themcglynn.com

21 May

United States Wars, News and Casualties

United States Wars, News and Casualties

Damn The War Criminals,

Bush,Cheney,Rice,Rumsfeld,Wolfowitz, Powell and Blair from England

War News

GUARD: UK arms exports are still playing a central role in Yemen’s humanitarian crisis

As MPs thank Jeremy Hunt for his efforts in securing peace in the war-torn country, the UK’s attempts to justify its weapons sales are ever more absurd

A boy looks over destroyed houses the day after a Saudi-led airstrike in Sanaa

A boy looks over destroyed houses the day after a Saudi-led airstrike in Sana’a that killed at least seven Yemenis, including four children, and left more than 50 wounded. Photograph: Yahya Arhab/EPA

After more than 1,500 days of war in Yemen, in the midst of the world’s worst humanitarian disaster, reports of the Houthi withdrawal from Hodeidah port are a welcome but extremely fragile development, surrounded by suspicion and fear.

A Houthi pullout from Hodeidah, Saleef and Ras Issa ports would be one step in the implementation of the Stockholm agreement, but a very small step. There are much wider conflict dynamics to be addressed before we can talk confidently of moves towards peace.

At this point in the conflict, the chair of the all-party parliamentary group on Yemen, Keith Vaz MP, has chosen to write to the foreign secretary, Jeremy Hunt, to thank him for his efforts to secure peace in Yemen. The letter, co-sponsored by MPs Andrew Mitchell and Alison Thewliss, asks the government to “use every available tool to put pressure on our allies in the UAE and Saudi Arabia to bring about an end to the conflict”.

Curiously, at no point does the letter mention the uncomfortable fact of UK arms exports to the Saudi-led coalition, which have played a central role in creating the humanitarian disaster to which the government claims to be responding.

The UK government emphasises its largesse in budgeting £120m in humanitarian assistance to Yemen in 2018/19, and lauds its role in the peace process, including the Hodeidah developments.

These claims have become increasingly visible as domestic criticism has grown of UK arms sales to the Saudi-led coalition – including a legal challenge by Campaign Against Arms Trade – and other European states have adopted more restrictive policies. The UK is now out of step with most other EU member states bar France and its efforts to justify its position are becoming ever more absurd, to the point where Jeremy Hunt claimed at the end of March that it would be “morally bankrupt” not to sell weapons to the Saudis.

The key problem with the government’s position is that targeting the civilian population, which is illegal under international law, appears to be a core component of the Saudi-led coalition’s strategy in Yemen. Excessive civilian harm in the war is not an accidental side-effect of an otherwise effective military strategy.

So the effort to tally the balance sheet between arms on the one side and diplomacy combined with humanitarian aid on the other simply cannot work. No amount of funding can compensate for a military strategy that relies on harming the civilian population physically, economically and psychologically.

The government has been told this. UN experts note that Saudi-led coalition airstrikes have caused most civilian casualties in Yemen, and conclude that members of the Saudi-led coalition “have committed acts that may, subject to determination by an independent and competent court, amount to international crimes”.

The Yemen Safe Passage Group (a group that includes former ambassadors and former defence attaches) has told Jeremy Hunt that economic blockades and the military targeting of civilians are illegal under international law – and yet central to Saudi strategy. They too support calls for a suspension of UK arms sales until a sustainable peace has been achieved.

When former defence attaches and an anti-arms trade campaign group are making the same call, you’d think the government might stop and listen. Nonetheless, the government continues to mobilise ambiguity and doubt about what is happening in Yemen in order to argue that the risks associated with weapons sales are not “clear” – and hence that there is no reason to suspend them.

If the parliamentary group on Yemen wants to encourage Jeremy Hunt to use “every available tool” to bring the conflict to an end, that should include a suspension of arms sales to the Saudi-led coalition.

Indeed, in a report published almost exactly one year ago, the APPG itself concluded that “the UK should, based on current available evidence, immediately suspend arms sales to all parties that have been accused of breaching international law”.

A recent Dispatches programme suggested that Saudi bombing missions would have to stop within seven to 14 days if engineering support were halted. The UK government is in a position to force the warring parties to the negotiating table by withdrawing material, diplomatic and symbolic support for the coalition.

By omitting this from their call for action, signatories to the APPG letter are diluting the force of their good intentions and throwing away possibly the best chance to force a change in the dynamics of the war.

And in a context where the parliamentary committees responsible for scrutinising government arms export policy won’t even put arms sales to Saudi on the agenda for their latest inquiry, and where Tories are content to let the Labour chair of the committees take the heat for the committees’ failure, it is a bad sign for accountability in British politics as well as for Yemen that the APPG is in congratulatory mode.

Anna Stavrianakis is a senior lecturer at the University of Sussex

GUARD: Citizens committee puts Saudi arms sales under scrutiny

Group of MPs and experts established after select committee’s failure to investigate trade

Saudi Arabian troops in Yemen’s southern port city of Aden.

Saudi Arabian troops in Yemen’s southern port city of Aden. Photograph: Faisal Al Nasser/Reuters

The failure of Britain’s “broken select committee system” to mount a new inquiry into UK arms sales to Saudi Arabia has prompted a group of MPs, arms sales analysts and former army officers to form its own citizens committee to argue against the multibillion-pound weapons contracts.

Nearly half of UK arms sales go to Saudi Arabia, which is involved in an intractable five-year civil war in Yemen where international law has been violated by both sides.

The new citizens committee on arms sales (CCAS), meeting in Westminster on Wednesday, is due to take evidence from Yemeni human rights campaigners speaking from the capital Sana’a as well as a former UK brigadier to the Saudi capital, Riyadh, who has previously claimed the UK is breaking its own rules by selling arms for use in Yemen.

The meeting came as MPs from the all-party parliamentary group on Yemen wrote to the foreign secretary, Jeremy Hunt, imploring him “to use every available tool to put pressure on our allies in the UAE and Saudi Arabia to bring about an end to the conflict. The UK has a strong relationship with Saudi Arabia and this must be used”.

One of the academics giving evidence to the CCAS is Anna Stavrianakis, a senior lecturer in international relations at the University of Sussex. She said: “Our parliamentary system of scrutiny is deeply flawed if options for ending the exports of these specific arms is not the subject of a current inquiry.”

She pointed out that former brigadier John Deverell, who is due to address the meeting, had said it was complete nonsense to suggest if the UK ended arms sales, Saudi could simply purchase the arms elsewhere, one of the claims most frequently made in defence of continued sales.

