The 2003 invasion of Iraq lasted from 20 March to 1 May 2003 and signaled the start of the Iraq War, which was dubbed Operation Iraqi Freedom by the United States (prior to 19 March, the mission in Iraq was called Operation Enduring Freedom, a carryover from the War in Afghanistan).The invasion consisted of 21 days of major combat operations, in which a combined force of troops from the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia and Poland invaded Iraq and deposed the Ba'athist government of Saddam Hussein. The invasion phase consisted primarily of a conventionally fought war which concluded with the capture of the Iraqi capital of Baghdad by American forces.
As I write this in the early part of 2012, it is a safe assumption that most Americans carry a suspicion, however slight, toward the reasons that they were told the U.S. needed to invade Iraq back in 2003. It is simply not possible to explain the depths of the corruption that exist at the highest levels of government today. Those who have bought into the mainstream media’s portrayal of the American government as an institution who seeks the common good, they do well to recall the words of America’s own first national leader:
“Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.” (President George Washington)
With that quote as a backdrop, let us dig deeper into our original question: Why did the U.S. appear so eager to launch an unprovoked war against Iraq? And why did the U.S. begin hatching these war plans many months prior to the events of September 11?
After all, many other nations around the world have confirmed stockpiles of dangerous weapons. So why did the United States specifically target Iraq so soon after the Afghanistan invasion of 2001?
Did the U.S. have some other motivation for seeking international support to invade Iraq?
William R. Clark was among those who questioned the status quo answers and Washington’s stated motives regarding the invasion of Iraq. In his book, Petrodollar Warfare, Clark claims that the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq was not based upon “violence or terrorism, but something very different, yet not altogether surprising – declining economic power and depleting hydrocarbons.”
Clark’s work was heavily influenced by another author named F. William Engdahl and his book, The Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order.
According to research conducted by both Clark and Engdahl, the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq was not exclusively motivated by Iraq’s connection to the terrorist groups who masterminded the 9/11 attacks. Nor was it out of concern for the safety of the American public or out of sympathy for the Iraqi people and their lack of freedom or democracy.
Instead, Clark and Engdahl both claimed that the U.S.-led invasion was inspired predominantly by Iraq’s public defiance of the petrodollar system.
According to page 28 of Clark’s book:
“On September 24, 2000, Saddam Hussein allegedly “emerged from a meeting of his government and proclaimed that Iraq would soon transition its oil export transactions to the euro currency.”
Not long after this meeting, Saddam Hussein began preparing to make the switch from pricing his country’s oil exports in greenbacks to euros. As renegade and newsworthy as this action was on the part of Iraq, it was sparsely reported in the corporate-controlled media.
Clark comments on the limited media coverage on page 31 of his book:
“CNN ran a very short article on its website on October 30, 2000, but after this one-day news cycle, the issue of Iraq’s switch to a petroeuro essentially disappeared from all five of the corporate-owned media outlets.”
By 2002, Saddam had fully converted to a petroeuro – in essence, dumping the dollar.
On March 19, 2003, George W. Bush announced the commencement of a full scale invasion of Iraq.
While attention has been focused on the controversial killing of the insurgent by a marine, American forces are still battling rebels across Fallujah. Yesterday, India Company of the 3rd battalion, 5th Marines fought for more than six hours, just south of the main road, after they were fired on in the Byzantian district. It was a fierce clash - in which the marines took several casualties.
The footage shows US Marines facing a resistance while advancing through the narrow streets of the one of the neighbourhoods of Fallujah. The insurgent fire is neutralised and they continue with their house to house clearing activity. Throughout the day, Americans hit the militants with artillery and mortars, and warplanes fired on the city's main street and market as well as the insurgent stronghold of Jolan, one of several neighbourhoods where troops were skirmishing with militants. At least 71 militants had been killed by early Wednesday, the third day of intense urban combat, the military said. As of Tuesday night, 10 US troops and two members of the Iraqi security forces had been killed. Marine reports on Wednesday said 25 American troops and 16 Iraqi soldiers were wounded. There was no new report Wednesday on US military deaths. Fallujah, 40 miles (64 kilometres) west of Baghdad, is the centrepiece of the Sunni Muslim insurgency that has stymied US efforts to secure Iraq and prepare for national elections that are scheduled for January. Most of Fallujah's 200,000 to 300,000 residents are believed to have fled the city before the US assault. Civilian casualties in the attack are not known, though US commanders say they believe the numbers are low.
While attention has been focused on the controversial killing of the insurgent by a marine, American forces are still battling rebels across Fallujah. Yesterday, India Company of the 3rd battalion, 5th Marines fought for more than six hours, just south of the main road, after they were fired on in the Byzantian district. It was a fierce clash - in which the marines took several casualties.
The footage shows US Marines facing a resistance while advancing through the narrow streets of the one of the neighbourhoods of Fallujah. The insurgent fire is neutralised and they continue with their house to house clearing activity. Throughout the day, Americans hit the militants with artillery and mortars, and warplanes fired on the city's main street and market as well as the insurgent stronghold of Jolan, one of several neighbourhoods where troops were skirmishing with militants. At least 71 militants had been killed by early Wednesday, the third day of intense urban combat, the military said. As of Tuesday night, 10 US troops and two members of the Iraqi security forces had been killed. Marine reports on Wednesday said 25 American troops and 16 Iraqi soldiers were wounded. There was no new report Wednesday on US military deaths. Fallujah, 40 miles (64 kilometres) west of Baghdad, is the centrepiece of the Sunni Muslim insurgency that has stymied US efforts to secure Iraq and prepare for national elections that are scheduled for January. Most of Fallujah's 200,000 to 300,000 residents are believed to have fled the city before the US assault. Civilian casualties in the attack are not known, though US commanders say they believe the numbers are low.
Sixteen years ago, the U.S. and its allies invaded Iraq on the premise that the country was hiding weapons of mass destruction. Despite worldwide protest and a lack of UN authorization, 200,000 thousand troops deployed into Iraq in March of 2003, following massive airstrikes. The coalition faced minimal opposition, and Baghdad quickly fell. For years after President George W. Bush's "mission accomplished" speech, the war raged on, fueled by sectarian conflicts, al Qaeda insurgencies, outside agencies, and mismanagement of the occupation. Ten years later, we look back in a three-part series. Today's entry focuses on the March 20, 2003, invasion of Iraq, and the weeks immediately following.
From morning till noon he repelled charge after charge, he tenaciously held on with his handful of men through the heat and agony of battle, till he himself fell dead among his slain soldiers. And well chosen and most fitting was the place where he offered the sacrifice of his life. It was on the mountain summit, overlooking the plains and the shores of his country, a massive and tremendous altar, built as it were for Titans, caressed by the rolling clouds of morning, lighted by the stars of dusk.
Gregorio Del Pilar ( PHOTO, ABOVE) was born in San Jose, Bulacan, on Nov 14, 1875 to an illustrious ilustrado (middle class) family. In his early years, he aided his uncle, Marcelo H. del Pilar, in distributing his anti-friar writings. He was a member of the revolutionary forces in Bulacan even when he was studying at theAteneo de Municipal. When the revolution broke out on Aug 30, 1896, he joined the forces of Heneral Dimabunggo (Eusebio Roque). In the battle at Kakarong de Sili, Pandi, Bulacan, on Jan 1, 1897, he almost lost his life.
General Gregorio del Pilar (front, dark trousers) and Filipino army officers in 1898 photo
The Dec 14, 1897 Truce of Biyak-na-Bato temporarily halted the revolution. Gen. Emilio F. Aguinaldo brought Del Pilar to Hong Kong (LEFT, photo taken in Hong Kong in early 1898). On May, 19, 1898, Aguinaldo and the other exiles returned to the country and renewed the revolution.
Del Pilar was promoted to general either in June or July 1898 at the age of 22. (He was the second youngest general in the Philippine army, after General Manuel Tinio). He besieged the town of Bulacan and forced the colonial forces there to capitulate on or about June 30, 1898.
The Filipino-American War found Gen. Del Pilar in the frontlines once again. In the April 23, 1899, battle at Quingua (now Plaridel, Bulacan), he nearly defeated Major (later Brig. Gen.) James Franklin Bell; the cavalry commander, Col. John Stotsenburg, was killed.
Toward the latter part of May 1899, with the Philippine army reeling in the face of unrelenting American offensives, President Emilio Aguinaldo created a peace commission to negotiate an armistice. He appointed Del Pilar to head the Filipino panel. For two days, on May 22 and 23, the Filipinos conferred with the Schurman Commission. The talks failed, owing to the Americans' insistence that US sovereignty was non-negotiable. In addition, the Filipino army had to surrender unconditionally. [RIGHT, photo of General Del Pilar taken on May 22-23, 1899 in Manila].
Mt. Tirad at Concepcion, Ilocos Sur Province. PHOTO was taken in the early 1900s.
Tasked to delay US troops pursuing President Aguinaldo, Del Pilar and 60 of his men formed a blocking force at 4,500-foot (1,372 m) Tirad Pass, Concepcion, Ilocos Sur Province (Concepcion was renamed "Gregorio del Pilar" on June 10, 1955). They constructed several sets of trenches and stone barricades, all of which dominated the narrow trail that zigzagged up towards the pass.
On Dec. 2, 1899, Major Peyton Conway March (LEFT, as First Lt. in 1896-1898) led 300 soldiers of the 33rd Infantry Regiment of U.S. Volunteers, up the pass. A Tingguian Igorot, Januario Galut, led the Americans up a trail by which they could emerge to the rear of the Filipinos. Del Pilar died in the battle, along with 52 subordinates. The Americans lost 2 men killed.
The Americans looted the corpse of the fallen general. They got his pistol, diary and personal papers, boots and silver spurs, coat and pants, a lady's handkerchief with the name "Dolores Jose," his sweetheart, diamond rings, gold watch, shoulder straps, and a gold locket containing a woman's hair.
Del Pilar's body was left by the roadside for two days until its odor forced some Igorots to cover it with dirt.
On his diary, which Major March found, Del Pilar had written: "The General [ Aguinaldo ] has given me the pick of all the men that can be spared and ordered me to defend the Pass. I realize what a terrible task has been given me. And yet, I felt that this is the most glorious moment of my life. What I do is done for my beloved country. No sacrifice can be too great."
No comments:
Post a Comment