MATTHEWGOODONLINE

A couple of years ago on the day Israel decided to wage war on Lebanon, I remember a conversation with a friend, telling him, that everything will be ok, this kind of thing happens all the time. That war cost Lebanon thousands of dead and millions in economic and property damage. Years before that after PM Rafic Harriri was assassinated, and the cedar revolution began, we all thought it was the end of tyranny in Lebanon. Little bombs started soon after that. It seemed like every weekend a bomb would go off somewhere. Yet every weekend my friends and I would have plans, we would always be optimistic that the latest bomb would be the last, but it wasn’t. \

Last month Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah waged war against Beirut, sparking violence between the sunni and shia population in Lebanon. A deal was reached between the government and Hizbuallah at Doha soon after. Everyone rejoiced, Lebanon was finally going to return to its peaceful days. However once the cycle of violence starts it is not in the powers of those who started it to end it. Sporadic violence continued, yet people moved on with their daily routines, going to work, school, plans with friends, a false sense of security, a feeling that violence will never touch you.

Tuesday, June 16, 2008 at 1:00 am Lebanon time, my uncle’s family woke to sounds of gun shots ( pro-gov’t and opposition supporters shooting at each other), my aunt and youngest cousin went out to investigate, my uncle yelled at them to come back inside, my cousin walked in, but my aunt never made it back in. She was shot while she stood on her secure 2nd floor balcony. I am still in shock, I can’t believe that aunt Samira is gone, I can’t believe that my young cousins and my uncle witnessed it. I always hear of things like this on the news, I never felt afraid. I never thought it could happen to anyone I know. Always felt secure, today I am afraid, afraid of the country I love, afraid for family that is there. I am sad cause a woman, an educator, a mother, a wife, as well as being many other things was lost in senseless violence. May she rest in peace.

In July of 2006, I spent many nights up listening to bombs go off. Everyday that passed I would feel more and more helpless and yet my hate for what Israel would only increase. We couldn’t leave our homes, The airport was blocked off, and Hizbullah we thought would be our own way out. Though I never was a Hizbulllah supporter, never agreed with their views, at that time I respected them for standing up to those who were invading.

Today David has become Goliath, Hizbullah no longer points its guns at israel in order to Defend Lebanon, instead they have turned their guns on their own people. And as the days pass the death toll rises, and hate grows. They have taken human life and have taken the right of the other side to even speak, by closing down pro-gov’t Future TV. Freedom is lost.

I came across this video of Noha, a Beirut resident, who is now a prisoner in her own home care of the recent fighting, and invasion of Beirut. Her video moved me cause she reminded me of what I went through during the July 2006 Israel war on Lebanon. Israel 2006 = Hizbullah 2008.

Noha, a Beirut Resident, shares her experience

It started two days ago. Earlier in the week the government announced its decision to replace the Beirut airport security chief Brig Wafiq Shoqeir for alleged ties to Hizbullah, He allegedly allowed Hizbullah to install their own security network with in the airport. The government also announced that it will close down Hizbullah’s telecommunication network. And thus overnight Hizbullah leader Hassan Nassrallah contended that these decisions are declarations of war and thus moved his gurilla army to take over Beirut. And so much like Israel’s 2006 war on Lebanon, Hizbullah has launched their own version of that war internally.

Once Hizbullah vowed never to use their arms in internal fighting but much like other promises they made they also failed to keep this one. On Wednesday, May 7, Hizbullah supporters closed off the airport road, leading to the complete shut down of Beirut’s international Airport, a similar move to what Israel did in 2006. What Israel didn’t do however Hizbullah did. Yesterday they moved into Beirut and have officially taken over the capitol. Today they burned down one of Future TV’s building and have forced the pro-government TV station to shutdown.

Friends living in Beirut are living in Terror. Random bullets are flying into residential homes. People are sleeping away from windows. Hizbullah is detaining pro-government supporters. People are scared to speak out, already worried that Hizbullah is monitoring their phone calls. They are turning Lebanon into another totalitarian state. The whole country is completely shut down. This is what Hizbullah Leader Hassan Nassrallah calls a democracy.

