| |
News Center | Mason News | News Center |
| SEARCH: |  |
| TheSpringGarden Plants & trees, gardening products & equiptment, homedecor | SunglassesEyeglasses All stunning brand names sunglasses at the great prices | DIYHomeSupplies Do it yourself woodworking projects & home remodeling supplies | UnitedPlus Gift Ideas. Diecasts, Figurines, American Heroes, and much more |
| CarPartsAccessoriesEtc Search and shop for auto parts & accessories online. Simple & Convenient | Sewing Machines Top notch sewing machines, vacuums, and appliances. For home or commercial. | Patio & Landscape Ready for family BBQ party this summer? A Large selection of outdoor furnitures | FontsWorld Looking for those cool fonts? Here, variety of all around the world fonts. Free Download. |
| |||||||
| Army What's up with the Army? |
 |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
02-05-2008, 05:57 PM
| ||||
| ||||
 The Pentagon Early Bird 5 Feb 2008 February 5, 2008 Use of these news items does not reflect official endorsement. Reproduction for private use or gain is subject to original copyright restrictions. Item numbers indicate order of appearance only. This is the single print version. Use the PRINT command in your browser to print the entire Early Bird as one document. (NOTE: This single file format is a long document and can use 50 or more pages of paper.) BUDGET
Washington Post February 5, 2008 Pg. 12 White House Requests $515 Billion For The Pentagon Additional $70 Billion Is Sought to Fund Wars By Josh White, Washington Post Staff Writer President Bush yesterday requested $515.4 billion for the fiscal 2009 Pentagon budget, a 7.5 percent increase from last year's spending request that is aimed at expanding the Army and Marine Corps, boosting force readiness and future combat capabilities, and improving the quality of life of service members. The administration also sought an additional $70 billion in funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, a short-term spending request that could force the next administration to make critical war-funding decisions during the first days of its term. Congress so far has given the Pentagon $87 billion of the administration's $190 billion war-funding request for 2008. Defense officials yesterday used the budget announcement to ask lawmakers to approve the rest of the funding, saying that the Pentagon might be unable to pay soldiers at war by June and that continued delays could cause operational problems in Iraq by July. "Our ability to continue this level of effort there" would be undermined, and "we'll have to stop operations about that time," Vice Adm. P. Stephen Stanley, director for force structure, resources and assessment on the Joint Staff, said at a Pentagon news conference. Military officials said they expect that the $70 billion in war funding will need to grow significantly to support operations in Iraq and Afghanistan over the next year. However, following the administration's wartime pattern, yesterday's request separated out funding for Iraq and Afghanistan. Pentagon officials are unsure how much they are going to need for the wars and are awaiting an assessment this spring from Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq. The Defense Department's base budget request is more than 70 percent higher than the $302 billion Pentagon budget in fiscal 2001, before the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq began, and it has risen consistently during the Bush administration. Defense experts said they were not surprised to see the budget grow again. The budget generally funds previously announced policies and strategies, and shows increases in areas that Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates has identified as priorities. Though real spending would rise to its highest level since World War II, defense officials were quick to point out that the 2009 budget and war supplemental request represent approximately 4 percent of the nation's gross domestic product (GDP), far less than the military's budget of 9 percent of the GDP during the Vietnam War era and of 34.5 percent during World War II. Analysts questioned the comparison because of the economy's dramatic expansion since then. Tina W. Jonas, the Pentagon's comptroller, told reporters at the Pentagon that there are four areas in which the Defense Department would like to see notable budget increases: an $8.7 billion increase to expand the Army and Marine Corps, a $7.9 billion increase to improve force readiness, a $10.5 billion increase to develop future combat capabilities and an $8.9 billion increase to improve the "quality of life" of service members. As part of an overall rise of $35.9 billion from last year, the budget request would grant service members a 3.4 percent pay raise. The budget also would recruit, train and equip 65,000 additional active-duty Army soldiers and 27,000 Marines over five years, fulfilling a plan to increase the size of the force in order to relieve the stresses that the wars have placed on the military. The administration predicts that military spending will flatten out or decline over coming years, even as new programs such as the advanced Joint Strike Fighter jet, or F-35, move into full-scale production. Steven Kosiak, a budget expert at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, said that 2009 was expected to be a budgetary peak for the Pentagon but that projections of a flat or declining military budget could be difficult for the next president to sustain. "This is a stay-the-course budget," Kosiak said. "The administration projects a plan showing the base budget declining, and there's good reason to believe that there will be a lot of pressure to restrain spending. It will be left to the next administration how to sort this out. If they're going to abide by it, they will have to start scaling back plans or will have to add more money." Michael O'Hanlon, a military expert at the Brookings Institution, said the 2009 budget fully funds the military services with few, if any, sacrifices. He said he expects to see a continued rise in weapons procurement. "You give the services what they're requesting, and you see the budget go up like this," O'Hanlon said. "It makes it very hard to figure out how to cut. If a new president wants to make a meaningful dent in the budget, how can they?" http://ebird.afis.mil/ebfiles/e20080205577888.html <A href="http://68.142.200.12/us.f318.mail.yahoo.com/ya/securedownload?clean=0&fid=Inbox&mid=1_1552950_AEP PjkQAAXemR6jhmg3QVizdUxo&pid=2&tnef=&prefFilename= e20080205aaindex_concat.html&cred=jRY8j7TNX8kmfm_W KvQMFWWbChVQsXY0DB0euHk5adqFfZVTdsmKNKu_bnfq0IcR#T OP">RETURN TO TOP USA Today February 5, 2008 Pg. 5 Bush Seeks $515B To Spend On Military Wants 7.5% hike; would boost size of Army, Marines By Tom Vanden Brook, USA Today WASHINGTON -- President Bush asked Congress on Monday for $515 billion for military spending, an increase of 7.5% compared with last year. Among the major factors driving the increase is the Pentagon's plan to bolster the ranks of the Army and Marine Corps, forces stretched thin by two wars. The budget calls for an $8.7 billion hike to $20.5 billion in fiscal year 2009 to add 7,000 soldiers and 5,000 Marines. Congressional leaders who must approve Bush's request said wars in Iraq and Afghanistan merited the spending increase but criticized the White House for not including those wars' costs in the budget proposal. "We all understand that there is a level of unpredictability with such budget estimates, but it is critical that we attempt to plan for expenses we know are coming," said Rep. Ike Skelton, a Missouri Democrat who chairs the House Armed Services Committee. Bush has already asked Congress for $70 billion to pay for the wars, and more money will be sought later this year. Last year, the Pentagon asked for $189 billion in war spending. For all of the 2009 fiscal year, which starts Oct. 1, the Bush administration said it planned to spend $651.2 billion on defense. That includes the $515 billion request and anticipated supplemental spending bills. The request will allow the United States to maintain its "technological advantage over current and potential enemies," Defense Secretary Robert Gates said. The Pentagon budget is at an all-time high when adjusted for inflation, said Steven Kosiak, vice president at the non-partisan Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. Additional costs for personnel, fuel and weapons systems are behind the increase. "It's pretty much an across-the-board increase," he said. Some