-
-
American forces 'attack small village killing women and children'
Read the title!
"At least 15 people, including women and children, were killed in an attack involving U.S.-led forces in a remote Pakistani village near the border with Afghanistan, intelligence officials and a witness said Wednesday. " Read the title! ... more -
500th U.S. service member dies in Afghanistan
A sailor killed in Afghanistan on Saturday was the 500th U.S. service member to die in that country since the war there began in 2001.
Petty Officer 1st Class Joshua Harris of Lexington, North Carolina, was 36.
Twenty-two U.S. service members were killed in Afghanistan in August, part of a recent increase in American deaths there. In June, 28 U.S. service members died in Afghanistan -- the United States' highest one-month total in that country.
Including deaths from the United States' coalition partners, 46 service members were killed in August, equaling the coalition total for June. Forty-six is the highest one-month total for coalition forces.
But Afghan and coalition forces killed more than four times as many insurgents -- 220 -- in one week last month in southern Afghanistan, the U.S. coalition said.
The battles occurred in Helmand province from August 25 through Saturday, the coalition said. The battles also led to the discovery of weapons caches. A sailor killed in Afghanistan on Saturday was the 500th U.S. service member to die in that country since the war there began in 2001.... more -
Afghan commission says US troops fired on first
KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) -- An Afghan army commander said that U.S. and Afghan troops were fired on first from a village where a government investigative commission says scores of civilians were killed, according to a report released Sunday.
The chief of staff for the army's Herat corps told the head of the government's investigative commission that shots were fired early Aug. 22 from Azizabad at U.S. and Afghan troops. The troops had gone to the village on a raid.
But the report, released by the office of President Hamid Karzai, did not specify who fired the shots.
"When the ANA (Afghan army) and coalition troops got close to the village, firing started after the ANA unit stopped, and the coalition forces conducted the operation in the village," the report said.
There were no "foreign or internal Taliban" among the victims, the report said.
The commission found that 15 men, 15 women and 60 children were killed. That finding was backed by a preliminary U.N. report. The commission said eight houses were destroyed and seven damaged.
The U.S.-led coalition maintains that 25 militants and five civilians died. The U.S. says it is investigating.
The top NATO spokesman in Afghanistan, Brig. Gen. Richard Blanchette, told The Associated Press on Saturday that the U.S.-led coalition, Afghan government and U.N. would launch a probe into the raid.
A U.N. spokesman, Dan McNorton, said details of the investigation were still to be worked out.
The statement from Karzai's office on Sunday did not mention any joint investigation, and no Afghan government officials have confirmed that the government would participate.
The U.N. mission said it had delivered aid to around 900 people affected by what it called "the recent tragedy" in Azizabad. It delivered three truck loads of food, cooking utensils, shelter materials and medicines to 150 families.
Story continued at link... KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) -- An Afghan army commander said that U.S. and Afghan troops were fired on first from a village where a govern... more -
Agree To Disagree? Maliki, Bush Admin Clash On Status Of Pullout Agreement
Some interesting news broke today that has been buried amid the orgy of convention coverage: Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki said -- apparently in a speech to tribal leaders in the Green Zone -- that the U.S. and Iraq had agreed that all "foreign soldiers" would leave Iraq by the end of 2011. Maliki was promptly shot down by the White House, which maintained there is no pullout date. Some interesting news broke today that has been buried amid the orgy of convention coverage: Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki said ... more
-
Iraq PM demanding changes to US military deal
BAGHDAD -- Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki is demanding changes to a draft deal on the status of U.S. forces beyond this year, a key Shiite ally in the governing coalition said on Sunday.
"There are points in the agreement that are still pending, and they can't be approved without changes in order to preserve the complete sovereignty of Iraq," the Supreme Iraqi Islamic Council quoted Maliki as telling fellow Shiite politicians at a meeting on Saturday.
Iraq's chief negotiator, Mohammed al-Haj Hammoud, had told AFP on Friday that the two negotiating teams had finalized a 27-point deal to put before the two governments and it was now up to the leaders to take a decision.
