The Canadian National Newspaper Exopolitics Headlines

Headline News on Democracy, Ecology and Extraterrestrial research

Undereported Official death toll among American soldiers in Iraq rises above 74,000

leave a comment »

Special to The Canadian

  U.S. taxpayers

As we mark the fifth anniversary of the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq, rhetoric around the “success” of the so-called surge continues.  U.S. President Barack Obama like his predecessor George W. Bush, continues to tout “progress,” alleging fewer U.S. casualties and moves amongst Iraqi groups towards “reconciliation.” However, official U.S. government data present a different picture.

While large U.S. media organizations like CNN, NBC, ABC, FOX and the New York Times document that about 4,000 U.S. military personnel have lost their life, U.S. Department of Veteran Affairs data documents a death toll of over 74,000 U.S. military personnel from Iraq Wars, as of May 2007. Award-winning investigative journalist Dahr Jamail documents that the U.S. political-military-industrial complex is apparently pursuing a “divide and rule” strategy by actually arming the same groups, that are labelled as “extremists” or “terrorists” against a stated objective of “stability” and “peace” in Iraq.

Indeed, it is apparent that the U.S. political-military-industrial complex is pursuing a Eugenics-inspired de-population agenda against Iraq, under the cover of a so-called “War on Terrorism”. Well over one million people have already died in Iraq, in the apparent execution of a Eugenics War. Dahr Jamail investigative research suggests that U.S. seeking, in practice, to perpetuate instability in Iraq, that can be used to justify the indefinite perpetuation of a U.S. and “coalition” military presence in Iraq.

by Dahr Jamail, Iraq Foreign Correspondent

In his final State of the Union address in January, George W. Bush proudly held up the newly formed “Awakening Groups,” known locally in Iraq as the Sahwa, as examples of both Iraqi cooperation and independence. Members of these groups now total nearly 80,000, and are paid $300 of U.S. taxpayer money a month to not attack occupation forces. These groups are referred to as “Concerned Local Citizens” by the military, as though they are comprised of concerned fathers and uncles who suddenly became keen to collaborate with members of a foreign occupation force which has eviscerated their country.

In reality, most of the Sahwa are resistance fighters who are taking the money, arms, and ammunition, whilst biding their time to build their forces to move, once again, against the occupation forces which now support them, in addition to planning to move against the Shia dominated government. Furthermore, it is widely known in Iraq that many of the Sahwa are al-Qaeda members, the irony of which is not lost to Iraqis, who heard the U.S. propaganda as to the reasons the Sahwa were formed: to drive al-Qaeda from Iraq and to promote security so as to enable political reconciliation within the government in Baghdad by providing the space for this to occur.

Illustrating the counter-productive nature of Bush’s plan, Iraq’s puppet government, led by U.S.-installed Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is having nothing to do with the Sahwa. When the U.S. military began to organize the Sahwa by buying off prominent Tribal Sheikhs across Iraq’s al-Anbar province, Maliki made it clear that none of the Sahwa would ever be granted positions within the government security apparatus.

And why should he feel differently? With Shia mlitiamen and death squad members he supports comprising the brunt of the Iraqi military and police, why would Maliki choose to grant legitimacy to the very groups who wish to gain a counter-balance of power in the Baghdad government?

Despite the periodic bickering and blaming from the Bush administration aimed at Maliki and his government, the Prime Minister remains in power for the sole reason that he and his cronies enjoy the backing of the occupation forces. After all, this is an “Iraqi” government that is located within the Green Zone. It is an “Iraqi” government that would not last five minutes without that kind of protection, as polls in Iraq indicate that it enjoys less than one percent support from the Iraqi population.

Arming (and splitting) Shia and Sunni

“I can’t think of a more classic example of divide and rule,” Phil Aliff, a then active duty U.S. soldier with the 10th Mountain Division told me at Fort Drum last October. He served nearly one year in Iraq from August 2005 to July 2006, in the areas of Abu Ghraib City and Fallujah, both west of Baghdad. Aliff was disgusted in the U.S. policy of, as he described it, “Arming the Sunni while politically supporting the Shia … how is that promoting reconciliation?”

According to the U.S. military, 82 percent of the Sahwa are Sunnis. Now the Sahwa, as my Iraqi colleague Ahmed Ali and I have been reporting for Inter Press Service, are openly challenging the government in Baghdad. In Baquba, the capital city of Diyala province, they are in the process of forcing the resignation of the Shia police chief of the province, Gen. Ghanim al-Qureyshi.