She added the official parliamentary committee on arms export controls (CAEC), drawn from four other select committees – defence, foreign, trade and international development – had refused to hold a specific inquiry into Saudi arms sales, favouring instead generic technical inquiries into UK arms export controls legislation. Government evidence to the generic inquiry is five paragraphs long.

Lloyd Russell-Moyle, a Labour MP and member of the CAEC, said: “It’s an open secret within CAEC that it is broken and has been prevented from holding the government to account.

“CAEC is meant to ensure that the government follows arms export control law, which is clearly being violated by Saudi Arabia on several grounds such as targeting civilians in Yemen and diverting arms to its proxies in the region. It’s not just Saudi though; the government is licensing powerful dual-use mass-surveillance kit to autocrats around the world.”

He called for a new arms control committee to be established with an elected chairman.

The CCAS is not entirely an academic exercise, because the Foreign Office is known to recognise that a sharp shift in UK policy to Saudi Arabia is inevitable if Jeremy Corbyn forms a government after the next election. One civil servant said: “UK Middle East policy will be turned upside down. It would be remiss if we, as civil servants, were not planning for it now.”

Labour’s front bench peace and disarmament spokesman, Fabian Hamilton, has recently urged the UK to boycott the G20 summit of world leaders if it is held next year as planned in Riyadh.

There is also frustration that the CAEC’s chairman, the Labour MP Graham Jones, represents a constituency, Hyndburn, in which arms production forms a backbone of many of his constituents’ livelihoods. Unlike most select committee chairs, Jones was appointed by fellow members rather than elected to his post in a ballot of all MPs. He argues his committee is looking for gaps in the ways the arms export control regime operates and for greater transparency.

The backdrop to the assembly on Wednesday includes a long-awaited court of appeal verdict into whether UK government is abiding by its own commitment not to supply weapons where there is a clear risk that they might be used in serious violations of international humanitarian law. The judges’ ruling is expected by the summer.

REU: Iran’s Rouhani rejects talks with Washington

DUBAI/LONDON (Reuters) – Iranian President Hassan Rouhani rejected talks with the United States on Tuesday, after President Donald Trump said Iran would call and ask for negotiations “if and when they are ever ready”.

Tehran and Washington have escalated rhetoric against each other in recent weeks as the United States has tightened sanctions with what it says is the goal of pushing Iran to make concessions beyond the terms of its 2015 nuclear deal.

Trump withdrew the United States a year ago from the deal between Iran and global powers, under which Tehran curbed its uranium enrichment capacity, a potential pathway to a nuclear bomb, and won sanctions relief in return.

Trump restored U.S. sanctions on Iran last year and extended them this month, ordering all countries to halt imports of Iranian oil or face sanctions of their own. Iran has repeatedly rejected any further negotiations as long as the United States remains outside the nuclear pact.

“Today’s situation is not suitable for talks and our choice is resistance only,” state news agency IRNA quoted Rouhani as saying.

Trump said on Monday that Iran would be met with “great force” if it attempted anything against U.S. interests in the Middle East. He said reports Washington was trying to set up talks were false, but “Iran will call us if and when they are ever ready”.

Critics have accused Trump of sending mixed signals. Last week three U.S. officials told Reuters that Trump had told his top advisers he does not want war with Iran.

Iran has portrayed the hot and cold rhetoric as evidence Trump is being goaded into war against his better judgment by hardline aides such as National Security Adviser John Bolton.

“Right after threatening Iran, they were forced to say they do not seek a war,” Rouhani said in televised remarks on Tuesday. “Iranians will never bow to a bully.”

REU: Fleeing into the fields, a family runs from Idlib attacks

ATMEH, Syria (Reuters) – Ali al-Ahmed and his family fled on foot through the fields when the bombs began raining down on their house in northwestern Syria, escaping a major offensive by the Syrian army and its Russian allies.

Ali, 25, a displaced Syrian farmer from the al-Ahmed family, holds his daughter as he sits with other family members in an olive grove in the town of Atmeh, Idlib province, Syria May 16, 2019. REUTERS/Khalil Ashawi

“In the early hours of the morning, the artillery stopped. Then the warplanes and helicopters came out,” Ahmed, a 25-year-old farmer, said, recalling his last hours in the village of Habeet which he fled with his family of five dozen.

Scattered during their frantic escape from the village, the family are now reunited in a makeshift shelter in an olive grove near the border with Turkey. They are among some of the 180,000 people uprooted by the military escalation.

It marks the biggest upsurge in violence since last summer between President Bashar al-Assad and his insurgent enemies in Idlib province and a belt of territory around it.

At least dozens of people have been killed; the U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs says unconfirmed reports indicate more than 170 civilians have lost their lives.

The night before Ali’s family left the village, they hid indoors or in basements. They feared moving around the village even to check whether other inhabitants were still alive.

Shelling hit his small truck, which they had planned to escape in. “The warplane was flying overhead,” he said. “So we stood there watching the truck burn.”

Then they set off through the fields: some of the relatives ran on foot. Others hopped into cars with their neighbors. A few stayed behind.

“For three days, we didn’t know anything about each other,” Ali said.

One of his neighbors managed to run away only to be hit when he reached the main highway, where his wife and children were killed.

Read Full Article>>

REU: Hundreds of U.S. lawmakers ask Trump administration for Syria strategy

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Hundreds of members of the U.S. Congress signed a letter to President Donald Trump on Monday arguing that the United States should remain engaged with the conflict in Syria, saying they were “deeply concerned” about extremist groups in the country.

“As some of our closest allies in the region are being threatened, American leadership and support are as crucial as ever,” said the letter, signed by nearly 400 of the 535 members of the House of Representatives and Senate.

Many U.S. lawmakers, Trump’s fellow Republicans as well as Democrats, have been deeply concerned about Syria policy since December, when Trump confounded his own national security team and allies with a surprise decision to withdraw all 2,000 U.S. troops from Syria.

Trump backtracked in February, agreeing to leave a small U.S. presence to help keep pressure on Islamic State during what the U.S. military believes will be a critical stabilization phase in Syria.

The lead signers of the letter were the Democratic chairman and ranking Republican of the House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee, Representatives Eliot Engel and Mike McCaul, and the Republican chairman and ranking Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Senators Jim Risch and Bob Menendez.

Among other things, the letter urges Trump to increase pressure on Iran and Russia with respect to their activities in Syria and increase pressure on the heavily armed Shi’ite Hezbollah movement, Iran’s Lebanese ally.