highlights of the Pentagon's spending plan: •Increasing the size of the Army and Marine Corps. $20.5 billion, an increase of $8.7 billion or 73%, compared with fiscal 2008. This year, the Army would grow to 532,000 soldiers, and the Marine Corps would increase its ranks to 194,000. By 2012, the plan would be complete, with the Army topping out at 547,000 soldiers, while there would be 202,000 members of the Marine Corps. •Aircraft and weapons. $45.6 billion, a $4.9 billion increase, which would include purchases of fighter planes such as the F-22A Raptor and F/A-18 Hornet and unmanned aircraft like the Predator and Reaper. •Cyberspace security. The budget shows at least $65 million for research and development projects tied to computer security. Some elements of the effort are secret, and funding levels are not disclosed. •Pay and health care. $149 billion to increase salaries and fund health care. Military salaries would increase by 3.4%. An additional request for money to fight in Iraq and Afghanistan is a virtual certainty, Kosiak said. It costs $12 billion a month to fight those wars. Since Sept. 11, 2001, Congress has appropriated $636 billion for the Pentagon to fight the war on terror, primarily the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. http://ebird.afis.mil/ebfiles/e20080205577877.html <A href="http://68.142.200.12/us.f318.mail.yahoo.com/ya/securedownload?clean=0&fid=Inbox&mid=1_1552950_AEP PjkQAAXemR6jhmg3QVizdUxo&pid=2&tnef=&prefFilename= e20080205aaindex_concat.html&cred=jRY8j7TNX8kmfm_W KvQMFWWbChVQsXY0DB0euHk5adqFfZVTdsmKNKu_bnfq0IcR#T OP">RETURN TO TOP Washingtonpost.com February 4, 2008 Gates Urges Congress To Act On War Funds By Robert Burns, Associated Press WASHINGTON -- Defense Secretary Robert Gates called on Congress Monday to approve $102.5 billion in war funds that President Bush requested last year. The money has been held up by Democrats' disagreements with the White House over the conduct of the war in Iraq. That money is in addition to another $70 billion in war funding that Bush proposed Monday as part of his 2009 budget request. Gates said the $70 billion was only an estimate of how much it would cost to run the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan during the first months of the budget year that begins Oct. 1. He said a full estimate would be provided this spring after Bush considers a way ahead in Iraq. Gates urged Congress to approve the stalled $102.5 billion as soon as possible, noting that it was requested last year. "Delay degrades our ability to operate and sustain the force at home and in theater, and makes it difficult to manage this department in a way that is fiscally sound," Gates told a Pentagon news conference at which the Pentagon's budget chief, Tina Jonas, spelled out details of the 2009 budget plan. Jonas said uncertainty over whether or when Congress will provide the remaining $102.5 billion in war funding for the current budget is one reason the administration did not offer a full 2009 estimate of war costs in the budget documents sent to Capitol Hill on Monday. How Congress acts on the $102.5 billion "will affect what we will ask for" in 2009 war funding, she said. Bush's total defense spending request for $588.3 billion in 2009 defense spending includes $70 billion as an "emergency allowance" for war costs for the first part of the budget year. The White House said, without citing a specific figure, that it would request more for 2009 "once the specific needs of our troops are better known." If the current rate of war spending is a guide, the additional request for 2009 is likely to exceed $100 billion. Bush is awaiting recommendations from his top commanders and from Gates in April on how much to reduce U.S. troop levels in Iraq this year. The $588.3 billion total requested falls in three main categories: $515.4 billion in Defense Department spending, $70 billion in initial war costs and $2.9 billion in certain fixed Pentagon costs. The comparable figure for the current budget year is $670.5 billion, combining $479.5 billion in Defense Department spending, $189.1 billion in projected war costs and $1.9 billion in fixed costs. Of the $189.1 billion requested for war costs this year, the Pentagon has actually received $86.7 billion. Of the $515.4 billion in the proposed Defense Department budget, $20.5 billion would be for increasing the size of the Army by 7,000 soldiers, to 532,400, and adding 5,000 Marines to expand the Corps to 194,000. Also included is $49.1 billion to recruit, train, equip and sustain the National Guard and Reserve, and $17.3 billion to modernize the aircraft fleets of the Air Force, Navy, Marines and Army. Bush also asked for $10.4 billion to continue the Pentagon's effort to develop and deploy defenses against long-range missiles. The budget proposal earmarks $750 million to help other countries improve their ability to fight terrorists -- "recognizing that threats to U.S. security exist beyond the war on terror in Iraq and Afghanistan," according to a Pentagon statement obtained by The Associated Press. The statement did not mention specific countries that would receive such aid. The president's budget also proposes to spend $389 million to establish a new command focusing on U.S. interests in Africa. The command is headquartered in Stuttgart, Germany and is headed by Army Gen. William Ward. Spending on special operations forces, such as the Army's Green Berets and the Navy's SEALs, would total $5.7 billion. Members of the military would get a 3.4 percent pay raise, and the defense civilian work force would see its pay grow by 2.9 percent. http://ebird.afis.mil/ebfiles/e20080205577857.html <A href="http://68.142.200.12/us.f318.mail.yahoo.com/ya/securedownload?clean=0&fid=Inbox&mid=1_1552950_AEP PjkQAAXemR6jhmg3QVizdUxo&pid=2&tnef=&prefFilename= e20080205aaindex_concat.html&cred=jRY8j7TNX8kmfm_W KvQMFWWbChVQsXY0DB0euHk5adqFfZVTdsmKNKu_bnfq0IcR#T OP">RETURN TO TOP Wall Street Journal February 5, 2008 Pg. 5 Bush's Successor To Confront Tough Decisions on Defense By August Cole President Bush's new Pentagon budget provides funding for most major weapons efforts in fiscal 2009, but it also pushes some tough decisions on a handful of costly programs to the White House's next occupant. For the defense industry, the budget will fuel speculation that after more than 10 years of steady growth, defense spending is beginning to peak. Fiscal pressure will influence many of the next president's choices, but others will be shaped by the tension between the military's need to fight insurgents in Iraq and its ability to fight a more conventional war against a superpower. The White House requested $515.4 billion for the defense budget in fiscal 2009, which begins Oct. 1, a 7.5% increase over fiscal 2008, plus an additional $70 billion outside the regular budget to pay for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Weapons procurement accounts for $104.2 billion, while research-and-development and testing-and-evaluation funding tallies $79.6 billion. The administration is expected to ask for billions more in supplemental funding later this year, for the wars and likely for other items. While proposed R&D funding is up $2 billion over last year's budget, money being allocated for buying weapons is about $6 billion below what had been expected. Big weapons systems oriented toward conventional conflicts have strong and vocal backers in Congress and the Pentagon. That makes decisions on cutting such spending very difficult. The Pentagon had been preparing to take the first steps to shut down Lockheed Martin Corp.'s and Boeing Co.'s F-22 Raptor fighter production lines, but no money is set aside to shut down manufacturing in fiscal 2009 -- a move that effectively delays the decision on whether to buy more planes. That funding, almost $500 million, instead is being set aside for repairs of F-15 fighters that have developed structural problems after decades of use. Similarly, no funding was provided to shut down production of Boeing's C-17 transport plane, a move that delays a decision on what to do with the line. The administration also proposed shifting $1 billion that was supposed to be spent on four new helicopters for the president into more R&D on that program. Lockheed has been stymied by problems in adapting a European military helicopter to meet the White House's needs. The budget calls for 20 F-22s to be built. More than half of the Air Force's 93 aircraft being sought in the budget would be pilotless planes such as General Atomics Aeronautical Systems