Hammoud said that the agreement had already been endorsed by U.S. President George W. Bush, although a White House spokesman later said that the discussions were still ongoing.
The statement from the office of SIIC leader Sheikh Abdel Aziz al-Hakim said Maliki's comments came at a meeting of the United Iraqi Alliance, the Shiite bloc that leads the government and in which the SIIC and Maliki's Dawa party are the two main factions.
"The leaders of the UIA focussed on the security agreement between the United States and Iraq in order to ensure that the deal safeguards Iraqi sovereignty and national interests," it said.
Hammoud said Friday that the deal provides for all U.S. combat troops to pull out of Iraqi cities by next June ahead of a complete withdrawal from Iraq by 2011.
But White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe said any dates in the agreement under discussion were "aspirational timelines" rather than formal deadlines. BAGHDAD -- Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki is demanding changes to a draft deal on the status of U.S. forces beyond this year, a k... more -
Iraq: Draft for U.S. troops pullout reached
U.S. and Iraqi negotiators have agreed to a preliminary draft of an agreement on the future of U.S. troops in Iraq, a senior U.S. military official said.
Earlier, Iraqi Deputy Foreign Minister Mohammed al-Haj Hamood indicated that it included a date of June 30 for U.S. troops to withdraw from Iraqi cities and villages. But the U.S. official said there are no dates in the agreement, only general time frames that would take into account conditions on the ground.
The U.S. source, though, said the June 30 date is a goal, but not set in stone. The source said the plan has the approval of U.S. negotiators but President Bush has not signed-off on it. He said it could take a while for the plan to be approved by Iraq's government.
In recent weeks, Iraqi government officials said that early versions of the plan would have called for U.S. combat troops to leave Iraq by the end of 2010 and for the remainder of troops to depart by the end of 2011. By June 20, 2009, troops would be restricted to their bases and prohibited from patrolling Iraq's streets.
The Iraqi government also would be able to request that U.S. troops remain longer under the preliminary agreement talks. U.S. and Iraqi negotiators have agreed to a preliminary draft of an agreement on the future of U.S. troops in Iraq, a senior U.S. mili... more -
US troops give to Obama 6x more than McCain
A new analysis shows the vast majority of US troops serving abroad have donated to candidates running on strong anti-war platforms, with presumptive Democratic nominee Barack Obama out-raising his Republican opponent by a 6-to-1 margin.
The Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks money in politics, analyzed donations from US troops in a report released Thursday.
According to an analysis of campaign contributions by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, Democrat Barack Obama has received nearly six times as much money from troops deployed overseas at the time of their contributions than has Republican John McCain, and the fiercely anti-war Ron Paul, though he suspended his campaign for the Republican nomination months ago, has received more than four times McCain's haul.
Despite McCain's status as a decorated veteran and a historically Republican bent among the military, members of the armed services overall -- whether stationed overseas or at home -- are also favoring Obama with their campaign contributions in 2008, by a $55,000 margin. Although 59 percent of federal contributions by military personnel has gone to Republicans this cycle, of money from the military to the presumed presidential nominees, 57 percent has gone to Obama.
Only Marines are more likely to donate to McCain, according to the report, with Obama leading in fundraising from members of the Army, Air Force and Navy. The report found Obama raised about $60,600 from troops deployed abroad, compared to $45,500 for Paul and $10,600 for McCain; the Democratic candidate brought in more than $335,000 from all military personnel, compared to about $280,000 for the Republican.
"That's shocking. The academic debate is between some who say that junior enlisted ranks lean slightly Republican and some who say it's about equal, but no one would point to six-to-one" in Democrats' favor, Aaron Belkin, a professor of political science at the University of California who studies the military, told the Center's Luke Rosiak. "That represents a tremendous shift from 2000, when the military vote almost certainly was decisive in Florida and elsewhere, and leaned heavily towards the Republicans."