I am so disappointed, upset, mad, and completely disgusted with Hizbullah. We are on the brinks of a shia vs sunni civil war. History doth repeat itself.

What is it about people who when angry resort to burning tires? There must be stocks of tires waiting for such occasions in the areas surrounding the airport. Last year on January 23rd the opposition decided to enforce their type of democracy by forcing the country to shut down. They burned tires and blocked roads and eventually lead to the deaths resulting from clashes. Last week in an ingenious effort by the opposition to remember that day they staged another protest, this time the army was ready for them, and no roads were blocked.

But today was unexpected. Protesters in the area of Sheiyah took to the streets to protest the recent power outages, a problem that most of Lebanon suffers from, a problem that I had touched on back in a post I called H2O. I am not sure why the rest of Lebanon isn’t burning tires but the opposition supporters seem to choose tire burning and blocking the airport road as their main mean of protest. Do they even think about the toxins they and their families are inhaling?

A state of lawlessness is the biggest fear that Lebanon faces today. People that are angry and frustrated are taking matters into their own hands. Leaders’ broken promises and the countries failing economy are only making matters worse. And with all the chaos what starts out as a protest ends as a riot, what might start off peaceful ends in death. Today’s death toll so far is 8 with many injured. Political leaders urged their citizens to get off the streets but as the day passed things worsened and tire burning turned into bullets and grenades flying. The airport road was blocked and the army was mobilized in order to end the ensuing chaos. By the end of the day the streets were cleared and tomorrow Lebanon has issued yet another day of mourning.

A day of mourning means a day of school and university closure. Lebanon usually declares days of mourning as a way to prevent further violence. I used to work at a Lebanese university and have seen my fair share of students beating the crap out of anyone who opposed their political views. A day of mourning usually gives them a day to let out steam.

I of course am sitting half across the world in my safe living room, but can’t help and panic over family and loved ones back home. I thought things would get better as days pass but it just seems to get worse. Presidential elections have been postponed over 13 times, in the last two weeks there have been two terrorist related bombings and a riot. People are becoming less tolerant and fear of escalating bursts of violence and terror are almost a certainty.

The overthrow of the ICU in Somalia was AFRICOM’s first challenge. Using Ethiopia as a military proxy, and backing their initial invasion of Somalia with air strikes and the insertion of special forces teams, the United States helped plunge Somalia back into a state of chaos that has resulted in a crisis that is being compared to that of Darfur.

The justification for their direction of the Ethiopian invasion of Somalia was that several members of the ICU had ties to al-Qaeda. The ICU’s implementation of Sharia law concerned the United States (who, ironically, has no qualms about its existence in Saudia Arabia), even though in the case of Mogadishu it provided stability where none had existed for more than a decade, with many Somalis, for the first time in a very long time, openly confessing that despite its implementation they were content to have a governing body in place that could provide stability. The US reaction, of course, was one that lent on the possible evolution of a terror-state governed by such a body.

What has occurred in Somalia since has gone largely under reported, and the situation there has become catastrophic in scope. From today’s New York Times…

“The worst humanitarian crisis in Africa may not be unfolding in Darfur, but here, along a 20-mile strip of busted-up asphalt, several top United Nations officials said.

A year ago, the road between the market town of Afgooye and the capital of Mogadishu was just another typical Somali byway, lined with overgrown cactuses and the occasional bullet-riddled building. Now it is a corridor teeming with misery, with 200,000 recently displaced people crammed into swelling camps that are rapidly running out of food.

Natheefa Ali, who trudged up this road a week ago to escape the bloodbath that Mogadishu has turned into, said Monday that her 10-month-old baby was so malnourished she could not swallow.

“Look,” Ms. Natheefa said, pointing to her daughter’s splotchy legs, “her skin is falling off, too.”

Top United Nations officials who specialize in Somalia said the country had higher malnutrition rates, more current bloodshed and fewer aid workers than Darfur, which is often publicized as the world’s most pressing humanitarian crisis and has taken clear priority in terms of getting peacekeepers and aid money.