Inc.'s Predator or Northrop Grumman Corp.'s Global Hawk. For the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, funding climbed slightly to $6.73 billion. For the third year, the White House proposed eliminating funding for an engine developed by General Electric Co. for the plane, a move widely expected to again be reversed by Congress. The Navy's Littoral Combat Ship, a near-shore vessel that could account for as many as 55 of the Navy's 313-ship long-term goal, is being pressured because of cost increases. The Navy, which had originally said it wanted six ships next fiscal year, now is scheduled to get two, a sign that rising costs are taking a toll on the program. The Army's Future Combat Systems contract, a battlefield technology project overseen by Boeing and SAIC Inc., will get $3.56 billion. More than $21 billion is being set aside for space and missile-defense initiatives, areas in which Lockheed, Northrop and Boeing have strong roles, but work is spread throughout the industry. The defense companies generally said the budget leaves them well-positioned. http://ebird.afis.mil/ebfiles/e20080205577875.html <A href="http://68.142.200.12/us.f318.mail.yahoo.com/ya/securedownload?clean=0&fid=Inbox&mid=1_1552950_AEP PjkQAAXemR6jhmg3QVizdUxo&pid=2&tnef=&prefFilename= e20080205aaindex_concat.html&cred=jRY8j7TNX8kmfm_W KvQMFWWbChVQsXY0DB0euHk5adqFfZVTdsmKNKu_bnfq0IcR#T OP">RETURN TO TOP Newport News Daily Press February 5, 2008 Budget Includes Sub, Funds For Carrier The plan has billions for the Gerald Ford carrier, but the Navy gets only a modest boost for other ships. By David Lerman WASHINGTON -- President Bush's new defense budget would provide a new Virginia-class submarine and at least $2.7 billion to continue construction of the Gerald Ford aircraft carrier in Newport News. The Air Force would get 20 more F-22 Raptor fighter jets at a time when many of the aging F-15 fighters have been grounded for safety concerns. The Army and Marine Corps would get more people: about 7,000 more soldiers and 5,000 more Marines to cope with the strain of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. And troops would get an average pay raise of 3.4 percent. The proposed $585.4 billion spending plan for the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1 would increase funding for military programs by 7.5 percent over this year's levels. The package also includes a $70billion down payment for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars — a funding level that is sure to increase later this year. "I think we got a very healthy increase," Pentagon Comptroller Tina Jonas said of the requested funding boost. But the overall increase masks ongoing problems in the Navy's effort to expand the size of its fleet — a prime concern in Hampton Roads. Instead of buying 11 new ships next year as once planned, the Navy scaled back the purchase to seven ships. The main reason, Navy officials said, is a delay in the development of the new Littoral Combat Ship — a small attack vessel designed to patrol waters close to shore. Instead of buying six of the ships next year, the Navy will buy only two as it tries to resolve technological issues. Although the Navy maintains a goal of building toward a 313-ship fleet, the new budget would end up providing only a modest boost. Today's fleet of about 283 ships would grow to 286 next year. Perhaps nowhere is the funding pressure more apparent than in the effort to finance the Navy's most expensive piece of hardware: the aircraft carrier. The Gerald Ford carrier now under construction in Newport News is projected to cost more than $13billion, when the expense of design and research on new technologies for the next generation of carriers is included. That price tag, if funded in a single year, could virtually wipe out any funding for building any other ships. With the cost so huge, the Navy abandoned its practice of funding ships in their first year of construction in a lump sum. Instead, the Ford carrier will be financed incrementally. Initially, the funding was to be split between 2008 and 2009. But Congress agreed last year to stretch the funding stream through 2011, a Navy official said. About 40 percent of the construction cost, not including design work, was funded over the last two years. Bush's new budget provides another $2.7 billion to continue the work. In addition, the budget provides about $1.2 billion in advance funding for future carriers. The budget also speeds up a planned overhaul of the USS Theodore Roosevelt, providing more than $600million to begin a refueling and upgrade of the Norfolk-based carrier next year. The Virginia-class submarine program also gets a modest boost. The budget provides about $2.1 billion for another submarine, which would be built jointly by Northrop Grumman Newport News and General Dynamics' Electric Boat shipyard in Connecticut. Another $1.3 billion is provided as advance funding to buy components for future submarines. The Navy's long-range budget now calls for doubling submarine production in 2011 — a year earlier than planned. While lawmakers have pushed to accelerate that timeline, Navy officials had long said they could not afford to double production until 2012 — when new technologies and production efficiencies would reduce the cost of submarines to about $2billion per copy. But in approving a 2011 start, the Navy expressed confidence it will achieve that cost-cutting goal. Some in Congress are hoping to start the higher submarine production rate in 2010. By all accounts, production must be doubled — buying two submarines per year instead of one — to maintain a dwindling submarine fleet. The Navy also hopes to buy its first next-generation cruiser warship in 2011, at a cost of $3.2 billion. Congress last year ordered that the ship be nuclear-powered — a provision that could bring some of the cruiser construction work to Newport News, one of only two nuclear-capable shipyards in the country. But Rear Adm. Stan Bozin, director of the Navy's budget office, said he did not yet know if the ship would be nuclear. If it is, Bozin said, "There will be a significant cost increase" that would likely delay the ship's construction. For the Air Force, the budget also provides nearly $500million to repair aging F-15 fighter jets, officials said. And it leaves for Bush's successor the question of whether to stop production of the F-22 Raptors after next year, as planned, or whether to continue that production line to make up for the shortfall in available F-15 fighters. Budget breakdown Fort Eustis: Operations facilities: $14.4 million Norfolk Naval Station: Child Development Center: $10.5 million; Norfolk Harbor channel dredging: $42.8 million Navy Reserve Williamsburg: Training support facility for ordnance handling and cargo operations: $12.3 million Special Operations Command at Dam Neck: Special Operations Forces facility: $31 million Fort Story: Special Operations Forces small-arms range: $11.6 million Craney Island: Replacement of fuel storage tanks: $39.9 million http://ebird.afis.mil/ebfiles/e20080205577736.html <A href="http://68.142.200.12/us.f318.mail.yahoo.com/ya/securedownload?clean=0&fid=Inbox&mid=1_1552950_AEP PjkQAAXemR6jhmg3QVizdUxo&pid=2&tnef=&prefFilename= e20080205aaindex_concat.html&cred=jRY8j7TNX8kmfm_W KvQMFWWbChVQsXY0DB0euHk5adqFfZVTdsmKNKu_bnfq0IcR#T OP">RETURN TO TOP Washington Post February 5, 2008 Pg. 13 New Hires, Weak Dollar Part Of State's Increase The State Department received one of the biggest boosts in the Bush administration's 2009 spending plan, which calls for a major staff increase of almost 1,100 foreign service officers, security staffers and development specialists. The budget also allocates $85 million to compensate for the drop in the value of the dollar to cover the 2008 budget, U.S. officials said. "The exchange rate is hitting us hard," said Pat Kennedy, the undersecretary of state for management. The total budget for the State Department, the Agency for International Development and other international programs is $39.5 billion, up from $36.2 billion in the 2008 budget, Kennedy said. State's share is $8.2 billion, while foreign assistance would total $22.7 billion, he said. Much of the State Department increase would fund three programs. It would add 300 positions for language training, particularly for difficult languages such as Arabic, Chinese and Urdu. It would also expand the Civilian Response Corps, a recent initiative to form groups of U.S. government specialists to deploy around the world, either with or after a U.S. military