The military donations streaming to Obama, Rosiak reports, breaks a historical trend that saw Republicans lead among the enlisted ranks. According to the report, George W. Bush out-raised Al Gore by a nearly 2-to-1 margin in 2000 and brought in $1.50 from the military for every $1 raised by Democratic candidate John Kerry in 2004. A new analysis shows the vast majority of US troops serving abroad have donated to candidates running on strong anti-war platforms, wi... more -
The Iraq Troop Surge Is Over?!
The White House has said that the troop surge in Iraq is over, but how come there are more troops in Iraq right now then before the surge started? The White House has said that the troop surge in Iraq is over, but how come there are more troops in Iraq right now then before the su... more
-
US now winning Iraq war that seemed lost
Limited, sometimes sharp fighting and periodic terrorist bombings in Iraq are likely to continue, possibly for years. But the Iraqi government and the U.S. now are able to shift focus from mainly combat to mainly building the fragile beginnings of peace — a transition that many found almost unthinkable as recently as one year ago.
Scattered battles go on, especially against al-Qaida holdouts north of Baghdad. But organized resistance, with the steady drumbeat of bombings, kidnappings, assassinations and ambushes that once rocked the capital daily, has all but ceased.
This amounts to more than a lull in the violence. It reflects a fundamental shift in the outlook for the Sunni minority, which held power under Saddam Hussein. They launched the insurgency five years ago. They now are either sidelined or have switched sides to cooperate with the Americans in return for money and political support.
Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, told The Associated Press this past week there are early indications that senior leaders of al-Qaida may be considering shifting their main focus from Iraq to the war in Afghanistan.
Ryan Crocker, the U.S. ambassador to Iraq, told the AP on Thursday that the insurgency as a whole has withered to the point where it is no longer a threat to Iraq's future.
"Very clearly, the insurgency is in no position to overthrow the government or, really, even to challenge it," Crocker said. "It's actually almost in no position to try to confront it. By and large, what's left of the insurgency is just trying to hang on." Limited, sometimes sharp fighting and periodic terrorist bombings in Iraq are likely to continue, possibly for years. But the Iraqi go... more -
Obama takes exit plan to Baghdad to meet Iraqi prime minister
US presidential candidate Barack Obama arrived in Baghdad today amid confusion about whether the Iraqi prime minister backs his timetable for withdrawing troops from Iraq.
The Democratic contender has pledged to pull out troops within 16 months if he is elected.
In an interview with the German paper Der Spiegel, the Iraqi prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, appeared to back Obama's timetable.
"Obama talks about 16 months. That, we think, would be the right timeframe for a withdrawal," he was quoted as saying.
Maliki's spokesman has since claimed his comments had been "misunderstood" and "mistranslated" without denying the story.
His aides also said Maliki was not taking sides in the US election.
The clarification from Maliki's aides came after the intervention of US embassy officials in Baghdad.
Last week Maliki signed up to the more vague "time frame" agreed with US president George Bush.
Obama was expected to meet Maliki as well as General David Petraeus in Iraq, although aides provided few details because of security concerns.
The Republican presidential candidate, John McCain, has been critical of Obama's position on Iraq, saying the decision to pull out should be determined by progress, not a timetable.
McCain supports the war, and has been critical of some aspects of its handling. But he was a vocal supporter of the decision to send in more troops.
McCain's foreign policy adviser, Randy Scheunemann, said Obama "is stubbornly adhering to an unconditional withdrawal that places politics above the advice of our military commanders, the success of our troops, and the security of the American people."
"Barack Obama is wrong to advocate withdrawal at any cost just as he was wrong to oppose the surge that has put victory within reach," Scheunemann said in a statement.
US commanders have begun withdrawing some of those additional troops and Obama has argued that they should be sent to Afghanistan, which he says is the "central front" in the fight against terrorism.
McCain also supports sending troop reinforcements to Afghanistan.