REU: Italy unions refuse to load Saudi ship in protest over Yemen war

 

Protesters and workers on strike prevent a Saudi ship Bahri Yanbu, that was prevented by French rights group ACAT from loading a weapons cargo at the French port of Le Havre due to concerns they might be used against civilians in Yemen, from loading cargo at the Port of Genoa, Italy May 20, 2019. REUTERS/Massimo Pinca

GENOA, Italy (Reuters) – Italian unions refused on Monday to load electricity generators onto a Saudi Arabian ship with weapons on board in a protest against the war in Yemen.

The Bahri-Yanbu vessel loaded arms in the Belgian city of Antwerp earlier this month, but was prevented from picking up another consignment of weapons in the French port of Le Havre following protests by humanitarian groups.

Rights campaigners say the weapons contravene a U.N. treaty because they might be used against civilians in Yemen, where a Saudi-led military coalition is battling the Iran-backed Houthis in a war that has killed thousands.

Unions in Genoa had tried to have the boat banned from Italy, but the ship docked just after dawn, met by a handful of protesters who gathered on the quay.

“No to war” read one of their banners.

Union workers refused to load two generators aboard the boat, saying that although they were registered for civilian use, they could be instead directed to the Yemen war effort.

AP: Russia raises alarm about Islamic extremists in Afghanistan

MOSCOW (AP) — Russia’s top security chief on Tuesday raised alarm about Islamic extremists massing on Afghanistan’s northern border.

Alexander Bortnikov, chief of the main Russian intelligence agency FSB, said on a visit to Tajikistan that some 5,000 fighters of an Islamic State group affiliate have gathered in areas bordering on former Soviet states in Central Asia, saying that most of them fought alongside IS in Syria.

Bortnikov, in comments carried by Russian news agencies, called for tighter border control to prevent a spillover.

Russia has a significant presence in Central Asia including several military bases.

The IS affiliate in Afghanistan emerged in 2014 and refers to itself as the Khorasan Province, an ancient term for an area that includes parts of Afghanistan, Iran and Central Asia. It has pledged allegiance to the IS group in Iraq and Syria but consists mainly of disgruntled former Taliban and other insurgents from South and Central Asia.

Russia has been expressing concern about the IS insurgency spilling over into Central Asia for several years. But some experts say the Kremlin is exaggerating the number of extremists to justify its outreach to the Taliban. In recent years, Russia has emerged as an influential power broker in Afghanistan where it fought a disastrous war in the 1980s. Russian officials have been mediating between feuding factions, and even spoke for lifting international sanctions against the Taliban.

The Taliban has waged bitter battles against the followers of the Khorasan Province, most often in eastern Nangarhar province but also in the north of Afghanistan.

Bush’s Five Big Lies That Led to the Iraq Quagmire

These are the five lies Bush told that Ralph Nader documented to impeach him.

  • Weapons of Mass Destruction. The weapons have still not been found. Nader emphasized, “Until the 1991 Gulf War, Saddam Hussein was our government’s anti-communist ally in the Middle East. We also used him to keep Iran at bay. In so doing, in the 1980s under Reagan and the first Bush, corporations were licensed by the Department of Commerce to export the materials for chemical and biological weapons that President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney later accused him of having.” Those weapons were destroyed after the Gulf War. George W. Bush’s favorite chief weapons inspector, David Kay, after returning from Iraq and leading a large team of inspectors and spending nearly half a billion dollars told the president We were wrong. See: David Kay testimony before Senate Armed Services Committee, 2004-01-28.Tyler Drumheller, the former chief of the CIA (Central Intelligence Agency) ’s Europe division, revealed that in the fall of 2002, George W. Bush, Vice President Cheney, then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice and others were told by CIA Director George Tenet that Iraq’s foreign minister — who agreed to act as a spy for the United States — had reported that Iraq had no active weapons of mass destruction program.

  • Iraq Ties to Al Qaeda. The White House made this claim even though the CIA and FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation) repeatedly told the Administration that there was no tie between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda. They were mortal enemies — one secular, the other fundamentalist.

  • Saddam Hussein was a Threat to the United States. In fact, Saddam was a tottering dictator, with an antiquated, fractured army of low morale and with Kurdish enemies in Northern Iraq and Shiite adversaries in the South of Iraq. He did not even control the air space over most of Iraq.

  • Saddam Hussein was a Threat to his Neighbors. In fact, Iraq was surrounded by countries with far superior military forces. Turkey, Iran and Israel were all capable of obliterating any aggressive move by the Iraqi dictator.

  • The Liberation of the Iraqi People. There are brutal dictators throughout the world, many supported over the years by Washington, whose people need liberation from their leaders. This is not a persuasive argument since for Iraq, it’s about oil. In fact, the occupation of Iraq by the United States is a magnet for increasing violence, anarchy and insurrection

Recent Casualties:

Color Denotes Today’s Confirmation

DOD Identifies Army Casualty

The Department of Defense announced today the death of a soldier who was supporting Operation Freedom’s Sentinel.

Spc. Miguel L. Holmes, 22, from Hinesville, Georgia, died May 6, 2019, in Nangarhar Province, Afghanistan, of wounds sustained from a non-combat incident. The incident is under investigation.

Holmes was assigned to 1st Battalion, 118th Field Artillery Regiment, 48th Infantry Brigade Combat Team, Savannah, Georgia.

DOD Identifies Army Casualty

The Department of Defense announced today the death of a soldier who was supporting Operation Inherent Resolve.

Pfc. Michael A. Thomason, 28, from Lincoln Park, Michigan, died April 29, 2019, in Kobani, Syria, of wounds sustained from a non-combat incident.

Thomason was assigned to 2nd Battalion, 327th Infantry Regiment, 1st Brigade Combat Team, 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault), Fort Campbell, Kentucky.

DOD Identifies Army Casualty

The Department of Defense announced today the death of a soldier who was supporting Operation Inherent Resolve.

Spc. Michael T. Osorio, 20, from Horseshoe Bend, Idaho, died April 23, 2019, in Taji, Iraq, in a non combat related incident. The incident is under investigation.

Osorio was assigned to 4th Squadron, 10th Cavalry Regiment, 3rd Armored Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division, Fort Carson, Colorado.