presence, to help stabilize countries moving from wartime to peace. The spending plan also would create 150 slots for staff training, half at military institutions such as the Army War College. The plan for 1,076 new positions -- one of the largest one-year increases ever at State -- comes in response to a shortage of diplomats to work in crisis zones, with many embassies staffed at 70 percent. "[Secretary of State Condoleezza] Rice has made clear she is going to go all out" to win approval for new staff, Kennedy said. -- Robin Wright http://ebird.afis.mil/ebfiles/e20080205577746.html <A href="http://68.142.200.12/us.f318.mail.yahoo.com/ya/securedownload?clean=0&fid=Inbox&mid=1_1552950_AEP PjkQAAXemR6jhmg3QVizdUxo&pid=2&tnef=&prefFilename= e20080205aaindex_concat.html&cred=jRY8j7TNX8kmfm_W KvQMFWWbChVQsXY0DB0euHk5adqFfZVTdsmKNKu_bnfq0IcR#T OP">RETURN TO TOP New York Times February 5, 2008 Turkish Planes Strike Iraqi Kurdistan By Alissa J. Rubin and Sabrina Tavernise BAGHDAD — Turkish warplanes bombed villages in Iraqi Kurdistan on Monday as the Kurds came under pressure on several fronts. Representatives in Parliament discussed the Kurdish share of the budget, and the Turkmen, a minority group primarily in northern Iraq, declared that they would no longer support efforts to hold a referendum on whether the city of Kirkuk should join the Kurdistan region. In a statement on its Web site, the Turkish military said it had struck 70 targets in the Avashin and Hakurk districts in a 12-hour bombing run that began at 3 a.m. The military did not give details on damage or deaths. It said the targets were in 11 places. Turkey’s military has been fighting a militant fringe of its ethnic Kurdish minority for decades. The militants, known as the Kurdistan Workers Party, hide in Turkey and Iraq. They are trying to force Turkey to give greater rights and recognition to its minority Kurds. Though the extent of the damage from the bombing on Monday was not clear, it was not the largest airstrike that Turkey has conducted since beginning military action on Dec. 1. It claimed to have bombed 200 targets on Dec. 16. Kurdish military sources said they did not believe that anyone had been killed in the bombing. Jabar Yawar, a deputy minister in the Peshmerga Ministry in Kurdistan, said the Turks believed that the area was used by the Kurdistan Workers Party, but “there was no damage because this area had been deserted because of the tensions.” Haval Rosh, a spokesman for the militants, said the group had abandoned the area and no longer had bases there. In Parliament, representatives delayed a vote on the budget because of continued disagreement over how much the Kurdistan region should receive. There was also frustration among some members who said the government had not fully explained the budget’s expenditures. On the issue of Kirkuk, there is a growing dispute about the validity of the constitutional requirement that the city must hold a referendum to determine whether it will join the Kurds’ semiautonomous region. The referendum was supposed to be held by the end of 2007, but was delayed, and now the Turkmen, one of several minority groups in Kirkuk, are arguing that the window is closed and the city should not hold the referendum. The referendum, provided for in Article 140 in the Iraqi Constitution, has long been a contentious issue. Non-Kurdish groups have feared that the Kurds would win by bringing in Kurds from outside the Kirkuk area to vote. The right to include Kirkuk in the Kurdistan region has been an article of faith for the Kurds, who see it as a way to right the wrongs of Saddam Hussein, who forcibly replaced many of the Kurds there with Arabs during the 1980s. In a meeting on Monday in Baghdad, representatives of several Turkman groups agreed that regardless of sect — there are Sunni and Shiite Turkmen — they would stand together in opposition to holding the referendum. “Our meeting in Baghdad is a letter to the world that the Turkmen are united and they agree that they reject Article 140,” said Narmeen Mufti, a spokeswoman for the Turkman Front, the main Turkman party in the Kirkuk area. The Kurds do not accept that view, and the Iraqi president, Jalal Talabani, has spent the past several days in Kirkuk trying to work out a compromise. Qais Mizher contributed reporting from Baghdad, and an Iraqi employee of The New York Times from Kirkuk. http://ebird.afis.mil/ebfiles/e20080205577820.html <A href="http://68.142.200.12/us.f318.mail.yahoo.com/ya/securedownload?clean=0&fid=Inbox&mid=1_1552950_AEP PjkQAAXemR6jhmg3QVizdUxo&pid=2&tnef=&prefFilename= e20080205aaindex_concat.html&cred=jRY8j7TNX8kmfm_W KvQMFWWbChVQsXY0DB0euHk5adqFfZVTdsmKNKu_bnfq0IcR#T OP">RETURN TO TOP Los Angeles Times February 5, 2008 Pg. 1 Militants Stake Claim On Diyala River Valley U.S. forces chase them from town to town but they survive, terrorizing the populace. By Alexandra Zavis, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer DIYALA RIVER VALLEY, IRAQ —They first appeared about 18 months ago: masked gunmen in speeding cars and scooters that kick up the mud along the canals weaving through lonely villages here. The invaders pinned notices on the walls of mosques informing residents that they now lived in the Islamic State of Iraq. For the last year, U.S.-led forces have pursued the militants from one stronghold to the next in Diyala, a province of winding waterways and abundant farms stretching north and east from Baghdad to the Iranian border. They have captured or killed hundreds of people, most said to be members or affiliates of the militant group Al Qaeda in Iraq. The American-led troops have destroyed weapons caches, training bases, bomb-making factories and torture houses. Yet the Sunni Arab militants identified by many U.S. commanders as their most lethal enemy and the greatest obstacle to stability in Iraq continue to flow into the province and farther north to the regions of Mosul and Kirkuk. This is not the only place that the militants have established a haven, but the U.S. deems success here as crucial to its efforts to consolidate recent security gains as American troops begin to draw down. Diyala sits at a strategic crossroads, providing access to Baghdad, Iran and insurgent strongholds in northern Iraq. Its isolated hamlets, thick palm groves and fragrant citrus orchards provide a multitude of hiding places from which the militants unleash gruesome strikes. Residents say that those who disobeyed the militants were stuffed into cars and brought before religious courts. "If they don't bring them back in 10 days, that means they are dead," said Ali Jumaa, an aging farmer with a thin mustache, who lives with his wife in a house fronting a canal in Thanira. "They don't return the body." The U.S. military says Al Qaeda in Iraq is led by foreign fighters. Its Jordanian founder, Abu Musab Zarqawi, was killed in a U.S. airstrike outside Baqubah in 2006. But the military says the foot soldiers are mostly Iraqi, citing detailed ledgers recovered from an insurgent base showing local recruits, one of them just 16. At first blush, the province would not seem the most obvious place to center a self-styled Islamic caliphate. Unlike the militants' previous stronghold in overwhelmingly Sunni Anbar province, Diyala is a volatile mix of sects, tribes and ethnicities. But the province is also home to thousands of former officers in Saddam Hussein's army, many of whom found themselves without jobs, pensions or a future after the dictator's ouster. Similar dynamics are found in Mosul, where the Iraqi government has also announced its intention to rout Sunni extremists. With the military push in Diyala province, U.S. and Iraqi officials believe many fighters have fled to Mosul and elsewhere. "When Al Qaeda got here, they gave them a choice: 'Either you are with us, and we will pay you, or you are against us, and we will kill you,' " said Col. Qais Shahab Ahmed, who commands the police rapid response unit in Muqdadiya, the main commercial center along the Diyala River valley, northeast of the provincial capital, Baqubah. Local officials say the insurgents paid up to $100 for each tip they received, including ideas about where to hide and information about U.S. and Iraqi troop movements. For the families who supported them, there were also gifts of rice, sugar, and chocolates for the children, villagers said. For those who resisted, retribution was swift and brutal. When word spread recently that some Sunni and Shiite tribesmen were joining forces with the U.S. military to fight the