The relentless urban combat in Mogadishu, between an unpopular transitional government — installed partially with American help — and a determined Islamist insurgency, has driven waves of desperate people up the Afgooye road, where more than 70 camps of twigs and plastic have popped up seemingly overnight.

The people here are hungry, exposed, sick and dying. And the few aid organizations willing to brave a lawless, notoriously dangerous environment cannot keep up with their needs, like providing milk to the thousands of babies with fading heartbeats and bulging eyes. “Many of these kids are going to die,” said Eric Laroche, the head of United Nations humanitarian operations in Somalia. “We don’t have the capacity to reach them.”

He added: “If this were happening in Darfur, there would be a big fuss. But Somalia has been a forgotten emergency for years.”

The officials working on Somalia are trying to draw more attention to the country’s plight, which they feel has fallen into Darfur’s shadow. They have recently organized several trips, including one on Monday, for journalists to see for themselves.

“The situation in Somalia is the worst on the continent,” said Ahmedou Ould-Abdallah, the top United Nations official for Somalia.

That situation has included floods, droughts, locusts, suicide bombers, roadside bombs and near-daily assassinations.

United Nations officials said the recent round of plagues, natural and man-made, coupled with the residual chaos that has consumed Somalia for more than a decade, have put the country on the brink of famine. In the worst-hit areas, like Afgooye, recent surveys indicate the malnutrition rate is 19 percent, compared with about 13 percent in Darfur; 15 percent is considered the emergency threshold.

The officials, in making the comparison, were not trying to diminish the problems in Darfur, where more than 200,000 people have died from violence and disease since 2003. But they said they were concerned that the crisis here was increasingly urgent.

Unlike Darfur, where the suffering is being eased by a billion-dollar aid operation and more than 10,000 aid workers, Somalia is still considered mostly a no-go zone. Just last week, a Somali aid worker and a guard were shot to death at an aid distribution center in Afgooye. United Nations officials estimate that total emergency aid is under $200 million, partly because it is so difficult just getting food into the country.

Pirates lurking off the coast of Somalia have attacked more than 20 ships this year, including two carrying United Nations food. The militias that rule the streets — typically teenage gunmen in wraparound sunglasses and flip-flops — have jacked up roadblock taxes to $400 per truck. The transitional government last month jailed a senior official of the United Nations food program in Somalia, accusing him of helping terrorists, though he was eventually released.”

“Installed partially with American help”. Now there’s an understatement.

This passage, though, is rather telling…

“United Nations officials now concede that the country was in better shape during the brief reign of Somalia’s Islamist movement last year. “It was more peaceful, and much easier for us to work,” Mr. Laroche said. “The Islamists didn’t cause us any problems.”

Off The Books

Since the US backed Ethiopian invasion of Somalia, the United States has been gifted use of notorious Ethiopian jails to house and question detainees, despite the fact that they have been afforded the ability to conveniently claim that such individuals are not technically in US custody…

“Ethiopia, which denies holding secret prisoners, is a country with a long history of human rights abuses. In recent years, it has also been a key U.S. ally in the fight against al-Qaida, which has been trying to sink roots among Muslims in the Horn of Africa.

U.S. government officials contacted by AP acknowledged questioning prisoners in Ethiopia. But they said American agents were following the law and were fully justified in their actions because they are investigating past attacks and current threats of terrorism.

The prisoners were never in American custody, said an FBI spokesman, Richard Kolko, who denied the agency would support or be party to illegal arrests. He said U.S. agents were allowed limited access by governments in the Horn of Africa to question prisoners as part of the FBI’s counter-terrorism work.

Western security officials, who insisted on anonymity because the issue related to security matters, told AP that among those held were well-known suspects with strong links to al-Qaida.

But some U.S. allies have expressed consternation at the transfers to the prisons. One Western diplomat in Nairobi, who agreed to speak to AP only if not quoted to avoid angering U.S. officials, said he sees the United States as playing a guiding role in the operation.

John Sifton, a Human Rights Watch expert on counter-terrorism, went further. He said in an e-mail that the United States has acted as “ringleader” in what he labeled a “decentralized, outsourced Guantanamo.”

Details of the arrests, transfers and interrogations slowly emerged as AP and human rights groups investigated the disappearances, diplomats tracked their missing citizens and the first detainees to be released told their stories.

