The Command Post
Iraq
June 02, 2004
Names Have Been Changed

...to protect the guilty.

Some past reports of the US Occupation have not been widely publicised. They reveal a consistent story of administration bungling. Anyone who believes that a country so drastically mismanaged and chaotic will have a stable, Democratic government in the next twenty years is obviously a deluded NeoCon.

MisQuotations from articles by the New York Times :
January 6 ...The third report is by General MacNarney on the American Occupation Zone in Iraq. And that report, like the reports of General Ironhewer before him, and like virtually every newspaper dispatch coming from that zone, is a further recital of what must be considered thus far a failure. The primary cause of this failure is a confusion of purpose on the highest-level of policy-making. But there has been clear evidence of failure, also, in administration.
December 18 United States CENTCOM Headquarters announced today that plans had been completed for initial Iraqi elections in January at Tribal or Town levels in the Western Military District. A statement said that the vast majority of Iraqis remained passive in attitude towards politics and displayed no disposition to take over civic responsibilities.
December 2 An exhaustive compilation of opinions of Iraqis in all walks of life on the reaction to the United States occupation of their country was released this afternoon from the Confidential status under which it was submitted to officiakls of the United States Forces in CENTCOM recently.
Bitter resentment and deep disapointment was voiced over the Americans' first six months of occupation, though there was some praise for the improvements in transportation, health conditions, book publishing and entertainment.
A later report shows that the problems are not confined to the American sectors, and are far worse than the other reports would indicate, with widespread starvation.
March 23 British Occupation Officials announced today that they were prepared to use military armor to quell Iraqi hunger rioters in the British zone.
Mobile armored squads have been organized to put down riots and root out sabotage groups taking advantage of tension resulting from the general hunger, the British announced.
Armored cars will join military forces protecting food convoys as soon as additional 'difficulty' occurs, the announcement said.
Severe restrictions are to be placed upon the Iraqis to prevent them from buying and devouring their entire month's rations 'in a few days', authorities said. Iraqi officials said that this had happened on a large scale in Basra this month.
The British expressed doubts that 70 per cent of Basra's population was without bread because of this practice, as the Iraqi civilan officials claimed.
"Checks within the last twenty-four hours show that bakers' shops still have adequate supplies of flour." one British official said.
"We believe the looting yesterday was the result of a highly vociferous minority."
And finally, the post, via Tim Blair, that caused me to do some digging :
The Iraqi attitude toward the American occupation forces has swung from apathy and surface friendliness to active dislike. According to a military government official, this is finding expression in the organization of numerous local anti-American organizations throughout the zone and in a rapid increase in the number of attacks on American soldiers. There were more such attacks in the first week of May than in the preceding five months of the occupation, this source declared.
Before commenting on the above, readers should go and check the original source documents, many of which have been published on the net, because as Tim Blair said, "Some words may accidentally have been altered during transmission."

Posted By Zoe Brain at June 2, 2004 11:57 PM | TrackBack
Comments

erhserh

Posted by: johnnymozart at June 7, 2004 10:53 AM

Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (Click here should you choose to sign out.)

As you post your comment, please mind our simple comment policy: we welcome all perspectives, but require that comments be both civil and respectful. We also ask that you avoid the extensive use of profanity, racist terms (neither of which we consider civil or respectful), and other boorish language.

We reserve the right to delete any comment, and to prohibit you from commenting on this site, if we feel you have broached this policy. As a courtesy, we will first send you an email noting a violation so you understand the boundaries. This will occur only once, however, and should we ban you from our comment forums we expect that ban to be permanent.

We also will frown upon those who suggest that we ban other individuals for voicing unpopular opinions, should those opinions be voiced in a civil and respectful manner. The point of our comment threads is to provide a forum for spirited though civil and respectful discourse … it is not to provide a forum in which everyone will agree with your point of view.

If you can live by these rules, welcome aboard. If not, then we’re sorry it didn’t work out, and thanks for visiting The Command Post.


Remember me?