Skip to main content

Not quite forgotten

When the Coalition of the Willing "invaded" Iraq it was more than happy to "use" locals as interpreters and in other activities to assist the foreign forces.  

Now the war is over - well, as far as the West is concerned - those very countries which relied on local Iraqis have, in effect, abandoned them.    Not everyone, though.

"I serve on the board of the International Institute of New England, an organization that helps settle refugees in the Boston area. In early 2007, we heard that our organization would soon be aiding a flood of Iraqi refugees. Many would be men and women who had worked directly for the United States government while we were at war in their country. They were Iraqis who threw their lot in with the Americans, serving as translators and guides, administrative staff members and procurement experts. But as the conflict dragged on, radical militias began to target the Iraqi workers and their families.

Very few of these Iraqi allies were receiving any help from the United States. In Boston, a trickle of refugees arrived, but not the flood we had imagined — and most had no United States affiliation. In Washington a group of politicians, including Barack Obama, then a very eloquent presidential candidate, campaigned for “keeping faith” with the Iraqis who kept faith with us. I hoped, as did many Iraqi workers whose lives were in danger, that an Obama presidency would usher in an airlift rescue for America’s Iraqi employees. Britain and Denmark, among other allies, had already offered their own Iraqi workers a path to safety. President Bill Clinton demonstrated in 1996 that something like this could be done, when he ordered an airlift of 6,600 Iraqi Kurds to Guam for processing to be resettled in the United States."


Go, here, to The New York Times to view a film and read the full piece.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Pentagon's eye-popping spending....and waste!

Only a gigantic bureaucracy could get away with spending of such dimensions - and the amazing waste involved in part of that ginormous spend.   Think US Pentagon..... "From spending $150 million on private villas for a handful of personnel in Afghanistan to blowing $2.7 billion on an air surveillance balloon that doesn’t work, the latest revelations of waste at the Pentagon are just the most recent howlers in a long line of similar stories stretching back at least five decades.  Other hot-off-the-presses examples would include the Army’s purchase of helicopter gears worth $500 each for $8,000 each and the accumulation of billions of dollars' worth of weapons components that will never be used. And then there’s the one that would have to be everyone’s favorite Pentagon waste story: the spending of $50,000 to investigate the bomb-detecting capabilities of African elephants. (And here’s a shock: they didn’t turn out to be that great!) The elephant research, of course, represe...

Video: Israel demolishing a Bedouin village

From Mondoweiss - Israel's supposed "most moral army in the world", the IDF, engaged in immoral, and according to international law, illegal action.... "Israeli forces have demolished every home in the Bedouin village of Khirbet Taha in the northern West Bank district of Nablus during three separate demolitions since the start of the year. Unlike most Bedouin villages, the residents in Khirbet Taha own their own land. However that land falls in Area C, territory in the occupied West Bank under full Israeli control. The village’s only school was also destroyed, leaving children to study in a dilapidated 100-year-old mosque — the only structure left standing in the village. According the United Nations, Israel has demolished half as many Palestinian buildings in the first few months of 2016, as they had in all of 2015. In February alone, the UN found that more Palestinians homes were destroyed than any other month since 2009, when the organization began its docum...

What does a no-fly zone actually mean?

As some countries consider imposing a no-fly zone in relation to Libya, the pertinent question must be what does that mean and entail? FP provides the answers: "It depends on the circumstances. There are two primary types of no-fly zones imposed by air forces. The first is imposed by one military over another, while the two sides are at war. In practice, this type of no-fly zone amounts to a warning from one side that it will engage the other's aircraft if they are spotted in a given territory. The second type, more applicable to the situation in Libya, is when an outside power possessing overwhelming air superiority restricts flights over a given country in order to discourage an internal conflict or humanitarian crisis. This is a relatively recent tactic, which was used most famously in Bosnia and Iraq during the 1990s. No-fly zones are often a compromise in situations where the international community is demanding a response to ongoing violence, but full military interven...