Save The Children Organization

Save the Children is the world’s leading independent organisation for children and has been working with families, communities and local authorities in Iraq since 1991, leading NGOs in general relief and development programs.Save the Children is currently responding to the needs of internally displaced persons (IDP) and the Syrian refugees in Iraq, in camps and non-camp settings. Our goal is for children in Iraq to be supported in raising their voices and attaining their rights, especially the right to participate in decisions affecting their lives. They should have access to quality education, health and protection services. We are increasing access to community based services that protect, educate and improve quality of life for children. We are ensuring that there is an increased participation of boys and girls in age appropriate activities and services. We are ensuring that children benefit from government actions that create an environment of awareness and accountability to uphold child rights. We are also developing new resources and innovative practices that support our work for children and youth.In Iraq, Save the Children’s interventions include Child Protection, Education, Food Security and Livelihoods, Shelter and Water Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH), reaching vulnerble children and families in northern and central Iraq. Save the Children’s programs are implemented through field offices in Erbil, Dohuk, Sulaymaniyah, Kirkuk and Kalar, with a country office located in Erbil.

Visit Save The Children Organization>>

Iraq War Child

Please Never Forget.

Share
20 May

And Yemenis are paying the price.

Nicholas Kristof

By Nicholas Kristof

“Washington supplies weaponry and intelligence that allow this war to drag on indefinitely. American policy is to support the starvation of Yemeni children because they are ruled by a faction with ties to Iran.

This should not be a partisan issue. President Barack Obama backed the Saudis in Yemen, and President Trump has doubled down on that support.”

A neighborhood in Sana, Yemen, a day after it was hit by a Saudi-led airstrike on Thursday.CreditCreditYahya Arhab/European Pressphoto Agency, via Shutterstock

Is America headed for a war involving Iran?

Actually, we’re already mired in one. It’s the unconscionable war in Yemen, where we are complicit in the deaths of almost a quarter million Yemenis so far, many of them children who have starved to death.

Just a few days ago, bombs (perhaps American made) killed four Yemeni children. Every 12 minutes, another child in Yemen dies.

Yemen is a complicated place with many bad actors, but here’s the bottom line: Because of our enmity toward Iran and our bond with Saudi Arabia, we are helping to starve and bomb Yemeni children.

With tensions in the region high, Saudi Arabia is now encouraging the United States to escalate the hostilities and order a military strike on Iran. “They must be hit hard,” Arab News, a newspaper with ties to the Saudi government, declared on Thursday.

Beware. That was the Saudi line as well in 2015 when Saudi Arabia’s Mad Prince, Mohammed bin Salman, intervened in Yemen. He wanted to show his toughness and assumed that his armed forces would crush an Iran-backed faction there called the Houthis.

Instead, the Saudi intervention resulted in Iran gaining influence in Yemen, while the Saudis have helped cause what the United Nations calls the world’s worst humanitarian crisis. With talk of American conflict with Iran again in the air, Yemen should be a reminder that wars are easy to get into, harder to exit.

It is Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates that drop the bombs on Yemen, but Washington supplies weaponry and intelligence that allow this war to drag on indefinitely. American policy is to support the starvation of Yemeni children because they are ruled by a faction with ties to Iran.

This should not be a partisan issue. President Barack Obama backed the Saudis in Yemen, and President Trump has doubled down on that support.

Most presidential candidates (with the exception of Senator Bernie Sanders, who has been a strong opponent of the Yemen war) don’t mention Yemen much, and it receives little public attention. I’m writing about it partly because I was able to slip through the Saudi blockade into Yemen late last year, and I’m haunted by seeing my tax dollars go to help starve children to death.

Congress passed a bipartisan measure to end U.S. involvement in the war, but Trump vetoed it last month. A recent U.N. study calculated that if the war ends this year, it will have claimed 233,000 lives, and that if it continues until 2022, it will claim a total of 482,000 lives. If it lasts until 2030, the U.N. estimated, it will cause 1.8 million deaths.

“Every day things get worse,” Lise Grande, the U.N. humanitarian coordinator in Yemen, told me this month. “There isn’t anyone working today in Yemen who doesn’t believe that the only solution to this terrible, senseless crisis is to end the conflict. We have to face the fact that if fighting drags on, Yemen will be a failed state, unstable for generations.”

“Nearly every family has either lost someone, is hungry, has children out of school or is battling cholera,” Grande said. “It’s hard to understand why the lives of so many innocent people seem to mean so little.”

The Mad Prince’s rash interference in Yemen not only backfired and helped Iran, but a CNN investigation also found that it led Saudi Arabia to give American weapons to fighters linked to Al Qaeda. The chaos led to the cholera outbreak, which worsened recently, with more than 300,000 suspected cases so far in 2019.

Iran and the Houthis have also behaved badly, but that’s a poor excuse for Americans to support war crimes against Yemeni children.

Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are no longer enthusiastic about the Yemen war, but they don’t want to leave and give Iran and the Houthis a victory. So it’s difficult to see how the war ends unless the U.S. forces the issue.

Trump has said that if the United States doesn’t sell weapons to Saudi Arabia, then Russia or China will. But Saudi Arabia needs American spare parts, and it also buys U.S. weapons partly for the implicit security guarantee that comes with them. No other country can provide that security blanket.

“The Saudi military is dependent on American spare parts, logistics and munitions,” noted Bruce Riedel, a Middle East expert at the Brookings Institution. “If Washington uses its enormous leverage, the Saudis have no choice but to end the war.”

We are drifting toward an increased risk of a collision with Iran, and the U.S. Navy in particular worries about an accident in the Persian Gulf that escalates. In 1988, in a similar period of tensions, the United States mistakenly shot down an Iranian passenger plane, killing 290 people on board.

So of course let’s work to reduce the risk of a war directly with Iran. But let’s also not forget this old, shameful war outside Iran’s borders: It’s time to end American support for the bombing and starvation of children in Yemen.

Share
20 May

A Foreign Perspective, News and Analyses

A Foreign Perspective, News and Analyses

English Online International Newspapers

Nearly all of these are English-edition daily newspapers. These sites have interesting editorials and essays, and many have links to other good news sources. We try to limit this list to those sites which are regularly updated, reliable, with a high percentage of “up” time.

Recommended:

Irish Examiner>>

France 24>>

Spiegel>>

The Age>>

The Observer>>

Strache’s Defense The Right-Wing Ideology Exposed

© Bernhard Riedmann/ DER SPIEGEL

A Commentary by

An Austrian far-right politician got caught red-handed. Or was he? Not in his worldview, as became clear during his resignation speech. The right-wing worldview holds that if you’re fighting a vast and dangerous enemy, anything goes.

Strache will be Strache.