One investigator from an international human rights group, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the person was not authorized to speak to the media, said Ethiopia had secret jails at three locations: Addis Ababa, the capital; an Ethiopian air base 37 miles east of the capital; and the far eastern desert close to the Somali border.”

As an added tidbit, it should also come as no surprise that Ethiopia is believed to be the country in which AFRICOM’s headquarters are located.

Historical resentment has its drawbacks, especially when you’re militarily occupying a country. In the case of Iraq, its Shia majority has been under the thumb of Sunni minority governments since the British installed Faisal as king in 1923. During the tenure of Saddam Hussein they were persecuted, as were the Kurds, and following the Gulf War were left hung out to dry by the international coalition when they attempted to stand against Hussein’s regime.

When US forces entered Iraq in 2003, the Shia were the least of their concerns. At the time, the Iraqi army was controlled by Ba’athists, who, following the invasion, primarily melted into the countryside where they would help form what would later become the insurgency. What remained of the Iraqi army was, of course, disbanded by Paul Bremmer, easily the biggest mistake made by the United States post-invasion.

The reconstitution of the Iraqi military was thusly something that became a priority, and little consideration was given historic grudges with regards to who would ultimately constitute the majority of its ranks. With the rise of the Sunni insurgency, and the US need to expediently train an Iraqi military and national police force to help bolster security, many that joined the new Iraqi military establishment were not ignorant to the fact that it was a mechanism with which to confront past injustices and seize control of the establishment itself (re: in November of 2005, a secret underground prison was discovered in Baghdad where local police had interned and tortured Sunni captives).

Given the state of civil war that now exists in Iraq, the power wielded by Shia influences within the military establishment has played a significant role in countering US efforts to establish a uniform national security platform. The fact that a great deal of Baghdad has been successfully secured by Shia militias points to this reality. And there is certainly proof that it is becoming an ever increasing problem…

“As the Americans patrol the Sunni Arab neighborhood of Azamiyah, people keep turning to them for help. One man asks them to bring in a fuel truck stopped by Iraqi troops. Another complains that Iraqi soldiers just beat up his brother.

The Americans used to be loathed in Azamiyah, a longtime stronghold of insurgents and the last place where Saddam Hussein appeared in public. Now the animosity has given way to a grudging acceptance, because the people of this northern neighborhood want American protection from a foe they hate and fear even more: the mainly Shiite Iraqi army.

“We feel safe when the Americans are around,” says a computer engineer who gave his name only as Abu Fahd. He stopped going to work because of his fear of militiamen at the Shiite-dominated Health Ministry and now makes a living selling clothes.

“When we see the Iraqi army, we just stay home or close our shops.”

The story of Azamiyah, once a favorite with wealthy Sunnis and nationalists, shows once again how difficult it is to measure the success of the latest surge of American troops amid the shifting allegiances in Baghdad.

The accommodation between Azamiyah and the Americans represents a major breakthrough for the U.S. military, which had long considered the neighborhood among the city’s most dangerous. Yet the success is largely due to a sectarian divide so deep that it has poisoned institutions such as the Iraqi army, jeopardizing the chances of reconciliation and leaving the Americans caught in the middle.”

Be it the military establishment or the government itself, the numbers simply do not lie. It is impossible for a nation that is primarily composed of a group that has been historically misused to simply put the past behind it. The bizarre reality of Iraq’s future is that we may very well see US forces protecting a minority that has, up until this point, constituted their primary military opposition. It should therefore come as a surprise to no one that Sunni militias have agreed these past months to aid US efforts in exchange for arms and money, not to mention the ability to police their own enclaves.

No matter the promises made by the Democrats, who secured a House majority in last year’s elections, little progress has been made with regards to seriously addressing the conflict in Iraq. Of course, legislation has been tabled and passed by both Houses and vetoed by the President, but many have become disenfranchised with the Democrat’s inability to make real progress. Given the scandals that have plagued the Bush administration, there has also been little action with regards to addressing the issue of impeachment as a way forward, which is not as far fetched as many might believe, though unrealistic in that most politicians fear entering into such proceedings given the ‘state of war’ in which the United States finds itself and how it might effect their political futures.