militants in Baqubah and Muqdadiya, the gunmen began leaving severed heads of those they deemed collaborators along rural roads as a warning to others. "If you saw the people who cut off people's heads, you would never believe they were capable of this," Ahmed said. "Most are under 18. If you ask them, 'How can you do this?' they will say, 'I don't know. They just gave me a weapon, and I did it.' " Iraqi officials say the militants are adept at exploiting the poverty, ignorance, resentment and fear in these isolated villages, a patchwork of Sunni and Shiite enclaves. Sunni residents in the region feel trapped, said Maj. Fuad Farouk, a Sunni who commands a detachment of Iraqi soldiers positioned between the Sunni village of Abu Gharma and Shiite Abu Sayida. Few Sunnis here trust the Shiite-dominated government security forces, who they say treat Sunnis as terrorists and extort money at checkpoints. So Sunnis were easily lured by Al Qaeda in Iraq's promises to protect them, Farouk said. Until recently, U.S. soldiers were stationed with Farouk's forces, and he proudly recounts the battles they fought together against insurgent gunmen. But since the Americans handed over the outpost southwest of Muqdadiya to the Iraqis, Farouk says, his soldiers have been hopelessly outmanned and outgunned. Recently, a young soldier arrived fresh from his wedding. He died the next day in a roadside bombing. "I felt very, very sorry about what happened," Farouk said, his eyes misting with tears. "He was very happy, because he loved his wife so much. We brought him to his house, and we lay him on his wedding bed." The militants established their authority in the region by taking control of Sunni mosques, from which they issued decrees. When U.S. troops pressed into a 50-square-mile area north of Muqdadiya in January in their ongoing offensive, the white-bearded imam in Sinsil Tharia informed them that the senior cleric in the village departed sometime during the last year rather than comply with the militants. Imam Abid Hassim said he replaced his cousin, a moderate cleric who fled when the militants torched his house and wrote on the wall: "Property of the Islamic State of Iraq." Hassim said notices went up in mosques warning that anyone working for the Iraqi police, army, government or U.S. would be killed. Barber shops, music stores, and coffeehouses were ordered to close. Alcohol and smoking were banned. Women were forced to wear long black robes, with only a slit for their eyes. Shiites were ordered to leave or were slain. The militants used some of the abandoned homes as safe houses and rented out others to make money. At least one was turned into a makeshift hospital, according to the U.S. military. "The people here are poor," Hassim said. "They live a simple life. They have women and children to protect. So they do what the terrorists say." Since May, U.S. forces in Diyala have uncovered at least six centers where insurgents apparently tortured their victims. They say that a complex discovered northwest of Muqdadiya had chains attached to the walls and ceiling, bloody tools, a fan belt fashioned into a whip and a metal bed frame attached to a battery that was apparently used to inflict electric shocks. The remains of 26 people were found in communal graves nearby. To help secure a hold on these tribal communities, some militants sought to marry local women. When three from the Albu Aziz clan refused the marriage demands of Al Qaeda in Iraq emirs, or "princes," gunmen surrounded their village, dragged the women from their homes and slit their throats with jackknives, police reported in December. Asked where the insurgents came from, residents in village after village said Hembis, one of the larger villages in the area north of Muqdadiya known as the breadbasket of Iraq. When U.S. forces arrived in Hembis in Stryker armored vehicles, they found a car-bomb-making factory and houses rigged to explode. Hidden on a nearby farm was a recently built base with weapons, maps drawn on the backs of travel posters, a makeshift classroom under the trees and tunnels leading to underground sleeping quarters for three platoons of fighters. But the militants themselves had vanished. Villagers insisted they could not identify the fighters because they always wore masks. Some whispered there were Saudis, Moroccans, Algerians and other foreigners among them. The villagers who emerged from behind their gates to stare at the U.S. troops were mostly welcoming, but remained convinced that the masked gunmen would return. "When you attack one village, they will move to the next. When you attack that one, they will move to the next. You will never catch them all," a despairing Maad Khalaf Khadrish told the U.S. soldiers. His once prosperous military family was reduced to penury when its businesses in nearby Muqdadiya were destroyed in the fighting and its orchards cleared to make way for a U.S. outpost at Shakarat. The family spent the last of its savings trying to secure the release of Khadrish's kidnapped brother. He was not returned. But at his remote outpost, in an area not yet targeted by the U.S. offensive, the Iraqi major took a more hopeful stance. "If we continue with all these operations all the time, they will get weaker and weaker," Farouk said. "And we will destroy them." Times staff writer Ned Parker in Baghdad contributed to this report. http://ebird.afis.mil/ebfiles/e20080205577747.html <A href="http://68.142.200.12/us.f318.mail.yahoo.com/ya/securedownload?clean=0&fid=Inbox&mid=1_1552950_AEP PjkQAAXemR6jhmg3QVizdUxo&pid=2&tnef=&prefFilename= e20080205aaindex_concat.html&cred=jRY8j7TNX8kmfm_W KvQMFWWbChVQsXY0DB0euHk5adqFfZVTdsmKNKu_bnfq0IcR#T OP">RETURN TO TOP New York Times February 5, 2008 Processing Of Iraqi Refugees Remains Slow, U.S. Says By Helene Cooper WASHINGTON — Last year the Bush administration vowed to find a way to accelerate the processing of immigrant visas and the granting of refugee status so that Iraqis who worked for the American Embassy in Baghdad could immigrate to the United States. But a State Department update on the issue on Monday showed that a gap remains between words and action. State Department officials said that in the past four months, only about 1,400 Iraqis — compared with the 7,000 that administration officials promised last year would be resettled in the United States by the end of 2007 — have been given visas to enter the United States since the speedup effort began. State Department officials described a complicated and cumbersome “refugee resettlement” system, complete with color-coded graphs and charts, that included fingerprinting, job checks, name checks and interviews — all adding up to a system that, critics say, has worked more to keep people out than to let them in. “Resources are finite and at this point, we’re robbing Peter to pay Paul,” said James Foley, senior coordinator for the department’s Iraqi Refugee Issues office. He said that the department wanted to admit 12,000 refugees this fiscal year, but acknowledged that it was already four months into that term with only 1,400 refugees approved. Only a small number had been approved in 2007 before the accelerated effort began. Mr. Foley pledged, as others have before him, that the process would quicken and said that he expected “much higher numbers in the next few months.” Many local residents hired by the embassy in Baghdad run the risk of being the targets of attacks by militias because of their association with the American government. State Department officials said they have been working with Congress and the Department of Homeland Security to speed the issuance of immigrant visas and the granting of refugee status to the embassy’s Iraqi employees. But the pace remains slow: only 375 Iraqis were resettled last month. In a statement, Refugees International, an advocacy group, expressed disappointment at what it called “the U.S. administration’s continual failure to meet its resettlement targets.” “It’s hard to imagine a stable Iraq when millions of Iraqis are languishing in neighboring countries,” said Kristele Younes, an official of the group. “A year ago, the United States made a pledge to address the Iraqi refugee crisis and we have failed to keep that promise.” Within the State Department, some officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to discuss the subject publicly, say that the system is simply not set up to expedite immigration requests. The bottlenecks facing Iraqis who seek to enter the United States are a subset of a larger problem facing refugees from