After the entire world watched as he tried to lay the groundwork for installing a Hungary-esque media landscape in his country with Russian help, he complained in his Saturday press conference of a campaign “from abroad.”

In an attempt to completely distort the situation, he expressed outrage about the hidden cameras that filmed him — without addressing the obvious: That the video would have been of no interest at all if he hadn’t spoken so clearly about his plans for reshaping Austria. The only source for the ignominy is he, himself. He built the boat, and he sank in it.

And yet, his entire statement of resignation was an attempt to share responsibility and assign blame to others.

He named some of them by name, such as the Israeli political consultant Tal Silberstein and the German satirist Jan Böhmermann. Mostly, though, he relied on innuendo. He spoke of networks and groups to ensure that it all sounded sufficiently ominous — a horizon full of storm clouds in which all those who still supported him could see whatever they wanted.

The entire power of the extreme right depends heavily on such projections. A reason must be identified for why the system must be destroyed – and it is simply much easier to do so when playing the role of the victim.

Only after one can prove — by pointing to a hostile power — that the paths hitherto relied on for resolving conflict and finding compromise are unfair and threatening can there be the kind of extralegal state of emergency that justifies the most extreme of measures. Establishing the threat of a covert, omnipotent threat is the best way to mobilize such energies and mitigate scruples.

Following World War I in Germany, this function was fulfilled by the so-called Dolchstosslegende, or stab-in-the-back myth, the idea being that Germany would have won the war if the soldiers hadn’t been betrayed by the leftist press, leftist politicians and Jews back home. For decades afterward, the right wing in Germany saw the Jews, the Communists and the Social Democrats as the agents of what they believed was an underestimated threat. That ultimately gave birth to the irrational hatred that fueled the most enormous crime in the history of humanity: the Holocaust.

Times have changed, as have the political movements. But the strategies used to justify radical positions remain extremely similar.

They do not depend on the exchange of reason and argument; they do not rely on open discourse. Rather, they depend solely on the mechanics of power. And once you get rid of critical journalists, according to this mechanical worldview, you are also freed of criticism. The threat, though, never dissipates. Furthermore, the fact that the right wing has had success at the polls and has been voted into government in many European countries is, according to this logic, by no means proof of the fairness of the system. Just as the failure of right-wing plans, such as Brexit, is no proof of their unsuitability. Everything is linked to larger, hidden powers that must be reacted to. It’s not about shaping a political plan and choosing between political visions. Rather, it is about protection and imperative.

In the video, Strache speaks of the idealism of the political donors who support him — people who “don’t want Austria to be Islamisized.” More than that: “They don’t want their children and grandchildren to be destroyed.” But the reference to a need for protecting children, and the parallel need of protecting women from foreign sex criminals, is not meant as a concrete political goal that could then be solved with a policy of more police or other measures. Rather, it is merely a reference to a threat facing humanity itself and the ongoing battle that leaves the right wing with little choice.

Right-Wing Inferiority Fantasy

That’s why the factually incorrect theory of the “great replacement” — the idea that Europe’s white, Christian population is intentionally being gradually replaced with Arabs and sub-Saharan Africans — espoused by the French right-wing intellectual Renaud Camus is so effective: It places the majority in the position of the minority. And every single dark-skinned person strolling through Paris, every döner kebab bistro and every mosque then becomes proof of this invented invasion. But there is an additional component as well: Every incumbent politician is an accomplice, part of an alleged elite that is gathered in backrooms hammering out deals like the UN’s Global Compact for Migration as part of the effort to replace the current population with Africans. The resulting scenario could hardly be more perfect: The presumed alliance of all people living in Africa with all of those who bear political responsibility in Europe results in the classic, right-wing inferiority fantasy.

This idea, albeit in slightly watered-down form, has long since become part of parliamentary debates in Europe. Alice Weidel, floor leader for the right-wing Alternative for Germany party in the German parliament, for example, warned in a speech marking the anniversary of the country’s constitution that the ongoing migration crisis would “result in the long-lasting and dramatic transformation of the sovereign and of the people.” The subtext is clear: How is it possible to speak of a fair system when even the state itself is being modified by the migrant-tolerant elite?

Such a standpoint leaves those who hold it with no choice. The self-described minority is faced with such dominant powers and constraints that conforming to the conventional practice of politics and obeying the rules seems naïve, if not traitorous. And that is why no proof is needed for such ideas. Indeed, the entire process of seeking truth in an open society is seen as a secret pillar of evil powers. The media, in this reading, are just the covert agent of their owners or some other power. There are, in fact, no people, only powers.

Read Full Article>>

Children join Extinction Rebellion weedkiller protest – in pictures

Experts agree that global heating of 4C by 2100 is a real possibility. The effects of such a rise will be extreme and require a drastic shift in the way we live

Crosses topple in the cemetery at Quinhagak in the Yukon delta, Alaska. Permafrost in the region is thawing. Photograph: Mark Ralston/AFP/Getty Images

Drowned cities; stagnant seas; intolerable heatwaves; entire nations uninhabitable… and more than 11 billion humans. A four-degree-warmer world is the stuff of nightmares and yet that’s where we’re heading in just decades.

While governments mull various carbon targets aimed at keeping human-induced global heating within safe levels – including new ambitions to reach net-zero emissions by 2050 – it’s worth looking ahead pragmatically at what happens if we fail. After all, many scientists think it’s highly unlikely that we will stay below 2C (above pre-industrial levels) by the end of the century, let alone 1.5C. Most countries are not making anywhere near enough progress to meet these internationally agreed targets.

Climate models predict we’re currently on track for a heating of somewhere between 3C and 4C for 2100, although bear in mind that these are global average temperatures – at the poles and over land (where people live), the increase may be double that. Predictions are tricky, however, as temperatures depend on how sensitive the climate is to carbon dioxide (CO2). Most models assume that it is not very sensitive – that’s where the lower 3C comes from – but a whole new set of models to be published in 2021 finds much greater sensitivity. They put heating at around 5C by the end of the century, meaning people could be experiencing as much as 10C of heating over land.

Such uncertainty isn’t ideal, but for our purposes let’s plump for an entirely feasible planetary heating of 4C by the end of the century. If that seems a long time away, consider that plenty of people you know will be around then. My children will be in their 80s, perhaps with middle-aged children and grandchildren. We are making their world and it will be a very different place.