The reality of Iraq with regards to those attempting to secure the Democratic Presidential nomination is that most realize that truly actionable promises can’t be made because they are, for the most part, unfeasible. The hole that has been dug is too deep to address with any force of principle without abandoning the centrist thinking that many of the candidates are banking on to get them elected. Thus, to take the sort of bold action necessary to disengage the United States may very well be tantamount to political suicide. This is evident when the positions of many of the front-runners are examined. All of them have no realistic strategy for actually disengaging the United States from Iraq, only initiatives that slightly bend its purpose to create the appearance of change.

Even those with forward thinking initiatives, such as Senators Biden, Richardson, and Congressman Kucinich, are trapped within the creation of a reality that the current administration took little time to consider – Iraq’s polarized history. While theirs are perhaps the most assertive proposals, it is impossible to simply disregard Iraq’s centuries of autocratic rule under the Ottomans as three distinct provinces. Despite the fact that the country has existed in its current state since the end of the First World War, it cannot be overlooked that the decades since have been ones of both turmoil coupled with the continued autocratic rule of various entities, from monarchs to dictators that have only been able to secure tenuous peace through wholly undemocratic means precisely because of the nation’s underlying ethnic tensions.

A tyrant without question, Saddam Hussein was one such individual who was able to defuse such tensions, though through obviously questionable means. But it cannot be said that his wasn’t a technique that succeeded in bottling the tempest. Therein lies the difference in the understanding of Iraq itself, that a despot such as Hussein understood the complexities of its fragile and volatile state far better than those that invaded and occupied the country in 2003. The deliverance of democracy aside, the invasion’s quintessential mistake was not taking into consideration the underlying, and very real, divisions within Iraqi society. And so the United States finds itself on the flip side of a century of uneasy ethnic calm waiting for even the slightest chance for redress between the nation’s three primary ethnic groups.

In Northern Iraq the Turks have been threatening military overtures towards the Kurds, or at least Kurdish separatists that have worked for decades to unite those lands populated by that ethnicity. In the south, it is not lost on the nation’s Shia majority that their numbers are far greater than those of the Sunnis, both of whom are ideologically backed by various other countries, from Saudi Arabia to Iran. Thus, it is in the middle, in and around Iraq’s troubled capital, that this historic powder keg may very well fully explode, making the violence that has been seen so far negligible in comparison.

To some, the arming and funding of Sunni militant groups by the United States might be seen as a maneuver to combat Salafi Jihadis, which is precisely how it’s been sold, but there is surely something deeper to their designs that ultimately have to do with concerns that Shia majority governments may very well become commonplace in the new Iraq. Being that the United States has, for some time, asserted that Iranian influence is prevalent in such quarters, and given their obvious disdain for Iran, it only stands to reason that such a move may also be designed to bolster the military capabilities of the Sunnis while under a watchful eye so that they might feel more secure with regards to adhering to the political process. And while that might smack of lunacy to some, it is certainly a very palpable reality as far as the Iraqi political process is concerned. Strength equals the perception of political power, especially in nations that have long histories of violence and no experience with the democratic process whatsoever.

That is the landscape that Mr. Bush has uncovered, and in doing so trapped his successor, whomever that may be, in a painted corner, and whose only option may very well be to wait for the paint to dry.

If there is one thing that is routine with regards to the emails in my inbox on a daily basis, it’s accusations that this website does little more than “preach to the choir”. That accusation is then commonly followed by suggestions that information and commentary be presented in a far more fair and balanced fashion (where have you heard that slogan before?), and that I should spend less time focusing on the same themes and more time focusing on others because, as it was put to me this morning, …“constantly talking about the war in Iraq is boring. We get it, now move along!”.

It’s true, and I’ll not deny it, I spend a great deal of time blogging about the war in Iraq, and for obvious reasons. The most important being that it’s a complete disaster that many have turned a blind eye to it because they feel the arguments for and against it have become stale. Added to this is the media fatigue that has caused many to simply not care about it as much as they once did, something that I find incredibly irresponsible.