"There's starting to be a growing consensus that it's time for us to withdraw some of our combat troops out of Iraq, deploy them here in Afghanistan, and I think we have to seize that opportunity. Now is the time for us to do it," Obama said in a CBS News interview broadcast yesterday after his two-hour meeting with Afghan President Hamid Karzai.
"I think it's important for us to begin planning for those brigades now. If we wait until the next administration, it could be a year before we get those additional troops on the ground here in Afghanistan, and I think that would be a mistake," Obama said in the interview. "I think the situation is getting urgent enough that we have got to start doing something now." US presidential candidate Barack Obama arrived in Baghdad today amid confusion about whether the Iraqi prime minister backs his timeta... more -
Iraq Leader Maliki Supports Obama's Withdrawal Plans
In an interview with SPIEGEL, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said Barack Obama's 16 timeframe for a withdrawal from Iraq is the right one.
Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki supports US presidential candidate Barack Obama's plan to withdraw US troops from Iraq within 16 months. When asked in and interview with SPIEGEL when he thinks US troops should leave Iraq, Maliki responded "as soon as possible, as far as we are concerned." He then continued: "US presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months. That, we think, would be the right time frame for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes."
Maliki was careful to back away from outright support for Obama. "Of course, this is by no means an election endorsement. Who they choose as their president is the Americans' business," he said. But then, apparently referring to Republican candidate John McCain's more open-ended Iraq policy, Maliki said: "Those who operate on the premise of short time periods in Iraq today are being more realistic. Artificially prolonging the tenure of US troops in Iraq would cause problems."
Iraq, Maliki went on to say, "would like to see the establishment of a long-term strategic treaty with the United States, which would govern the basic aspects of our economic and cultural relations." He also emphasized though that the security agreement between the two countries should only "remain in effect in the short term."
Read more... In an interview with SPIEGEL, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said Barack Obama's 16 timeframe for a withdrawal from Iraq is... more -
Americans being electrocuted in Iraq 'on an almost daily basis'
Among the seemingly innumerable scandal-worthy stories which have so marked the war in Iraq is one growing tragedy which has been largely ignored: shoddy electrical work by U.S. contractors at military bases leading to numerous electrical fires, troops receiving painful shocks, and even death by electrocution.
In January 2008, Staff Sgt. Ryan Maseth, a 24-year-old weapons expert, was electrocuted while showering in Baghdad's green zone. According to a criminal investigation by the Army, an electrical water pump on the building's roof shorted out from not being properly grounded when installed. On March 19 his parents sued the contractor, KBR Inc., for Sgt. Maseth's death.
According to the Pittsburgh-Post Gazette:
"The Defense Contract Management Agency, we believe, authorized [the contractor] to the tune of millions of dollars to make the repairs. And they never made the repairs," Mr. Cavanaugh said. "And we don't know why. A simple repair -- just ground the building -- and Ryan would be alive today."
On July 1, New York Times Investigative Reporter James Reisen, author of the 2006 book "State of War: The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration," took up the subject. According to Reisen, General David Petraeus stated to Congress that 13 Americans had been electrocuted since the invasion of Iraq: 12 soldiers and one contractor.
As recently as July 11, KBR Inc. electricians told a Senate panel tasked to investigate the deaths that their employer used inexperienced, non-English speaking workers to install electrical systems. Many experienced contractors, they claimed, were dismissed after raising cautions over the work.
According to the Associated Press:
"Time and again we heard, `This is not the states, OSHA doesn't apply here. If you don't like it you can go home,'" said Debbie Crawford, a journeyman electrician with 30 years experience.
Army Times reports that the shoddy wiring and electrical risks have brought about the deaths of 11 service members and two U.S. civilians.
However, a follow-up report by James Reisen in the New York Times on July 18 states that the problem is far worse than General Petraeus stated, and the military has known about the systemic problems since 2004.
Since the invasion, over 283 electrical fires on US bases have been reported, along with two deaths in 2006 at a base in Tikrit, the death of Sgt. Maseth, and innumerable painful shocks dealt to Americans.