Iraq. While a large number of Iraqis have returned to the country in recent months as the security situation has improved, the United Nations estimated late last year that some two million Iraqis had fled to Syria, Jordan and other neighbors. http://ebird.afis.mil/ebfiles/e20080205577825.html <A href="http://68.142.200.12/us.f318.mail.yahoo.com/ya/securedownload?clean=0&fid=Inbox&mid=1_1552950_AEP PjkQAAXemR6jhmg3QVizdUxo&pid=2&tnef=&prefFilename= e20080205aaindex_concat.html&cred=jRY8j7TNX8kmfm_W KvQMFWWbChVQsXY0DB0euHk5adqFfZVTdsmKNKu_bnfq0IcR#T OP">RETURN TO TOP Los Angeles Times February 5, 2008 Feuding Between Iraqi Army And Police Slows Security Turnover Separated by regional and tribal rifts, the two branches won't cooperate, creating a stumbling block for the U.S. military's goal of transferring responsibility to local forces. By Tony Perry, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer RAWAH, IRAQ — Outside a two-story building guarded by U.S. Marines in this Euphrates River valley town is a sign that says, in Marine colors of scarlet and gold, "Welcome to JCC," or the Joint Coordination Center. The sign is misleading. Despite pleas from the Marines, the Iraqi police and Iraqi army have refused to share the facility with each other and merge their operations. Separated by tribal and regional differences, and a personality clash between top officers, the two branches of the Iraqi security forces have largely refused to coordinate their activities. For the Marines, the situation is a major stumbling block toward their goal of turning security responsibility for Anbar province over to Iraqis as quickly as possible. "This is our way out," said Col. Patrick Malay, commander of the 5th Marine Regiment. But for now, he said, the Marines are forced to serve as a bridge between two feuding sides. Rawah is not alone. Although there are areas in the province where the Iraqi police and army are working well together -- Fallouja, for example -- in many places they are not, U.S. officials say. As his forces assume responsibility for a wide swath of Anbar province, Malay has focused on getting the Iraqis to work together. In Fallouja, his regimental predecessor, Col. Lawrence Nicholson, finally used a line from the Nike commercial in telling the Iraqis to stop feuding and start cooperating: Just do it. "It's a struggle everywhere," Malay said. In Rawah (population 18,000), the idea of cooperation has proved a particularly hard sell, although there has been progress. The area is home to a large number of retired Baathist government officials who have an affinity for the army but an animosity toward the police. In the era of Saddam Hussein, the army enjoyed greater status and viewed local police as unprofessional. Recently the Iraqi police were given a radio by the Iraqi army to use in communicating with their outposts -- a small but significant gesture toward a cooperative approach. "It's in their best interest to realize that, but it's just taking time," said Capt. Adam Gross, who has been working for months to bring the two sides together. There have been some joint operations, including one that uncovered a cache of Italian land mines. The Marines helped plan the mission but then stood back and let the two Iraqi forces carry it out. But overall, relations between the army and police remain chilly -- "challenging and distrustful," according to a Marine document. Marines are concerned that if they leave prematurely, the army and police would cease all cooperation and create a schism in the region that could erupt into violence and allow insurgents to reassert control. Asked about the rift, a young police officer at the Rawah compound said of the Iraqi army, "They do not respect us. They think they know everything." But army Brig. Gen. Ayad Ismael complained that police units are often staffed by untrained, undisciplined youths recruited by tribal sheiks. "We are professionals. They are often not," he said. Many of the police officers wear ski masks to hide their identities, undercutting their credibility with the army and the public. A recent incident may also have turned the local populace against the police. An Iraqi police officer shot and killed a suspect fleeing from a checkpoint. That night, a police outpost was bombed. Last month, Maj. Gen. Walter Gaskin, the top Marine in Iraq, predicted that the Marines could turn over security responsibility to the Iraqis in Anbar province by March. Other U.S. military officials quickly backed off that optimistic assessment, noting that it depended on "conditions on the ground." Maj. Gen. John Kelly, who will soon relieve Gaskin, has declined to set a timeline, saying only that Marines are determined "to work ourselves out of a job." Rawah is a small town, but it is located near a major bridge that Marines want to protect from insurgents. A break between the army and police could embolden the insurgents to attempt to return here as well as to other communities. There are other challenges here. The local judge will not hear criminal cases and has encouraged defendants to plead insanity to avoid punishment. More police officers are needed for the region. The Marines, backed by a cadre of retired U.S. police officers working as consultants, want the Iraqi police to learn the "protect and serve" philosophy rather than acting as a paramilitary force that specializes in forced-entry raids. "The cop-on-the-street kind of patrolling is not what they're doing," said Gross, "but it's what they need to do." Although overcoming the split between the army and police may appear daunting, Marines say a good deal has been accomplished in two years. What started as unilateral U.S. patrols later became U.S. patrols with the Iraqis tagging along. Now many patrols are done by the Iraqis, with the U.S. in "over-watch" mode, ready to react. "We were the face [of security] when we got here," Gross said. "They're the face now." http://ebird.afis.mil/ebfiles/e20080205577854.html <A href="http://68.142.200.12/us.f318.mail.yahoo.com/ya/securedownload?clean=0&fid=Inbox&mid=1_1552950_AEP PjkQAAXemR6jhmg3QVizdUxo&pid=2&tnef=&prefFilename= e20080205aaindex_concat.html&cred=jRY8j7TNX8kmfm_W KvQMFWWbChVQsXY0DB0euHk5adqFfZVTdsmKNKu_bnfq0IcR#T OP">RETURN TO TOP Philadelphia Inquirer February 5, 2008 9 Civilian Deaths Point To Risk Of U.S. Strikes At Insurgents While ties with Sunnis are credited with Iraqi security gains, there are also complications. By Kim Gamel, Associated Press BAGHDAD -- The deaths of nine civilians, including a child, in a U.S. air strike south of Baghdad have raised fresh concerns about the military's ability to distinguish friend from foe in a campaign to uproot insurgents from Sunni areas on the capital's doorstep. Witnesses and Iraqi police said helicopters strafed a house Saturday after confusing U.S.-allied Sunni fighters for extremists in the deadliest case of mistaken identity since November. The U.S. military yesterday confirmed the civilian deaths but gave few other details of the Army gunship attack. The bloodshed also points to the wider complications for U.S.-led offensives against insurgents in populated areas: As the firepower increases, so do the risks of claiming innocent lives, and each such death frays the crucial alliances between the Pentagon and new Sunni allies known as Awakening Councils. It was one of these groups that apparently was caught in the clash near Iskandariyah, 30 miles south of Baghdad - an area where U.S.