Four degrees may not sound like much – after all, it is less than a typical temperature change between night and day. It might even sound pleasant, like retiring from the UK to southern Spain. However, an average heating of the entire globe by 4C would render the planet unrecognisable from anything humans have ever experienced. The last time the world was this hot was 15m years ago during the miocene, when intense volcanic eruptions in western North America emitted vast quantities of CO2. Sea levels rose some 40 metres higher than today and lush forests grew in Antarctica and the Arctic. However, that global heating took place over many thousands of years. Even at its most rapid, the rise in CO2 emissions occurred at a rate 1,000 times slower than ours has since the start of the Industrial Revolution. That gave animals and plants time to adapt to new conditions and, crucially, ecosystems had not been degraded by humans.

Things look considerably bleaker for our 2100 world. Over the past decade, scientists have been able to produce a far more nuanced picture of how temperature rise affects the complexities of cloud cover and atmospheric and oceanic circulation patterns and ecology. We’re looking at vast dead zones in the oceans as nutrients from fertiliser runoff combine with warmer waters to produce an explosion in algae that starve marine life of oxygen. This will be exacerbated by the acidity from dissolved CO2, which will cause a mass die-off, particularly of shellfish, plankton and coral. “We will have lost all the reefs decades before 2100 – at somewhere between 2C and 4C,” says Johan Rockström, director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany.

Sea levels will be perhaps two metres higher and, more worryingly, we will be well on our way to an ice-free world, having passed the tipping points for the Greenland and west Antarctic ice sheets, committing us to at least 10 metres of sea-level rise in coming centuries. That’s because as ice sheets melt, their surface drops to a lower altitude where it is warmer, speeding up melting in a runaway feedback loop. Eventually, dark, heat-absorbing land is exposed, speeding the melting process even more. By 2100, we will also have lost most low-latitude glaciers, including two-thirds of the so called third pole of the Hindu Kush-Karakoram-Himalayan mountains and Tibetan plateau that feeds many of Asia’s important rivers.

However, most rivers, especially in Asia, will flood more often, according to research by Richard Betts, head of climate impacts at the Met Office Hadley Centre, because the hotter atmosphere will produce more intense monsoons, violent storms and extreme rainfall. His studies predict a wide equatorial belt of high humidity that will cause intolerable heat stress across most of tropical Asia, Africa, Australia and the Americas, rendering them uninhabitable for much of the year. Tropical forests of heat-tolerant species may well thrive in this wet zone with the high CO2 concentrations, especially with the disappearance of human infrastructure and agriculture, although the conditions will probably favour lianas (vines) over slower-growing trees, Betts says. To the south and north of this humid zone, bands of expansive desert will also rule out agriculture and human habitation. Some models predict that desert conditions will stretch from the Sahara right up through south and central Europe, drying rivers including the Danube and the Rhine.

Our best hope lies in cooperating as never before: decoupling the political map from geography

In South America, the picture is more complicated: increased precipitation could enhance the Amazon rainforest, leading to mightier river flow. Other models predict a weakening of the easterlies over the Atlantic, drying the Amazon, increasing fires and turning it from forest to grassland. The tipping point for the Amazon could well be triggered by deforestation; while the intact forest could cope with some drought because it generates and maintains its own moist ecosystem, areas that have been opened up through degradation allow moisture to escape. “A combination of climate change and deforestation could push it into a savannah state,” Rockström says.

All of nature will be affected by the change in climate, ecosystems and hydrology and there will be plenty of extinctions as species struggle to migrate and adapt to an utterly changed world. Daniel Rothman, co-director of MIT’s Lorenz Center, calculates that 2100 will herald the beginning of Earth’s sixth mass extinction event. But what about us? This is undoubtedly a more hostile, dangerous world for humanity, which by 2100 will number around 11 billion, all of whom will need food, water, power and somewhere to live. It will be, in a giant understatement, problematic.

The good news is that humans won’t become extinct – the species can survive with just a few hundred individuals; the bad news is, we risk great loss of life and perhaps the end of our civilisations. Many of the places where people live and grow food will no longer be suitable for either. Higher sea levels will make today’s low-lying islands and many coastal regions, where nearly half the global population live, uninhabitable, generating an estimated 2 billion refugees by 2100. Bangladesh alone will lose one-third of its land area, including its main breadbasket.

From 2030, more than half the population will live in the tropics, an area that makes up a third of the planet and already struggles with climate impacts. Yet by 2100, most of the low and mid latitudes will be uninhabitable because of heat stress or drought; despite stronger precipitation, the hotter soils will lead to faster evaporation and most populations will struggle for fresh water. We will have to live on a smaller land surface with a larger population.

Indeed, the consequences of a 4C warmer world are so terrifying that most scientists would rather not contemplate them, let alone work out a survival strategy.

Rockström doesn’t like our chances. “It’s difficult to see how we could accommodate a billion people or even half of that,” he says. “There will be a rich minority of people who survive with modern lifestyles, no doubt, but it will be a turbulent, conflict-ridden world.”

Children paddle rafts through the streets in Kurigram District, Bangladesh, September 2015.

Children paddle rafts through the streets in Kurigram District, Bangladesh, September 2015. Photograph: Zakir Hossain Chowdhury/Barc

He points out that we already use nearly half the world’s ice-free surface to produce food for 7 billion people and thinks meeting the needs of 11 billion in such hostile conditions would be impossible. “The reason is primarily making enough food, but also we would have lost the biodiversity we’re dependent on and be facing a cocktail of negative shocks all the time, from fires to droughts.”

Read Full Article>>

More On The Environment:

World Politics

United States

Cartoons Trump and Putin

Image result for foreign Trump Cartoons

By

Image result for foreign Trump Cartoons

by Ed Wexler / CagleCartoons.com

Joe Biden says most important thing is to beat Donald Trump – video

Source: Reuters

Formally launching his third presidential campaign, Joe Biden appealed for party and national unity while accusing Donald Trump of leading the US with ‘a clenched fist, a closed hand and a hard heart’. But, he said, ‘we are the United States of America and there is not a single thing we cannot do if we are together’. Biden was a senator representing Delaware for 36 years and vice-president to Barack Obama from 2009 to 2017. He was a relatively late entrant to the sprawling field seeking the Democratic nomination in 2020, with 23 candidates now in the running

Buttigieg slams Trump on Fox News, likens his tweets to ‘grotesque things’>>

Kirsten Gillibrand can’t break through – is sexism to blame?>>

Trump’s lawyers: does serving the president mean undermining justice?>>

Trump lashes out at Justin Amash after Republican talks of impeachment>>

Trump reacts angrily to New York Times report on Deutsche Bank transactions>>

Deutsche Bank staff saw suspicious Trump and Kushner activity – report>>

Share
19 May

United States Wars, News and Casualties

United States Wars, News and Casualties

Damn The War Criminals,

Bush,Cheney,Rice,Rumsfeld,Wolfowitz, Powell and Blair from England

War News

REU: Trump may pardon military men accused or convicted of war crimes: New York Times

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. President Donald Trump has asked for files to be prepared on pardoning several U.S. military members accused of or convicted of war crimes, including one slated to stand trial on charges of shooting unarmed civilians while in Iraq, the New York Times reported on Saturday.