A log of complaints compiled early in 2008 found soldiers living in just one Baghdad building complex were complaining of painful electrical shocks 'on an almost daily basis.'
In public statements, Pentagon officials have not addressed the scope of the hazards, instead mostly focusing on the circumstances surrounding the death of Sergeant Maseth, who lived near Pittsburgh.
But the internal documents, including dozens of memos, e-mail messages and reports from the Army, the Defense Contract Management Agency and other agencies, show that electrical problems were widely recognized as a major safety threat among Pentagon contracting experts. It is impossible to determine the exact number of the resulting deaths and injuries because no single document tallies them up. (The records were compiled for Congressional and Pentagon investigators and obtained independently by The Times.)
The 2007 safety survey was ordered by the top official in Iraq for the Defense Contract Management Agency, which oversees contractors, after the October 2006 electrical fire that killed two soldiers near Tikrit. Paul Dickinson, a Pentagon safety specialist who wrote the report, confirmed its findings, but did not elaborate.
READ THE REST. Among the seemingly innumerable scandal-worthy stories which have so marked the war in Iraq is one growing tragedy which has been larg... more -
US troops forced out of Afghan base after attack
KABUL, Afghanistan — U.S. and Afghan troops have abandoned a remote outpost in eastern Afghanistan where militants killed nine American soldiers this week, officials said Wednesday.
Compounding the military setback, insurgents quickly seized the village of Wanat in Nuristan province after driving out the handful of police left behind to defend government offices, Afghan officials said.
Some 50 officers were headed to the area to try to regain control, said Ghoolam Farouq, a senior provincial police official.
Sunday's attack by some 200 militants armed with machine guns, rocket-propelled grenades and mortars was the deadliest for the U.S. military in Afghanistan in three years. Rebels fought their way into the newly established base, wounding another 15 Americans and suffering heavy casualties of their own, before the defenders and warplanes could drive them back.
The assault underlined how Islamic militants appear to be gaining strength nearly eight years after the ouster of the Taliban, and the difficulties facing foreign and Afghan forces trying to defeat them.
NATO said the post, which lies amid precipitous mountains close to the Pakistan border, had been vacated, but insisted that international and Afghan troops will "retain a strong presence in that area with patrolling and other means."
Story continues below KABUL, Afghanistan — U.S. and Afghan troops have abandoned a remote outpost in eastern Afghanistan where militants killed nine America... more -
Pakistan: U.S. can't hunt bin Laden on its turf
Pakistan's top diplomat said Saturday there are no U.S. or other foreign military personnel on the hunt for Osama bin Laden in his nation, and none will be allowed in to search for the al-Qaida leader.
In an interview with The Associated Press, Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi said his nation's new government has ruled out such military operations, covert or otherwise, to catch militants.
"Our government's policy is that our troops, paramilitary forces and our regular forces are deployed in sufficient numbers. They are capable of taking action there. And any foreign intrusion would be counterproductive," he said Saturday. "People will not accept it. Questions of sovereignty come in." Pakistan's top diplomat said Saturday there are no U.S. or other foreign military personnel on the hunt for Osama bin Laden in hi... more -
US considers increasing pace of Iraq pullout
The Bush administration is considering the withdrawal of additional combat forces from Iraq beginning in September, according to administration and military officials, raising the prospect of a far more ambitious plan than expected only months ago.
Such a withdrawal would be a striking reversal from the nadir of the war in 2006 and 2007.
One factor in the consideration is the pressing need for additional American troops in Afghanistan, where the Taliban and other fighters have intensified their insurgency and inflicted a growing number of casualties on Afghans and American-led forces there.
More American and allied troops died in Afghanistan than in Iraq in May and June, a trend that has continued this month.
Although no decision has been made, by the time President Bush leaves office on Jan. 20, at least one and as many as 3 of the 15 combat brigades now in Iraq could be withdrawn or at least scheduled for withdrawal, the officials said.
The desire to move more quickly reflects the view of many in the Pentagon who want to ease the strain on the military but also to free more troops for Afghanistan and potentially other missions. The Bush administration is considering the withdrawal of additional combat forces from Iraq beginning in September, according to admin... more -
U.S. Troops in Iraq Face Flying I.E.D.'s
BAGHDAD, July 9 -- Suspected Shiite militiamen have begun using powerful rocket-propelled bombs to attack U.S. military outposts in recent months, broadening the array of weapons used against American troops.
U.S. military officials call the devices Improvised Rocket Assisted Munitions, or IRAMs. They are propane tanks packed with hundreds of pounds of explosives and powered by 107mm rockets. They are often fired by remote control from the backs of trucks, sometimes in close succession. Rocket-propelled bombs have killed at least 21 people, including at least three U.S. soldiers, this year.
The latest reported rocket-propelled bomb attack occurred Tuesday at Joint Security Station Ur, a base in northeastern Baghdad shared by U.S. and Iraqi soldiers. One U.S. soldier and an interpreter were wounded in the attack.
U.S. military officials say IRAM attacks, unlike roadside bombings and conventional mortar or rocket attacks, have the potential to kill scores of soldiers at once. IRAMs are fired at close range, unlike most rockets, and create much larger explosions. Most such attacks have occurred in the capital, Baghdad.
The use of the rocket-propelled bombs reflects militiamen's ability to use commonly available materials and relatively low-tech weaponry to circumvent security measures that have cost the U.S. military billions of dollars. To combat roadside bombs, known as improvised explosive devices or IEDs, U.S. and Iraqi troops have set up scores of checkpoints throughout the capital, increased patrols and purchased hundreds of armored vehicles that can resist such attacks.
A June report on the Web site Long War Journal called the explosives-filled propane tanks "flying IEDs."
Militia members and insurgents have at times increased the sophistication of their weapons, but the rocket-propelled bombs are makeshift devices that also have been used in recent years by insurgents in Colombia. Propane tanks are ubiquitous in Iraq, where the fuel is widely used for cooking, making it hard for security forces to stop production of the bombs.
U.S. military officials in Baghdad have noted the use of rocket-propelled bombs in press releases in recent months. But they have not publicly discussed their use or their concerns about the weapons at length because most of the information about them is classified, U.S. military officials said.
"IRAM attacks could be very tragic against us," said Col. William B. Hickman, the commander of the 2nd Brigade Combat Team of the 101st Airborne Division, which operates in northwestern Baghdad. "We take them very seriously."
As the number of U.S. soldiers in Baghdad has begun to drop with the end of the "surge" of additional forces, U.S. military officials are placing a higher percentage of their troops in small outposts in densely populated neighborhoods. U.S. military officials say this is crucial to ensure the continued training of Iraq's security forces, win the trust of the capital's residents and improve local governance. But deployments in small outposts -- some are manned by just one platoon -- also have made soldiers more vulnerable.
To counter the threat posed by rocket-propelled bombs, soldiers have stepped up patrols around outposts, fortified their buildings and offered tens of thousands of dollars for information about networks that use the weapon.
The weapon first emerged as a threat here last fall and has become a top concern in recent months following a series of deadly attacks.
Most such attacks have been carried out during the day and some have been videotaped and aired on the satellite television station operated by Hezbollah, a Lebanese militia and political movement. U.S. military officials said they have found Iranian-made 107mm rockets at some of the blast sites, which they said suggests the weapons -- or parts -- may have come from Iran. BAGHDAD, July 9 -- Suspected Shiite militiamen have begun using powerful rocket-propelled bombs to attack U.S. military outposts in re... more -
Lieberman to Google: Remove terror videos on YouTube
Joe Liberman demands that Google remove all videos on YouTube of US troops being killed by Iraqi insurgents.
-
Iraq wants right to veto US operations
Iraq is insisting on the right to veto any US military operations throughout its territory under a "status of forces" agreement currently being negotiated between Baghdad and Washington, according to a senior member of the Iraqi government.