A local Sahwa member told Ali in Baquba recently that their demands also include “the nomination of four Sunni assistants to be available as the new police chief, hiring 5,000 members of the Sahwa to serve as government security personnel, and government police no longer to be allowed into certain predominantly

Sunni districts in an effort to eliminate the sectarian conduct of the police.”

So much for reconciliation. The Sahwa albeit wrought with its own infighting, corruption, and power struggles, now form an effective counterweight to the Iraqi government and are beginning to demand posts in various ministries in Baghdad, as well as power within government security forces.

General Mahdi Subeih, the commander of the order preservation forces in the interior ministry in Baghdad, announced to the Saudi-owned al-Hayat newspaper in the U.K. on March 3: “The growth in the security role of the members of the Awakening Councils made them a third security force in the country alongside the army and the police.” He went on to state, “The councils are trying to exploit their successes in order to acquire political gains as their leaders are demanding the formation of a ministry dedicated to running the affairs of the councils.”

Subeih claimed, “The rebellion by some of the members of the Awakening Councils and the confrontations that erupted between them and the security forces reveal the depth of the chasm between the two sides.”

Thus, the U.S.-backed predominantly Sunni Sahwa is now both large and powerful enough to make demands of the correspondingly U.S.-backed Iraqi government, and hopes of reconciliation have never been so distant as the U.S.-backed elements of the Sunni and Shia power structure have never been as divided.

The U.S. military continues to train hundreds of thousands of members of the Iraqi Army-Police-Security forces. These forces, the majority of which are members of various militias or criminal gangs whose loyalty lies elsewhere, remain largely unable or unwilling to operate effectively. Nevertheless, there numbers are in the hundreds of thousands now, tens of billions of dollars have been spent, and the result is the U.S. backing of both sides of a growing conflict.

A Neo-Colonial Strategy

Divide and rule is not new to the United States, nor is it new as imperial strategy. Even before the U.S. existed, colonial strategy was keen to it. In A People’s History of the United States, historian Howard Zinn quotes Gary Nash, who writes of the period in the 1750’s when native American’s and blacks greatly outnumbered white Europeans, “Indian uprisings that punctuated the colonial period and a succession of slave uprisings and insurrectionary plots that were nipped in the bud kept South Carolinians sickeningly aware that only through the greatest vigilance and through policies designed to keep their enemies divided could they hope to remain in control of the situation.”

Zinn writes, “The white rulers of the Carolinas seemed to be conscious of the need for a policy, as one of them put it, ‘to make Indians and Negroes a check upon each other, lest by their Vastly Superior Numbers we should be crushed by one or the other.’ And so laws were passed prohibiting free blacks from traveling in Indian country. Treaties with Indian tribes contained clauses requiring the return of fugitive slaves. Governor Lyttletown of South Carolina wrote in 1738: ‘It has always been the policy of this government to create an aversion in them [Indians] to Negroes.'”

And not just between “Indians and Negroes,” but also strife between poor whites and blacks was fomented during the 1700’s so the powerful elites could remain in control of the colonies. Zinn adds, “It was the potential combination of poor whites and blacks that caused the most fear among the wealthy white planters.”

Spring 2004 was perhaps the closest time in the occupation a unified Sunni-Shia front of resistance to the occupation existed. While the U.S. military assaulted the city of Fallujah in April of that year, Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr was carrying out his first intifada against the occupiers across much of Baghdad and southern Iraq. I witnessed Shia and Sunni demonstrating together against the occupation in the Khadamiya and Adhamiya neighbourhoods of Baghdad. When I was in Fallujah there were members of Sadrs’ militia, the Mehdi Army, as well. Later, during Sadr’s second intifada, Sunni mujahedin from Fallujah would cart weapons to Najaf to the Mehdi Army there.

Also during Spring 2004, the U.S. military had supply lines cut, and later admitted to losing control of swaths of Iraq it usually controlled. Thus, a new strategy was needed for the occupiers, because “only through the greatest vigilance and through policies designed to keep their enemies divided could they hope to remain in control of the situation.” Nearly three years later, the fruits of this strategy are clear.