Trump requested the immediate preparation of paperwork needed, indicating he is considering pardons for the men around Memorial Day on May 27, the report said, citing two unnamed U.S. officials. Assembling pardon files normally takes months, but the Justice Department has pressed for the work to be completed before that holiday weekend, one of the officials said.

One request is for Special Operations Chief Edward Gallagher of the Navy SEALs, scheduled to stand trial in coming weeks on charges of shooting unarmed civilians and killing an enemy captive with a knife while deployed in Iraq.

Also believed to be included is the case of Major Mathew Golsteyn, an Army Green Beret accused of killing an unarmed Afghan in 2010, the Times said.

Reuters could not immediately identify a way to contact Gallagher and Golsteyn.

The newspaper reported that the cases of other men are believed to be included in the paperwork, without naming them.

Read Full Article>>

GUARD: Old grudges, new weapons… is the US on the brink of war with Iran?

While American hawks talk up an ‘imminent’ threat from Tehran with no hard evidence, echoing the start of the Iraq conflict, hardliners are in the ascendant in Iran

For better or worse, America remains the world’s leading military superpower. In Washington last week, a familiar row erupted over how best that power should be used. Past targets have included Soviet Russia, al-Qaida in Afghanistan and Saddam Hussein in Iraq. Today the international bogeyman topping the White House’s to-do list is Iran.

Once again the US is in the process of deciding whether to go to war. As always, it is a tangled, messy and dishonest business. On one side, favouring punitive action, stand the Iran hawks. They include neoconservative retreads such as John Bolton, Donald Trump’s national security adviser, who championed the 2003 Iraq invasion; Mike Pompeo, a former CIA director and Christian evangelical who heads the state department; and Mike Pence, the ascetic US vice-president.

On the other side, opposing escalation, stand Democratic party leaders in Congress and a clutch of presidential hopefuls; sceptical Pentagon generals and security agency officials who trust Bolton as far as they can toss an IED; a majority of Washington’s more important allies in the EU and Nato; and China and Russia, which oppose American global power-plays on principle.

The focus of the row was secret intelligence, reportedly gathered by US satellites over recent weeks and presented to officials on 3 May. The photographs purported to show Iranian Revolutionary Guards loading missiles onto dhows in the Gulf. Their presumed purpose was to attack American and allied naval or commercial shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, through which much of the world’s oil supplies pass.

The existence of the surveillance photos was top secret – until the information inexplicably leaked to the media last Wednesday. Oddly enough, a few days earlier Saudi Arabia – America’s close ally and sworn foe of Iran – had reported attacks on four tankers in the Strait. Oddly again, no one claimed responsibility and Tehran denied all knowledge. Marine insurers pointed the finger at Iran’s Houthi allies. But while admitting it had no proof, the pro-war camp in Washington immediately blamed Iran or its proxy forces.

The reaction from Bolton and Pompeo was swift. Citing yet more secret intelligence that Iran was rallying Shia militias in Iraq and Syria to “prepare for war”, they had already expedited military reinforcements to the Middle East – an aircraft carrier battlegroup and nuclear-armed bombers. Pompeo dramatically cancelled a visit to Germany and flew to Baghdad to warn of the threat.

John Bolton, now the White House national security adviser, was widely accused of massaging secret intelligence to boost the case for war with Iraq.

The McGlynn: A Very Dangerous Man. Bolton plays Trump like a Stradivarius and  he knows to keep it very simple.

John Bolton, now the White House national security adviser, was widely accused of massaging secret intelligence to boost the case for war with Iraq. Photograph: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

In the wake of the tanker attacks, the administration upped the ante. Details of a White House national security meeting were also leaked. They revealed that Patrick Shanahan, the acting defence secretary, had presented a new plan to send 120,000 troops to the Middle East, supposedly to deter Iran. Another option under discussion was multiple sea and air-launched missile strikes on Iran’s military facilities and suspected nuclear-related targets.

Since then, White House officials have persistently talked up an “imminent” threat from Tehran, Pompeo has personally briefed EU governments (he reportedly got a cool reception), and the US embassy in Baghdad has been partly evacuated. But there’s a snag. Throughout this accelerating process of military and diplomatic escalation, the US has not produced any firm, on-the-record evidence of hostile Iranian action.

Read Full Article>>

AP: Once again, Iraq caught up in tensions between US and Iran

BAGHDAD (AP) — When U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo sat down with Iraqi officials in Baghdad last week as tensions mounted between America and Iran, he delivered a nuanced message: If you’re not going to stand with us, stand aside.

The message, relayed to The Associated Press by two Iraqi government officials, underscores Iraq’s delicate position: Its government is allied with both sides of an increasingly contentious confrontation.

As tensions escalate, there are concerns that Baghdad could once again get caught in the middle, just as it is on the path to recovery. The country hosts more than 5,000 U.S. troops, and is home to powerful Iranian-backed militias, some of whom want those U.S. forces to leave.

Read Full Article>>

AP: Officials: US strikes kill 17 policemen in south Afghanistan

A U.S. military spokesman, Col. Dave Butler, said the airstrike was called in by Afghan security forces who were taking heavy fire from Taliban fighters.

Before dropping the bombs, Butler said the U.S. along with its allies on the ground sought to ensure the area was clear of friendly forces. An Afghan coordination force reported the targeted areas were safe from fellow personnel.

“Unfortunately, they were not and a tragic accident resulted,” Butler said in a written reply to an Associated Press request for information on the deaths.

He said both Afghan security forces and Taliban were killed in the strike.

“We’re examining the miscommunication to ensure it is not repeated,” said Butler. “We regret this tragic loss of life of our partners and are committed to improvement every day with every mission.”

Helmand’s governor, Mohammad Yasin, said Afghan authorities were also investigating. A Taliban statement claimed U.S. forces were behind the incident.