The real importance of the war in Iraq is what it symbolizes with regards to the foreign policy doctrine adopted by this administration, one of the most dangerous in US history. Its effects are far reaching, and certainly reverberate beyond the borders of Iraq. But Iraq remains the quintessential example of the employment of that doctrine, and is therefore of incredible importance. Added to that is the massive loss of Iraqi lives since 2003, the complete crippling of their economy, and the dissolution of their daily lives.

The figures remain the same. Yesterday 78 Iraqis were killed, 75 more wounded, and 2 US soldier were also killed in action.

Boring - because yesterday, and the day before, the numbers were similar, be they slightly higher or lower. The whole thing’s a mess and it’s best to not think about it - unless you’re able to offer a solution as to how to end the war, what’s the point in constantly talking about it?

How about public discourse?

How can the public form opinions or be moved to examine the realities of such things so that they might be moved to counteract them? The reality of the debacle in Iraq is that it must be examined from the top down. It must start with the Office of the President and from there slip and slide its way through the various agencies and departments that allowed the President to justify the war in the first place. Accountability is everything, and while history cannot be altered, and the situation in Iraq cannot be magically solved, we have a responsibility to constantly examine what is happening there and weigh it against the falsehoods presented with regards to the reasons for going to war in the first place.

With regards to the war’s conclusion, I will say that while many believe that the answer lies in the adoption of a timetable for withdrawal, which I do support, or the redeployment of forces, I believe the first step in the process is the impeachment of the President and the Vice President, who represent the the primary apparatus that ensures the war’s continuation.

There are many who will read that and think it folly. Some will argue that to cause such a disruption in government would only ‘empower the enemy’, as the mantra goes. Others believe that, from a legal standpoint, there are no grounds for it. Interestingly, a new book written by former Congresswomen and Brooklyn District Attorney, Elizabeth Holtzman, and Cynthia Cooper, a journalist and lawyer, details five issues on which the President could legally be impeached. They include…

Deceptions into Taking the Country into War in Iraq
Reckless Indifference to Human Life in Katrina and Iraq
Illegal Wiretapping and Surveillance of Americans
Permitting Torture
Leaking Classified Information

There is little doubt that some of these issues apply to the Office of the Vice President as well, especially the first and fifth.

Were both Bush and Cheney impeached, a process that, given the gravity of those charges, may very well result in their resignations rather than them enduring impeachment proceedings, the speaker of the House would become President, perhaps allowing for a broader spectrum of ideas to be floated in Congress with regards to a solution.

This first step is crucial, because no matter the proposed legislation regarding US involvement in Iraq that is sent from the hill to the White House, the President has the ability to use his veto, as he has in the past without hesitation. Given that his administration is in too deep in Iraq, as has been the case with past administrations, primarily that of Johnson and Nixon, the chances of it admitting the truth about how disastrous the war has become is next to none. This is reflected in the removal of those in military leadership positions that have attempted to flat out tell the administration that Iraq is not only a lost cause, but one that will continue to produce pointless American deaths and increase the likelihood of international terrorism. Thus, the administration appoints new commanders who will, for the most part, tell them what they want to hear, while employing various likeminded think tanks to provide them entirely unrealistic option papers that merely buy into their policy objectives. This phenomenon also occurred at the CIA following 9/11 and during the run up the invasion of Iraq, those veteran voices at the agency largely silenced in favour of tenuous and entirely partisan information being provided by a whole new generation within the agency focused more on appeasing the administration that doing their jobs.

That’s not to sat that some haven’t tried to tell the truth. Unfortunately, for the most part, they’ve been quietly removed from their positions for attempting to do so. One of the more important examples of this occurring has to do with the CIA’s initial Baghdad Station Chief who wrote two aardwolfves warning his superiors, and the administration, in 2003 of the growing insurgency and what he viewed as the failures of the invasion and occupation that had to be addressed. After sending his second missive in December of 2003, he was removed from the position.