-led forces stepped up an air and ground assault last month against al-Qaeda in Iraq footholds. A farmer who lives nearby said the Americans retaliated after a mortar attack against a convoy as it passed a checkpoint manned by Awakening Council fighters. The soldiers apparently thought the barrage came from the Awakening Council fighters, who fled to a nearby house, Issa Mahdi said. "After a while, U.S. helicopters arrived and bombarded the house where the Awakening members were hiding," he said. Abu Abeer, who said he was guarding a post nearby when the attack occurred, alleged that the helicopters targeted anyone near the house, in the village of Tal al-Samar. "It was a crime and it shows the Americans' disrespect for Iraqi blood," he said. The U.S. military said only that a child and eight other civilians were killed and that three others, including two children, were wounded as U.S. troops pursued suspected al-Qaeda in Iraq fighters. Lt. Col. James Hutton, a military spokesman in Baghdad, said the strike involved Army helicopters and no American casualties were reported. U.S. officers met with a local sheikh representing local citizens and expressed condolences to the families of those killed, according to a brief e-mailed statement. Some Sunni leaders worry about future cracks in Sunni cooperation with U.S. forces, which the Pentagon credits as a key reason behind a sharp drop in violence in recent months around Iraq. "Al-Qaeda could exploit such mistrust in order to win back some Awakening Council members who defected from it," Sunni lawmaker Salman al-Jumaili said. "I think that the Awakening Council members have served their country in the best way," he said, "and any attempt to hurt them, even if it is by mistake, could endanger the political process in the country." In November, a leader of one of the Awakening Councils said U.S. soldiers killed dozens of his fighters during a 12-hour battle north of Baghdad. The U.S. military acknowledged killing 25 men but said the men were insurgents "in the target area" where al-Qaeda in Iraq fighters were believed to be hiding. The U.S. military investigated the incident, but the two versions of events were never reconciled. A month later, the U.S. military said its forces accidentally killed two people in Baqubah, northeast of Baghdad. One was later identified as an Awakening Council member. http://ebird.afis.mil/ebfiles/e20080205577865.html <A href="http://68.142.200.12/us.f318.mail.yahoo.com/ya/securedownload?clean=0&fid=Inbox&mid=1_1552950_AEP PjkQAAXemR6jhmg3QVizdUxo&pid=2&tnef=&prefFilename= e20080205aaindex_concat.html&cred=jRY8j7TNX8kmfm_W KvQMFWWbChVQsXY0DB0euHk5adqFfZVTdsmKNKu_bnfq0IcR#T OP">RETURN TO TOP Colorado Springs Gazette February 5, 2008 Pg. 8 Iraqis Lead The Charge In Mosul 2 small U.S. units help patrol the nation’s 2nd-largest city By Tom Roeder, The Gazette MOSUL, Iraq -- The fight to drive insurgents from Iraq’s second-largest city is being fought largely by Iraqis, leaders with a Fort Carson unit here said. While Baghdad is controlled by nine American brigades, this city of 1.8 million 225 miles north of the capital is patrolled by two comparatively small American units, a cavalry squadron from Fort Hood, Texas, and the 1st Battalion, 8th Infantry Regiment from Fort Carson’s 3rd Brigade Combat Team. The Iraqi security forces, including two infantry divisions, outnumber their American counterparts nearly 10 to one. The 900-soldier unit from Colorado was moved here last month amid rising violence. In the eastern section of Mosul it controls, there are about 10 attacks per day. The unit lost five soldiers last week in a bombing that was followed by a shootout that lasted nearly three hours. Battalion commander Lt. Col. Christopher Johnson said he wants to quell the violence by working closely with an Iraqi army division and the police. Then, the battalion can help get people jobs and fix the balky electrical system that provides about four hours of power a day to the neighborhoods it patrols. The insurgents here are using tactics they’ve used elsewhere in Iraq. Bombings are aimed at U.S. troops, but they’re also killing civilians nearly every day. “They’re trying to intimidate the people,” Johnson said over tea with with an Iraqi colonel at an Iraqi army base on the site of one of Saddam Hussein’s palaces. Johnson went to invite local army officials to a memorial service today for five soldiers who were killed and to plan new operations targeting insurgents. The Iraqis say they’re just as determined as the Americans to stop the attacks. “The people of Mosul want to start life again,” the Iraqi colonel said. The Iraqis have said Mosul is the site of their final showdown with al-Qaida in Iraq, which is thought to be running much of the insurgency here since it was driven out of Baghdad. Officials say it could take two months or more to rout the terrorists and win over the people. As Johnson made the rounds Monday, Mosul hardly looked like a city under siege. Shoppers crowded markets and traffic jammed streets amid the highrise buildings downtown beside the Tigris River. Much of Mosul is cleaner than Baghdad, and its roads appear to be in better shape. Soldiers, though, say the calm is an illusion. “The enemy is hiding,” said Sgt. Ed Winters of Branchburg, N.J., after he returned from a mission, “If they were to come out in the open, it would make it easier to do our job.” The city’s largest ethnic group is Sunni, which may feel disenfranchised from the region’s Kurd-dominated government and can be enticed to the insurgency with money because unemployment tops 60 percent in some neighborhoods. In areas in and around Baghdad patrolled by the 3rd Brigade’s other five battalions, Sunni strife has been calmed by the use of “concerned local citizens” — armed U.S. Armybacked groups that patrol neighborhoods for pay. Those aren’t being formed in Mosul because of fears that they would increase unrest. Instead, Americans, who live on a base on the city’s west side near an airport, work closely with the Iraqi forces. Lt. Col. Eric Crisp runs an American team that trains and advises Mosul’s Iraqi forces and said the Iraqi soldiers know the neighborhoods. They draw in scores of tips about insurgents through a wide intelligence network. “The amount of information these guys are able to gather is amazing,” he said. “This brigade is the best Iraqi Army brigade I have ever seen,” he told the Iraqi colonel who beamed with pride. After the city is no longer a haven for insurgents, the battalion plans to work on economic development and fixing electrical, water and sewer systems. But battling insurgents comes first. “If they want a toe-to-toe fight here, that would be good with me,” Winters said. http://ebird.afis.mil/ebfiles/e20080205577866.html <A href="http://68.142.200.12/us.f318.mail.yahoo.com/ya/securedownload?clean=0&fid=Inbox&mid=1_1552950_AEP PjkQAAXemR6jhmg3QVizdUxo&pid=2&tnef=&prefFilename= e20080205aaindex_concat.html&cred=jRY8j7TNX8kmfm_W KvQMFWWbChVQsXY0DB0euHk5adqFfZVTdsmKNKu_bnfq0IcR#T OP">RETURN TO TOP Colorado Springs Gazette February 5, 2008 Pg. 1 Standing Their Ground Where Comrades Fell By Tom Roeder, The Gazette MOSUL, Iraq -- The five men in the lead Humvee died instantly. The other 20 soldiers in the column felt the massive blast more than they heard it. They saw the remains of the rig falling to earth. Before the dust cleared, a firefight erupted, with dozens of insurgents firing machine guns, mortars and rockets. Fort Carson’s Violator Platoon was caught in the open Jan. 28 by a well-planned ambush. They could have fled southeastern Mosul’s Palestine neighborhood for the safety of Forward Operating Base Marez across the river. But they wouldn’t leave their fallen comrades. “We weren’t going anywhere,” said Sgt. 1st Class Lloyd Lane of Richmond, Va., who helped lead the platoon through nearly three hours of battle to hold the cratered and bloody ground where five members of his platoon died. “We weren’t moving.” The platoon is a part of the 1st Battalion, 8th Infantry Regiment, which was sent to this city 225 miles north of Baghdad in December to help quell rising violence. It’s one of six battalions that left Colorado for Iraq in December with Fort Carson’s 3rd Brigade Combat Team. The other five are in and around Baghdad. While attention has been focused on Baghdad, the 1.8 million residents in Mosul have seen a decreasing American Army presence since the war began. Until reinforcements were ordered, a single battalion of American troops was stationed in this city that’s centered around ancient Babylonian ruins amid rolling hills. Meanwhile, insurgent groups including al-Qaida in Iraq have moved here to take advantage of impoverished and disenfranchised Sunni Muslims to fill their ranks. The Fort Carson battalion plans to help rebuild eastern Mosul. But first, the soldiers and the Iraqi troops who outnumber them here must destroy the insurgency. The Violator’s soldiers were on a “targeting” mission to capture a suspected insurgent boss. They had played hideand-seek with the suspect for most of the morning. “After we had no luck we decided to head back,” said 1st Lt. Francisco Hernandez of Montrose, Violator’s commander. The platoon’s soldiers knew something was wrong when the streets cleared of people, often a telltale sign of a forthcoming attack. About 12:30 p.m., the first Humvee in the convoy, carrying Sgt. James E. Craig, Staff Sgt. Gary W. Jeffries, Spc. Evan A. Marshall, Pfc. Brandon A. Meyer and Pvt. Joshua R. Young, was blown to pieces when a bomb detonated beneath it. The bomb had been buried carefully, Hernandez said, and may have been in place