Jarrar. A student of architecture, Jarrar found a new purpose in life when his Baghdad neighborhood was bombed in April 2003. After witnessing neighbors fleeing from their homes and being killed by so-called "surgical warfare," he began a campaign to document civilian injuries and deaths during the first four months of invasion and occupation. With the help of 200 volunteers, Jarrar's group conducted a door to door survey in various cities and villages to find out who was hurt and killed. Based on Jarrar's data and experience, he concludes:

What three-quarters of the Iraqis want is a complete U.S. withdrawal. No mercenaries. No permanent bases. No interference. Only complete
withdrawal is the first step toward stabilizing Iraq. After that, we can start
healing the wounds of this occupation.

It's past time for policy makers in Washington to give up their Neo Conservative pipe-dream and start listening to what the people of Iraq want.


There's Nothing Secret About Hillary's Experience
At Huffington Post, Richard Klass writes, "Senator Clinton has based her claim to be a stronger nominee than Senator Barack Obama on her 'thirty-five years of experience' and blithely conflates that to her national security experience." In his post, Klass points out some very inconvenient truths regarding that "experience."

One of her more absurd claims has her being a party to peace negotiations in NorthernIreland. According to someone who was very much involved, Nobel Peace Prize-winner and former First Minister of the province, Lord Trimble of Lisnagarvey, Hillary's claim is an exaggeration and well, just "a wee-bit silly."

Then there was that "dangerous" trip to Bosnia Clinton made way back... with singer Sheryl Crow, comedian Sinbad and daughter Chelsea. You know, a USO Tour, basically. Sinbad recently had this to say regarding the candidates' exaggerated claims of red-phone moments, possible sniper fire and flying around with the military:

I think the only 'red-phone' moment was: 'Do we eat here or at the next
place.
Threat of bullets? Sinbad doesn't remember that, either.
I never felt that I was in a dangerous position. I never felt being in a sense of peril,
or 'Oh, God, I hope I'm going to be OK when I get out of this helicopter or when
I get out of his tank.

So, we know those claims are greatly exaggerated. Big surprise.

What most destroys her claim to national security experience is that during her husband's presidency, she never held a security clearance, let alone a top Secret clearance. That means she was never privy to the President's Daily Brief, to classified programs, meetings of the Cabinet or meetings in the situation room where classified topics are discussed. She has only held a clearance since landing on the Senate's Armed Services Committee. Therefore, she has no more real foreign policy experience than her rival, Barack Obama. To state otherwise is a total fabrication.