Like Johnson and Nixon with regards to Vietnam, the United States losing a war is not an option that is on the table. In fact, I believe that it wouldn’t be an option even were a Democrat in the same position right now. It’s important to remember that Johnson was a Democrat and responsible for the escalation of US forces in Vietnam to what, in this day and age, would be viewed as outrageous. In one year alone, 1965, US troop levels went from 3,500 Marines (not including military advisors already in-country) to 200,000 troops. But there again, Johnson was not without his ‘Cheney’s’. In his case it was the Joint Chiefs, who routinely bumped heads with then Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara. Even so, at the end of his first full term, I believe that Johnson’s admission that he would not seek re-election spoke directly to the ‘mistake of Vietnam’ and the fact that Robert Kennedy, who was vastly popular, not to mention against the war, would most likely have secured the 37th Presidency for the Democrats, whereas Johnson’s numbers were so dismal that his re-election was a foregone impossibility.

The importance of impeaching the President and Vice President is that it would create leeway with regards to immediate measures being taken rather than waiting out Bush’s term in office and the disaster being handed off to a new administration that would be forced to languish under the weight of trying to go about disengaging in a way that didn’t hurt them politically. The war itself would become the primary issue of the impeachment, I believe, allowing that leeway to exist.

But even then, that supposes that the President would resign rather than wade through the impeachment process, which would surely last until the end of his second term. Were he to do so, the status quo would, obviously, remain, though it may very well help the following administration’s ability to make important changes a reality and certainly aid in the removal of the Republicans from the White House – and perhaps even the House in greater numbers.

The entirely ambiguous context of The War On Terror is the Bush administration’s trump card, and they play it whenever they can. In the case of impeachment, it would certainly be at the forefront of their argument that such proceedings would only hurt the country and embolden those that they routinely point to as threats. The President has made clear that he firmly believes that if the United States were to abandon Iraqi that ‘the enemy’ would simply find its way onto American soil. Unfortunately for the President, recent occurrences in Great Britain prove that theory to be largely inaccurate.

Being that the rest of the world views the United States as a greater threat to global security than terrorism, impeachment might not necessarily be a bad thing. All that stands in the way of it is, in many ways, the insularity of the American people. And that is precisely why blogging about the war in Iraq on a routine basis is important.

Critical Post War Realities

All of that said, and no matter a long term US military footprint, the reality of Iraq’s future, largely because of the invasion and occupation and how poorly they were planned, is most likely a bloody one. At this unfortunate point, that is the harsh reality, and one that I’ll not deny. But that being the case, the continued presence of a foreign occupational force will not, in any way, ensure the pacification of the population. If anything, it will only make matters worse. The need for international interventionism under the strict guidance of the United Nations, with a focus on obtaining the cooperation and/or participation of various militant factions within the country, one that excludes those nations that joined the ‘coalition of the willing’, is, perhaps, the only real vehicle left with which to attempt to contain what might otherwise become one of the most disastrous civil conflicts of our time.

In the end, Iraq may very well return to what it once was under the Ottomans for centuries – three distinct provinces that would, most probably, form nations unto themselves or be annexed, which could very well lead to wider regional conflicts and destabilization. Of course, this too poses problems, the more notable of which involves natural resources, the fact that many parts of central Iraq, and other locations, are inhabited by both Sunnis and Shi’ites, and that the formation of an independent Kurdistan would most likely provide Turkey the justification it so desperately desires to invade it in hopes of deterring any widespread movement calling for the formation of a united Kurdistan.

Lebanon is fighting a War on many fronts. There is the War on Terror in Naher Al Bared Refugee camp, which continues on its 4th week of fighting. The army today released that they have made considerable progress in the fight and that they are close to an end. What is “close” no one really knows. We keep on hearing “in the next few days” but then weeks pass and the fighting continues. Many of the Palestinians in the camp have been displaced, their homes taking over by terrorists and then bombed by the military. Saudi Arabia has pledged $12 Million to aid those displaced.