In the last year, the number of U.S. airstrikes has risen, most often in response to Afghan requests for assistance, but also in an intensified campaign against Islamic State group militants, who are mostly headquartered in eastern Afghanistan.

A higher frequency of U.S. airstrikes has led to more civilian deaths, according to U.N. reports. A quarterly estimate by the U.N. issued recently said more civilians were killed by Afghan and U.S. forces than by insurgents in the first months of 2019.

NYT: Official: Bomb Blast in Western Afghanistan Kills 2

KABUL, Afghanistan — An Afghan official says that a bomb blast in the western province of Herat has killed at least two people, including a child.

Gelani Farhad, a spokesman for the province’s governor, says that 14 people were wounded in Saturday morning’s attack in the Obe area, including the district administrative chief.

Farhad said that a remotely controlled bomb went off when the district chief’s vehicle was passing by the area’s main market.

No one immediately claimed responsibility for the attack.

Taliban insurgents are active in the province and regularly target Afghan officials and security forces.

KH PRESS: Children among several killed, wounded in Herat bomb explosion

At least 25 civilians including children were killed or wounded in an explosion in western Herat province of Afghanistan earlier today.

According to local government officials, the incident took place at around 8:30am local time in the main the market of Obe district.

Provincial governor’s spokesman Jilani Farhad has confirmed that the target of the explosion was the district administrative chief of Obe district who was crossing the area.

Farhad further added that the explosives were planted in a bicycle which went off as the vehicle of Obe district chief was crossing the area, leaving at least 3 civilians dead including a child.

However, the provincial public health officials are saying at least 5 children were killed and 20 other civilians were wounded in the explosion.

No individual or group has so far claimed responsibility for the explosion.

Bush’s Five Big Lies That Led to the Iraq Quagmire

These are the five lies Bush told that Ralph Nader documented to impeach him.

  • Weapons of Mass Destruction. The weapons have still not been found. Nader emphasized, “Until the 1991 Gulf War, Saddam Hussein was our government’s anti-communist ally in the Middle East. We also used him to keep Iran at bay. In so doing, in the 1980s under Reagan and the first Bush, corporations were licensed by the Department of Commerce to export the materials for chemical and biological weapons that President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney later accused him of having.” Those weapons were destroyed after the Gulf War. George W. Bush’s favorite chief weapons inspector, David Kay, after returning from Iraq and leading a large team of inspectors and spending nearly half a billion dollars told the president We were wrong. See: David Kay testimony before Senate Armed Services Committee, 2004-01-28.Tyler Drumheller, the former chief of the CIA (Central Intelligence Agency) ’s Europe division, revealed that in the fall of 2002, George W. Bush, Vice President Cheney, then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice and others were told by CIA Director George Tenet that Iraq’s foreign minister — who agreed to act as a spy for the United States — had reported that Iraq had no active weapons of mass destruction program.

  • Iraq Ties to Al Qaeda. The White House made this claim even though the CIA and FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation) repeatedly told the Administration that there was no tie between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda. They were mortal enemies — one secular, the other fundamentalist.

  • Saddam Hussein was a Threat to the United States. In fact, Saddam was a tottering dictator, with an antiquated, fractured army of low morale and with Kurdish enemies in Northern Iraq and Shiite adversaries in the South of Iraq. He did not even control the air space over most of Iraq.

  • Saddam Hussein was a Threat to his Neighbors. In fact, Iraq was surrounded by countries with far superior military forces. Turkey, Iran and Israel were all capable of obliterating any aggressive move by the Iraqi dictator.

  • The Liberation of the Iraqi People. There are brutal dictators throughout the world, many supported over the years by Washington, whose people need liberation from their leaders. This is not a persuasive argument since for Iraq, it’s about oil. In fact, the occupation of Iraq by the United States is a magnet for increasing violence, anarchy and insurrection

Recent Casualties:

Color Denotes Today’s Confirmation

DOD Identifies Army Casualty

The Department of Defense announced today the death of a soldier who was supporting Operation Freedom’s Sentinel.

Spc. Miguel L. Holmes, 22, from Hinesville, Georgia, died May 6, 2019, in Nangarhar Province, Afghanistan, of wounds sustained from a non-combat incident. The incident is under investigation.

Holmes was assigned to 1st Battalion, 118th Field Artillery Regiment, 48th Infantry Brigade Combat Team, Savannah, Georgia.

DOD Identifies Army Casualty

The Department of Defense announced today the death of a soldier who was supporting Operation Inherent Resolve.

Pfc. Michael A. Thomason, 28, from Lincoln Park, Michigan, died April 29, 2019, in Kobani, Syria, of wounds sustained from a non-combat incident.

Thomason was assigned to 2nd Battalion, 327th Infantry Regiment, 1st Brigade Combat Team, 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault), Fort Campbell, Kentucky.

DOD Identifies Army Casualty

The Department of Defense announced today the death of a soldier who was supporting Operation Inherent Resolve.

Spc. Michael T. Osorio, 20, from Horseshoe Bend, Idaho, died April 23, 2019, in Taji, Iraq, in a non combat related incident. The incident is under investigation.

Osorio was assigned to 4th Squadron, 10th Cavalry Regiment, 3rd Armored Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division, Fort Carson, Colorado.

Save The Children Organization

Save the Children is the world’s leading independent organisation for children and has been working with families, communities and local authorities in Iraq since 1991, leading NGOs in general relief and development programs.Save the Children is currently responding to the needs of internally displaced persons (IDP) and the Syrian refugees in Iraq, in camps and non-camp settings. Our goal is for children in Iraq to be supported in raising their voices and attaining their rights, especially the right to participate in decisions affecting their lives. They should have access to quality education, health and protection services. We are increasing access to community based services that protect, educate and improve quality of life for children. We are ensuring that there is an increased participation of boys and girls in age appropriate activities and services. We are ensuring that children benefit from government actions that create an environment of awareness and accountability to uphold child rights. We are also developing new resources and innovative practices that support our work for children and youth.In Iraq, Save the Children’s interventions include Child Protection, Education, Food Security and Livelihoods, Shelter and Water Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH), reaching vulnerble children and families in northern and central Iraq. Save the Children’s programs are implemented through field offices in Erbil, Dohuk, Sulaymaniyah, Kirkuk and Kalar, with a country office located in Erbil.

Visit Save The Children Organization>>

Iraq War Child

Please Never Forget.

Share

© 2019 themcglynn.com | Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS)

Global Positioning System Gazettewordpress logo