The Political Splits

Added insurance comes from internal divisions within parties and alliances within the U.S.-backed government. Recently, Iraq’s presidential council refused to ratify a provincial election bill passed by the Iraqi parliament, purportedly due to the refusal of Vice President Adel Abdul-Mahdi (a member of the Supreme Islamic Council) to sign the bill. The move angered several political groups, particularly the Sadr movement and the Dawa Party, which has soured the “three point deal” agreed upon by the main political coalitions of the parliament, which would have entailed three main laws at once: the provincial elections bill, the general pardon bill, and the federal budget.

On 7 March 2008 al-Hayat newspaper reported, “The refusal by the Iraqi presidential council to ratify the provincial election bill opened the door for the emergence of new political disagreements between the various parliamentary coalitions, especially in the ranks of the Shia dominated ‘United Iraqi Alliance.'”

Analysts are predicting new splits between the four major parties that comprise the UIA, the Supreme Islamic Council, the al-Sadar movement, the Fadhila party, and the Dawa party. Al-Hayat noted, “The al-Sadr movement expected that the results of the elections for the provincial councils in the provinces of southern Iraq, which are supposed to be held before the end of this year, will lead to the loss of the Supreme Islamic Council of more than half the seats it now possesses. The Fadhila party also expected that the elections might shift the balances of power in central and southern Iraq…”

Some political observers considered that the Presidential council’s decision, which forced the bill to be returned to the Parliament, caused a disturbance in some of the political agreements between the various political coalitions. Abdul-Karim al-Salami, one of the leaders of the al-Sadr movement, told al-Hayat: “the al-Sadr movement enjoys wide popularity in the provinces of the south” and that ratifying the provincial election bill and holding the elections on schedule would lead to the SIC “losing control” of the southern provinces…”

In the Kurdish controlled north the situation is no different. The U.S. simultaneously supports both Kurdish warlords, Iraqi President Jalal Talabani, as well as Marzoud Barzani, in their continuing struggle for power against one another.

Nevertheless, the U.S. has relied heavily on the Kurds from the beginning, even using Kurdish Pershmerga militiamen to augment U.S. forces in that region during the invasion. Yet, when Turkey decided to begin launching air strikes, artillery barrages and ground incursions into Kurdish villages in northern Iraq, the U.S. supplied the Turkish military with coordinates of Kurdish rebel groups, without, of course, notifying their puppets in Baghdad or Northern Iraq.

A “Success” Doomed to Fail the Iraqi People

The various U.S. military and political strategies in Iraq are the primary cause of the continuing sectarianism. The occupation forces and their methods are dividing Iraqi groups, and rather than promoting reconciliation, suggest a premeditated attempt to actually encourage increases in violence, power struggles, and strife. Thus, the military strategy is actually making the political process more difficult by failing to provide the actors the space needed for any progression towards reconciliation. This strategy also makes the possibility for a much larger civil war far more likely, toward a broader justification by the greed and power-driven U.S. political-industrial-military complex to further demand more money to “deal with insurgents”. How many more Iraqis and U.S. soldiers must lose their lives before the American people wake up to the duplicitous machinations of an apparent Eugenics War being waged in Iraq?

About the writer:

In late 2003, weary of the overall failure of the U.S media to accurately report on the realities of the war in Iraq for the Iraqi people and U.S. soldiers, Dahr Jamail went to Iraq to report on the war himself.

Dahr is as one of only a few independent U.S. journalists in the country. In the Middle East, Dahr has also has reported from Syria, Lebanon and Jordan. LINK.

Click to make a donation-pledge herein

Become a Member:

Would you like to see other similar articles and critical commentaries in The Canadian Exopolitics Newspaper? Then, show your support. Make a member-pledge donation, in support of the Membership Drive of the Pro-Democracy Media Foundation.

The Canadian can only continue to publish investigative articles in such areas, with the donations from members of the public in Canada, the U.S., and abroad. Consider making a donation of $50.00, $75.00, $100.00, $200.00 or more. Donors are eligible to receive our first collector’s print edition in mail. Alternatively, you can send us a note to be placed on our special email list of members. Member-donors can also suggest articles or commentaries to be published in The Canadian.

The Canadian is a socially progressive and not-for-profit national newspaper, with an international readership. We provide an alternative to the for-profit commercial focused media, which often censors vital information and perspective of potential interest to the diverse Canadian public, and other peoples internationally.

Become a member of The Canadian, with your donation-pledge. Help support independent, progressive, and not-for-profit journalism.


Written by thecanadianheadlines

December 11, 2009 at 10:11 pm

Posted in 9/11 and the War on Terrorism

Tagged with

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: