Syria Circling the Drain

With things such a mess, it's hard to know much for certain.

But it's beginning to sound like Syria could go the way of Lybia.

The people of Syria no doubt remember Hafez al-Assad slaughtering thousands of them back in Hama, yet they are gearing up for more confrontation.

For their sakes, I hope Bashar al-Assad is nothing like his father.

Yemen: Ground Level Account

(Via the Telegraph)

On the other side of what the demonstrators have begun to call "Taghyir" or "Change" Square, others stripped off their jackets and advanced towards the ever more relentless gunfire, pointing towards their chests as if in an invitation to shoot.

As the carnage continued, killing 52 and wounding hundreds more, victims were brought to a nearby mosque that had been turned into makeshift hospital.

Photographs showed the dead, identity cards and miniatures of the Koran laid on their corpses, lain in rows across the carpeted floor on an inner prayer room.

One young boy, barefoot and dressed in an Arsenal football club T-shirt, had been shot just above the eye. Another photograph showed a veiled woman cradling the body of her young son, his arms outstretched as if in supplication.

In one video, a man holding the body of his dead brother is shown making a tearful telephone call to his mother to tell her, in a faltering voice, that her son is dead.

Nearly all the bodies in the photographs had bullet wounds either in the forehead, neck or in the back of the head. There seems little doubt that this was the work of trained marksmen.

Yet President Saleh, while expressing his sorrow, claimed that the gunmen were either the demonstrators themselves or irate residents neighbouring the university who had grown tired of the noise of the protests – a claim denied by the residents themselves.

The opposition coalition at the forefront of the protests accused Mr Saleh, a key US ally against al-Qaeda, of perpetrating crimes against humanity.

"It is a massacre," said opposition spokesman Mohammed al-Sabri. "This is part of a criminal plan to kill off the protesters, and the president and his relatives are responsible for the bloodshed."

Much of the sniper fire emanated from a building allegedly owned by a regional governor close to President Saleh, further evidence, the opposition said, of the regime's involvement in the killings.

Video footage showed a masked man crouching behind a balustrade on the building's roof.

As the gunfire continued unabated, a group of protesters stormed the rooftop, braving gunfire to capture 10 of the snipers – seven of whom were said to have possessed government identification papers.

One of the suspected snipers was dragged into the streets, where he was beaten and clubbed by protesters, while a second was allegedly flung off the edge of the building.

Ye gods.

Sauce for the goose

Glenn compiles another monster post about moral relativism, the right and how our press covers it.

Standing up in Iran

Solid picture.

I think this lady's facing longer odds than even the picture suggests. But you gotta admire someone who's looking down the street at that - and still has the guts to stand there.

(H/t to Dynagirl)

The false hope of virtual sunshine

I know we'd all love for there to be some great movement afoot in Iran. Much has been made of how the internet is going to save the Iranian reformist movement - but it is becoming all too clear that the powers that be are perfectly willing to crush the reformists in broad daylight.

Foreign journalists are being sent home or have had their movements strictly limited - the "investigation" ordered by the Supreme Leader has been exposed for the sham it always was...

Now Iran's strong man is telling people to get off the streets. It's pretty clear he means it this time.

This time next week, I would expect us to be talking about how Iran has ruthlessly crushed the reformists - and how we never should have allowed ourselves to expect anything else.

There's a great moment in the movie Goin' South (1978) where Jack Nicholson is fleeing a western posse near the Mexican border. He rides like hell and makes it in Mexico - then turns to laugh at his pursuers.

Then the posse crosses the border, grabs Nicholson, and drags him back into the US to face jail.

The lesson being: you can believe you're in the right all you want - but if your opponent is willing to do anything to win - you really can't count on that to save you.

Why I love Rachel Maddow

Dr. Maddow had Zbigniew Brzezinski on her show talking about our future in Afghanistan.

Smart question, smarter answer:

Maddow: It seems like the emerging, um I guess the emerging debate about what to do in the whole Afghanistan/Pakistan region - it comes down to this idea of about whether or not the problem can be out-governed instead of out-gunned. Whether this is something the US can be part of a constructive political solution, whether it really is a military issue. When I look at the evidently corrupt government - and, and a goverment of a limited reach of Hamid Karzai - and I look at the government in Pakistan which is only one year old and is bankrupt. It's hard for me to believe that we're, we've got enough- there's enough governance there to really solve this big problem.

Brzezinski: I can't help smiling because you used two words which we like to use when we become uncomfortable with those who are dependent on us - or who are, who are to some extent our allies. If we are uncomfortable with them we begin to say they are corrupt. Or now we're say that the Pakistanis are bankrupt.  What about us? We're close to being bankrupt, and you know Washington and I know Washington. What we have in this city is well-organized, legalized corruption.

Brzezinski was not done - he went on to point out that 160,000 Soviet troops lost in Afghanistan, and that (at first) the US won rapidly using 300 troops because the Afghanis were with us. He was less sanguine about our future prospects:

Brzezinski: We have wasted seven years, pursuing policies which were ill-defined - not seeing any realistic objective - and now we have to re-think this whole engagement very seriously and taking into account Pakistani and European views.

Good stuff.

We base our killer drones in Pakistan?

At least according to Sen. Feinstein, we do.

Which is news to many Pakistanis. Their President has called the strikes -- more than 40 in the past year --  "counterproductive"; their prime minister, "intolerable." Pakistan's army has practiced shooting down the drones. 

(Via Danger Room)

Her office is sourcing that comment to a WaPo article - which might be true, or just good cover for the kind of gaffe that will require considerable smoothing of Pakistani feathers.

(I'm all for funny gaffes but you know, there are limits.)

Remote control

The Long War has posted transcripts of the Mumbai terrorists talking to their handlers. They came from The Hindu, which obtained the dossier India gave to Pakistan. The dossier details their argument that the attackers were aided by elements within Pakistan.

Reading the exchanges between the attackers and their controllers is plenty creepy - but the Long War is posting that American intelligence officials are (informally) saying the voice of one of the controllers is that of former Pakistan ISI head, Hamid Gul.

That...would not be good.

To the chest-thumpers of America

Don't look now, but Ben Stein (on CBS Sunday Morning) has done a masterful job of letting the air out of this tough talk on Russia and Georgia (emphasis in orignal)

Here's a cool idea: while we're in a difficult war in Iraq, while the war in Afhanistan is turning distinctly ugly, while we have major economic and energy problems - let's get into a war with Russia!

What? You don't think that's a good idea?

Neither do I.

But that seems to be exactly where we are heading. We already made the boneheaded move of getting nation of Georgia to think we would back them when they confronted Russia over Issues that have zero to do with us.

Russia warned us over and over to back off. We didn't back off. Then when Russia called our bluff, invaded Georgia and thumbed their noses at us - we did nothing. This was a nearly fatal blow to Georgia, a sovereign state and made us look like liars and punks.

Now we've made an agreement that places interceptor missiles in Poland, even as Russia has told us over and over again not to do it. We've promised the Poles we'll defend them if Russia attacks.

This is dangerous foolishness.

We're not gonna fight the Russians over Poland, which is right next to Russia and about 5,000 miles from us.

1. We don't have the means to do it; and
2. The nation doesn't want to do it.

So if Russia invades, which they've strongly hinted that they may do - we'll do nothing, and look weak again.

Why are we getting into all these messes so far from home? Why are we provoking the Russians needlessly? They are obviously ready to fight on their borders, and we're not ready to fight on their borders. And neither is anyone in Western Europe - all of whom are totally dependent on Russia for natural gas at this point. Plus, the Western Europeans have almost no armies at this point.

Look, we have enough on our plate. Let's not get other people killed and ourselves humiliated in Russia's backyard.

If we're not gonna fight - and we're not - let's just butt out and stay out.

Ben's dead-on on this issue. Only blind nationalists and simpletons could think picking a fight with Russia has any upside. We are not invincible - even if nations like Georgia and Poland think we are.

Russia is doing what they are doing because they understand that we cannot back up our words. We may not like it - but it doesn't change things. Leaders who suggest otherwise are either  shameless demagogues or fools. Either way, they are dangerously irresponsible.

Kim Jong Il: down for the count?

Bloomberg is reporting that North Korea's Kim Jong Il may have suffered a stroke in the past month.

Pantomime

The NYT's Dexter Filkins writing up our sham of an ally in Pakistan:

So here was Namdar — Taliban chieftain, enforcer of Islamic law, usurper of the Pakistani government and trainer and facilitator of suicide bombers in Afghanistan — sitting at home, not three miles from Peshawar, untouched by the Pakistani military operation that was supposedly unfolding around us.

What’s going on? I asked the warlord. Why aren’t they coming for you?

“I cannot lie to you,” Namdar said, smiling at last. “The army comes in, and they fire at empty buildings. It is a drama — it is just to entertain.”

Entertain whom? I asked.

“America,” he said.

(H/t to DangerRoom)

For this we give them billions.

Don't know much about Georgia

If you're like me - the South Ossetia/ Georgia thing is a bit murky.

DangerRoom's Noah Shachtman says the popular account is totally wrong.

The account he cites (that of Michael J. Totten) is a very interesting counterpoint.

Tit for tat

In reading Emptywheel's post on the NYT article on the loss of WMD evidence, one aside really jumped out at me.

Back in 2004 - the Pakistanis are in hot water over the A.Q. Kahn mess - (Kahn helps other countries build nuclear bomb technology, is publicly arrested, and privately given his freedom). The US makes numerous statements defending Pakistan.

The US puts those statements on then-Pakistani President Musharraf's account. You owe us.

And what are they asking in return?

But the Bush administration apparently conveyed to the Pakistani military after that episode that it now expected the Musharraf regime to deliver high-ranking al Qaeda officials — and to do so at a particularly advantageous moment for the administration. The New Republic magazine reported Jul. 15, 2004 that a White House aide had told the visiting head of ISI, Ehsan ul-Haq, that “it would be best if the arrest or killing of any HVT [high value target] were announced on 26, 27 or 28 July.” Those were the last three days of the Democratic National Convention.

[snip]

Just hours before Democratic candidate John Kerry’s acceptance speech, Pakistan announced the capture of an alleged al Qaeda leader.

Obviously not a new story, but a vivid illustration of how power can be misused in an election year.

We are fortunate that this is not a re-election year for the president, or we might see some other flavor of this nonsense.

Have handbasket, will travel

Among the quotations from this weekend that I didn't need to hear was this one:

Shota Utiashvili, an official in the Georgian Interior Ministry, said the Russians had moved tanks and troops to within a few kilometers of Gori and were “trying to cut the country in half.”

Mr. Utiashvili said that if they tried to occupy Georgia, “there will probably be guerrilla warfare all over the country.” 

He said: “We need large supplies of humanitarian aid, because we have thousands of wounded. And weapons. We need weapons.”

 (via the NYT)

Russia continues to confound, and there is nothing we can do.

You wonder if Putin has planned to cow the rest of the former republics by making an example of Georgia.

Playing us like a fiddle

Well, we're paying a billion dollars a year to Pakistan, which is orchestrating the Taliban insurgency. So, it's actually US-taxpayer money that is paying for the insurgents, who are then killing, at the moment, Canadian troops. Now if I were the government of Germany or France, I'd have a hard time putting my troops in that kind of equation. I would demand from Washington, that Washington require a lot different behavior from Pakistan.
[snip[

Has anybody done very strict accounting on where [aid to Pakistan] is going? I suspect that if you start looking at some of the receipts, you'll find that there's money missing. I mean, I find it really amazing that, for example, recently, there was a cross border raid, that killed an Al Qaeda commander named Al-Libi in Beluchistan province of Pakistan. Now, the entire Taliban top command, or at least the top command of the part that's operating in the south, is based on Beluchistan province. People know exactly where they are. Why has we never required those guys heads from Islamabad? Or why have we not considered taking them out ourselves? It's been very clear to me, watching since 2002, that Pakistan has been buying us off, by a well-timed delivery of an Al Qaeda operative, which has then caused us to look the other way about the Taliban.
Sarah Chayes on Bill Moyers Journal, Feb. 22, 2008

 Ms. Chayes is isolating the problem with having Pakistan as our so-called ally. We give them billions of dollars without accountability.