for weeks as insurgents waited for a target. Commanders say the bomb probably carried more than 100 pounds of explosives. “It stopped us, the driver didn’t even have to hit the brakes,” said Sgt. Richard Augafa, from American Samoa. “I saw my buddies on the ground. The turret hit the ground as the dust was clearing. It was about 30 meters away. I saw it fall for a second or two.” Hernandez yelled for Violator to stop and form around the bombing site. Before his words came out, the soldiers, including many Iraq veterans, were moving. The action to defend the dead was automatic. “You don’t have time to think,” said Pvt. Robert Greenlaw-Moore of Columbia, S.C. Insurgents in a field near the Humvees and within surrounding buildings, including two mosques, opened fire. The Humvees moved to dodge the fire. Drivers kept watch for other bombs. “When I was backing up I watched to make sure I didn’t hit anything that could be an IED,” said Pfc. Andrew Fatula of Cushman, Mass., using the Army acronym for improvised explosive device, the homemade bombs that are the insurgent’s biggest weapon in Iraq. Hernandez said he spotted nine positions the enemy was using for cover, each inhabited by as many as five gunmen. The four surviving Violator Humvee gunners raked the enemy positions with fire from the 7.62 mm machine guns. “It sounded like popcorn,” said Sgt. Gary Dishroon of South Elgin, Ill., who put short bursts into every enemy position he saw. The Americans were shocked to see that the enemy had taken cover in houses of worship. “I was like ‘Jesus Christ, they’re firing from the mosque,’” Lane remembered saying early in the battle. The insurgents had just started, though. Machine guns were soon joined by rocket-propelled grenades that whooshed toward the Americans. As many as 10 of the explosiveladen rockets exploded near the patrol, detonating on the road or against nearby walls. Hernandez said the Humvee gunners saved the rest of his platoon from the grenades — their bullets caused the insurgents to fire without aiming.“They had IEDs on every avenue of approach,” said Staff Sgt. Matthew Houser of Bristol, Tenn. “We were caught in a kill sack,” Hernandez said. Insurgent mortar rounds landed all around Violator’s Humvees. Troops inside the Humvees yelled out targets for the gunners, giving clock position and distance to targets. A few soldiers lowered bullet-proof Humvee windows and blazed away with their M-4 rifles. Enemy gunners rebuffed repeated attempts by the soldiers to get out of the Humvees and secure better firing positions. “If we would have dismounted, we would have taken more casualties,” Lane said. The platoon members buttoned up inside the armored Humvees and waited for help. They were on their own for about half an hour. Soldiers recalled the sound of dozens of bullets hitting the armor around them. “A few minutes out there can last forever,” Houser said. “This was 35 minutes. We were the only patrol in that area. It’s the loneliest feeling.” OH-58 Kiowa helicopters launched from the battalion’s base in answer to the platoon’s urgent calls for help. The pilots came in low to blast targets. But the overwhelming insurgent fire quickly turned skyward and drove one of the helicopters off with damage and turned back to the Humvees. “It’s a feeling of fight or die,” Dishroon said. The soldiers kept their heads, ensuring they only fired at people who were shooting at them. Lane said the last thing the soldiers wanted was civilians to die. “We had positive identification on every target we fired on,” he said. A quick reaction force of Humvees and tanks from Forward Operating Base Marez on Mosul’s southwest side rolled toward the firefight. It, too, was targeted by insurgents. “Even as a first responder, we were hit by an IED,” said Sgt. James Luce of Chicago, a member of Violator platoon who was part of the rescue team. The rescuers knew that five men had been killed. “We were angry and wanted to get into the fight,” Luce said. “We were furious.” The insurgents changed tactics when American help arrived, firing less often and moving more frequently. “Even when the tanks showed up, they still wanted to fight,” Hernandez said. Enemy positions were hit with 120 mm tank rounds and a rain of bullets from the increasing number of troops on the scene, including some who climbed to rooftops. “It’s the first time I’ve ever loved the tankers,” said Houser, a die-hard infantryman. It took another two hours of fighting before the enemy fled and let the Americans recover their dead. Hernandez said his men fired more than 8,000 rounds. When the firefight ebbed, the soldiers of Violator wanted to help recover the bodies. They were turned back by officers who thought they had seen enough. “When we came around the Humvee I saw one of my soldiers and bit my lip,” Lane said. “The commander told me to go back to my vehicle. There were tears in my eyes.” It was 4:30 p.m. when the stunned platoon members returned to the base. There was a chaplain waiting. They hugged each other. The soldiers of Violator platoon carried each of the five caskets onto a plane bound for America. The entire platoon plans to attend a memorial service for the five today. “We need to thank them for what they did in our lives,” said Luce. Violator platoon was back on patrol in Mosul within 48 hours of the bombing. The war doesn’t pause for mourning. The men share stories about their dead friends now. The tales are generally funny ones, some unprintable. “We’ve all been remembering them,” Lane said. “Right before you go to bed is the hardest,” Houser said. “That’s when your mind is at ease and you start seeing the pictures of what happened that day.” http://ebird.afis.mil/ebfiles/e20080205577768.html <A href="http://68.142.200.12/us.f318.mail.yahoo.com/ya/securedownload?clean=0&fid=Inbox&mid=1_1552950_AEP PjkQAAXemR6jhmg3QVizdUxo&pid=2&tnef=&prefFilename= e20080205aaindex_concat.html&cred=jRY8j7TNX8kmfm_W KvQMFWWbChVQsXY0DB0euHk5adqFfZVTdsmKNKu_bnfq0IcR#T OP">RETURN TO TOP Washington Times February 5, 2008 Pg. 13 Afghan Civilian Casualties Rising, Analysts Report Iraq numbers also in hundreds By Sharon Behn, Washington Times The number of civilians inadvertently killed by U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan doubled in 2007 from the previous year as coalition forces dropped about a million pounds of bombs on the country, military analysts said. There were no official military numbers readily available for Iraq. But based on official and unofficial U.S. and U.N. data, one analyst said that 400 to 500 Iraqis died last year at U.S. checkpoints and that 200 to 300 were killed in U.S. air operations in 2007. Citing security rules, military officials declined to answer questions regarding U.S. rules of engagement on collateral damage and civilian casualties in military operations. But the figures are clearly of concern to U.S. strategists, who understand that civilian casualties build resentment against the international forces and undermine attempts to win support for U.S.-backed governments in the two countries. "Some of what you are asking for is very sensitive material. We never discuss rules of engagement, as doing so could seriously endanger both our own forces and civilians," one Pentagon official told The Washington Times. The U.S. military apologized late Sunday for the deaths of nine civilians in an air strike against al Qaeda near the town of Iskandariyah, about 30 miles south of Baghdad. "Over the past two years, there has been a significant increase in the use of air power" in both countries, which in some cases has led to more civilian deaths, said Carl Conetta, co-director of the Project on Defense Alternatives. In an attempt to stem the rise of civilian casualties, Human Rights Watch has even lobbied for increased ground forces in Afghanistan to boost pro-government strength on the ground, allow for more humanitarian work and improve intelligence gathering. In 2006, a total of 929 Afghan civilians were killed, of whom 116 died from air strikes and 114 were killed by ground fire. The other 699 were killed by the Taliban, said Marc Garlasco, a former Pentagon official now working as a senior military analyst for Human Rights Watch. Through September 2007, a total of 892 Afghans were killed — 438 by the Taliban, 272 by air strikes, 62 by ground fire, 16 by a combination of air and ground fire. In addition, 15 died in shooting incidents where it was not clear which side did the shooting, and 89 were killed by unknown assailants. Mr. Garlasco, who traveled to Afghanistan and |