Another act of terror was the assassination of MP Eido on Wednesday. The government supporters blamed Syria, while Syria blamed them. All while a news anchor, Sawsan Darwish, for NBN TV station, which is a pro-Syrian/anti- government station, commented by accident on air “Why were they late in killing him [Eido]?,” She then said “they’re [anti-Syrian Politicians] driving us crazy,” “Ahmed Fatfat [Anti-Syrian MP] is left. I’m counting them,” she said as she and the sound engineer laughed. The comments caused a huge stir. How could this woman be so insensitive, just because this man had an opposing political view, was his death justified? How could she go on and gloat about who will be next as if this death comes as no surprise, it seemed as if what had just happened was amusing. How could I ever support anti government politics, when it’s people like this that represent it.

On the other hand, the Palestinian Brotherly War that continues to draw blood from Hamas and Fatah fighters in Gaza has spilled over into some of Lebanon’s Palestinian refugee camps. Tensions were highest at El Bedawi Refugee camp, where Fatah and Hamas supporters clashed. Later in Ain El Halweh refugee camp a Hamas representative was attacked. Of course both Hamas and Fatah leaders in the camps deny that they are promoting violence between their different factions. And so though it looks like most Palestinians in the camps are supporting Palestinian unity, the tensions will not disappear until the problems in Gaza are resolved, a feat that will not be easily accomplished from the looks of things. For a good opinion peace check this article out.

And as if this was not enough for Lebanon to deal with, today a Palestinian militant group launched 3 rockets at Northern Israel followed by Israel launching 5 of its own at Southern Lebanon. Do these people not learn? And why the hell are Palestinians shooting rockets at Israel when they continue to fight amongst themselves in Gaza. Do they really believe that launching a few rockets will free their land? I can’t help but think this is another ploy by Syria to try and draw Lebanon into another war with Israel.

With every passing day I think this is it, it can’t get worse. But it does get worse. I still feel numb to it all. I still don’t feel threatened by what is going on around me. I still wonder if what I feel is normal and it makes me question myself more when I hear my friends’ concerns about their own safety. My mother arrived last night, and as soon as she saw an army check point she wept, remembering all the soldiers that have been killed in that last month. She told me how she really wanted my brother and I to visit them instead but convinced her self that all will be well. My brother and his family arrive on Wednesday, my dad the following Wednesday, and I continue to be optimistic that this will be a good a summer. Am I delusional? I really don’t know.

You’re eating dinner at a restaurant over looking the beach…. You notice people go up to the T.V. Your friends look at you and ask what’s going on? You say “probably another bomb”. Five minutes later everyone is back to their seats. You over hear people saying something about a bombing at Zouk Mousbah’s industrial region, and then a quick check…. “Nope, don’t know anyone there”… And within 10 minutes everything is back to normal, people eating, drinking, laughing, and puffing on their water pipes. A strange calmness like nothing out of the ordinary has happened. Only a few phones ring.

I remember when the bombings first started a couple of years ago… As soon as a bomb went off… My phone would start ringing off the hook. My parents would call from Saudi, my cousins from UAE, my friends from all over Lebanon. We would cancel our plans and stay home. A month of that and then we figured out that never do two bombs go off in the same night and so for a while we would wait till we heard a bomb went off and then we would make plans to go out…. SICK, I know… The bombs stopped after a while and political assassinations started to become more popular. And well as long as you weren’t a politician or an out spoken journalist, you were fine and so life as usual.

The bombs started again on May 21st, the day after the army raided Fatah Al Islam safe house. I was sleeping and I woke up to the phone ringing. It was midnight, a minute after my brother walks into my room… “They started bombing again”… And so since then every few days a bomb would go off somewhere. At the beginning, you call your friends, people call you and you are glued to the T.V. following the live coverage. Shops closed early, People didn’t go out past 9. People organized neighborhood watch.

Eventually you become desensitized. Shop owners start fixing their damaged storefronts with in hours of a bombing. You go back and shop at those areas that were bombed cause you think to yourself “the probability of them bombing the same place twice is not likely”. You reduce your bombing call list to those that live in the area of the bombing. And the only time you panic is when you are on the road between 9 p.m. and midnight fearing that they might bomb an area as you pass by it…. But once you reach your destination your mind goes numb and you go on enjoying the rest of your night. It’s strange…. But I remember reading an article once about the mind of those who lived in Lebanon during the civil war and how they effectively went on with their daily lives and only when the war was over did they finally break down.