The agreement will last for a maximum of two years and can be terminated by either side with six months' notice, Hussain al-Shahristani, Iraq's oil minister, said.
His remarks come amid intensive closed-door negotiations between the Iraqi and US governments which have led to complaints in the US Congress as well as Iraq that the Bush administration is tying the next US president's hands by seeking to maintain long-term bases in Iraq for possible attacks on Iran and other neighbouring states.
But Shahristani insisted: "Neither the constitution nor our people will allow any violation of our sovereignty. Obviously foreign troops on Iraqi soil carrying out operations without the prior consent and approval of the elected government is a violation.
"Any arrests, any operations internally or externally against our neighbours without prior agreement of the Iraqi government will be considered a violation ... Land and sea movements and air space is all part of Iraq's sovereignty."
The status of forces agreement, known as Sofa, will flesh out a more general "strategic framework" pact on all aspects of the US-Iraqi relationship that is also being worked out secretly. The two agreements are seen as "legacy issues" allowing Bush to claim success and a legitimation of the US occupation when the UN mandate runs out at the end of this year. Iraq is insisting on the right to veto any US military operations throughout its territory under a "status of forces" agreem... more -
Troops pour into south Iraqi city
Iraqi troops and police backed by US forces have been sent to the southern city of Amara in a fresh operation against Shia gunmen, officials say.
Iraqi army tanks have been patrolling major streets in the city and the security forces set up checkpoints.
Hundreds were reported killed in March in battles which began in Basra and spread to Baghdad and elsewhere.
A main militia leader, Moqtada Sadr, has ordered his Mehdi Army followers to observe a ceasefire, but the authorities say attacks by Shia militiamen have continued. Helicopters dropped leaflets on Amara, the capital of Maysan province, urging residents to stay at home and not to interfere with the operation.
A spokesman for US forces declined to give details other than saying it was led and planned by the Iraqis. Iraqi troops and police backed by US forces have been sent to the southern city of Amara in a fresh operation against Shia gunmen, off... more -
America's Medicated Army
The new issue of Time magazine has an interesting article about antidepressant usage by the U.S. troops. This is an excerpt from the article:
"For the first time in history, a sizable and growing number of U.S. combat troops are taking daily doses of antidepressants to calm nerves strained by repeated and lengthy tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. The medicines are intended not only to help troops keep their cool but also to enable the already strapped Army to preserve its most precious resource: soldiers on the front lines. Data contained in the Army's fifth Mental Health Advisory Team report indicate that, according to an anonymous survey of U.S. troops taken last fall, about 12% of combat troops in Iraq and 17% of those in Afghanistan are taking prescription antidepressants or sleeping pills to help them cope. Escalating violence in Afghanistan and the more isolated mission have driven troops to rely more on medication there than in Iraq, military officials say."
"At a Pentagon that keeps statistics on just about everything, there is no central clearinghouse for this kind of data, and the Army hasn't consistently asked about prescription-drug use, which makes it difficult to track. Given the traditional stigma associated with soldiers seeking mental help, the survey, released in March, probably underestimates antidepressant use. But if the Army numbers reflect those of other services — the Army has by far the most troops deployed to the war zones — about 20,000 troops in Afghanistan and Iraq were on such medications last fall. The Army estimates that authorized drug use splits roughly fifty-fifty between troops taking antidepressants — largely the class of drugs that includes Prozac and Zoloft — and those taking prescription sleeping pills like Ambien."
"In some ways, the prescriptions may seem unremarkable. Generals, history shows, have plied their troops with medicinal palliatives at least since George Washington ordered rum rations at Valley Forge. During World War II, the Nazis fueled their blitzkrieg into France and Poland with the help of an amphetamine known as Pervitin. The U.S. Army also used amphetamines during the Vietnam War." The new issue of Time magazine has an interesting article about antidepressant usage by the U.S. troops. This is an excerpt from the a... more
-
related topics
US Troops
Contributors (182)
US Troops