We ask them for help in the tribal areas. They say its too hard. The militants do something that demands a response. We demand action. Pakistan goes through the motions - things go wrong.Then some Al Qaeda guy we've never heard of is killed - and then Pakistan goes back to what they were doing: Nothing.


The NYT has a story that suggests this is more than just Ms. Chayes' opinion:

C.I.A. Outlines Pakistan Links With Militants

A top Central Intelligence Agency official traveled secretly to Islamabad this month to confront Pakistan’s most senior officials with new information about ties between the country’s powerful spy service and militants operating in Pakistan’s tribal areas, according to American military and intelligence officials.

The C.I.A. emissary presented evidence showing that members of the spy service had deepened their ties with some militant groups that were responsible for a surge of violence in Afghanistan, possibly including the suicide bombing this month of the Indian Embassy in Kabul, the officials said.

The decision to confront Pakistan with what the officials described as a new C.I.A. assessment of the spy service’s activities seemed to be the bluntest American warning to Pakistan since shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks about the ties between the spy service and Islamic militants.

So, are we finally getting serious with Pakistan? What's it going to take to get the ISI to follow orders?

What do you know about things?

Digby posts a Could you be president? quiz.

Yet another humbling foray into relevant information.

America has no truer friend than Great Britain

...and friends are honest with each other on the big stuff:

The Human Rights Annual Report 2007 released Sunday by the UK House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee states that "the UK can no longer rely on US assurances that it does not use torture, and we recommend that the Government does not rely on such assurances in the future."

An end in sight?

(via TPM and Spiegel online )

Wow.

In an interview with SPIEGEL, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said Barack Obama's 16 timeframe for a withdrawal from Iraq is the right one.

Just take a knee McCain - you look like a total fool now.

I wish I have the magical stick.

Inside Iraq is a blog where Iraqi journalists can post their observations to an English speaking audience.

They frequently post in fractured English, but its hard to fault them for their observations. Like today:

Today, we received an e-mail (press release) inviting us to attend the groundbreaking ceremony of A FIVE STAR HOTEL INSIDE THE INTERNATIONAL ZONE KNOWN AS THE GREEN ZONE 

Instead of building power plants, our government approves building a five star hotel. 

Instead of building water plants, our government approves building a five star hotel. 

Instead of building new hospitals for the poor Iraqis who fill the old, dirty stink hospitals, our government approves building a five star hotel.

I'm sure this Iraqi isn't the only person scratching their head over this one.

Fighting the right fight

(via TPM)
Obama on Iraq:

So let's be clear. Senator McCain would have our troops continue to fight tour after tour of duty, and our taxpayers keep spending $10 billion a month indefinitely; I want Iraqis to take responsibility for their own future, and to reach the political accommodation necessary for long-term stability. That's victory. That's success. That's what's best for Iraq, that's what's best for America, and that's why I will end this war as President.

[snip]

Senator McCain said - just months ago - that "Afghanistan is not in trouble because of our diversion to Iraq." I could not disagree more. Our troops and our NATO allies are performing heroically in Afghanistan, but I have argued for years that we lack the resources to finish the job because of our commitment to Iraq. That's what the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said earlier this month. And that's why, as President, I will make the fight against al Qaeda and the Taliban the top priority that it should be. This is a war that we have to win.

Even read off a computer screen - that's some pretty good stuff. Take your position and box in your opponent.

McCain wishes he had a winning position like this one.

Read the whole speech.