Al-Maliki is celebrating victory over the American invader.

"A great deal of Mr. Maliki’s political support rests on the fact that violence has declined since the carnage of 2006 and 2007, that he has rebuilt the security forces, that he has presided over the beginning of the end of the American war. He rarely mentions any American role in the improved security in Iraq — though 130,000 American troops remain in the country.

“We will not ask them to intervene in combat operations related to maintaining public order,” he said in an interview with Le Monde published last week. “It is finished.”"  NY Times

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and the neocon scum will be held accountable somewhere, someday for their crimes against the American soldier.

Here is a partial list of my accusations.  It will be argued that some of these things are not technically "crimes."  I think that irrelevant. These specifically apply to Iraq.  You may add your own and I may comment further:

- "Planning and waging aggressive war.." Keitel and Jodl were executed for this.  In this case the "aggressive war was against Iraq, a country that, however ill governed, had not attacked the United States and that did not have WMD weapons any longer.  This latter point was in the process of being proven by the UN's inspectors when the miscreants under dicussion succeeded, with the help of White House staff still in the public square, of deliberately propagandizing the American people by making a false case against Iraq in the public media.  By carrying out these actions those charged involved the United States in a senseless war in which many thousands of American military personnel were killed or mutilated.

-  Those charged directly intervened in the operational planning of the invasion of Iraq in such a way as to risk defeat in detail in many smaller actions.  They did this by denying to the ground component commander (Mckiernan) the forces that he reasonably and prudently requested and by "nickel and diming" him endlessly in such a way that the forces involved were still minimal and barely adequate.  The success of these forces is not an indication of whether or not the force was adequate in strength.  The additional risk assumed by fielding too small a force placed the troops involved at risk.

- Those charged insisted on assuming in pre-invasion planning that Iraqi resistance would be minimal and that the coalition invasion force would be met with "open arms" rather than IEDs by the Iraqi populace.  This foolish and willfully blind assumption caused the death or wounding of many American soldiers.  Many experts tried to tell the accused that their assumption was wrong but they would not listen.

- Those charged insisted on disestablishing the public institutions of Iraq; the army, the police, the civil service, etc.  These actions were taken against the advice of US Army and USMC senior officers on the ground who were in the process of sorting out which units and commanders could be used to re-establish public order.  Considerable progress had been made.  These disestablishments drove many Iraqi officers and men into the various insurgent groups where they formed a hard core of competence that killed and wounded many American soldiers.

- Those charged refused to accept the plain and abundant evidence present in the first two years of the war that what was faced by the coalition was nothing less than a full-blown national resistance insurgency.  By so refusing, they caused US forces to operate in an inadequate planning environment that exposed US soldiers to much greater risks than might otherwise have been the case.

- Those accused encouraged the use of brutal and illegal methods of interrogation of prisoners.  This was done in spite of US doctrine and law that specifically forbade such conduct.  Was this not a crime against the souls of the junior soldiers encouraged and pressured to do such things?

I will stop at this point and wait for your comments.  pl

Comments

[linda]

colonel, i hope you are right; but i fear otherwise. who is to hold them accountable for the murderous policies and degradation of our country's institutions and values? it certainly won't be congress; the idea of a truth commission is laughable. and, can you imagine the uproar should any international attempts be made against them? oy.

although i must say the one institution that prevented the wholesale evisceration of our constitution were the assorted members of the judiciary who ruled against the bush regime's assault on those rights. and who continue to rollback those policies.

it will be very interesting to see what comes of john yoo's testimony in jose padilla's upcoming case.

[Bill Wade, NH, USA]

They should also be held accountable for the allowing of torture which ultimately too is a crime against the American soldier.

[Dave of Maryland]

Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and the neocon scum will be held accountable somewhere, someday for their crimes against the American soldier.

Sounds like you're waiting for Godot. If the men & women of this country want justice, they have the means at their disposal. If they fail to use those means, they are undeserving of their country.

[srv]

The Surge has been a spectacular success, if you're Mr. Maliki and you didn't intend any political reconciliation.

And that will work out very well for the neocons. Our "non-combat" troops will serve their recruitment purpose, that will lead to the inevitable blowback, and the neocons will return with honor.

[fred]

"Even some Iraqi officers are worried. Brig. Gen. Mahmoud Muhsen,...

“They are taking away all the equipment that the Americans provide."

Just where did all those billions go over eight years of neocon leadership? How much healh care would that have provided for our own people? Perhpas they could at least have saved a couple million to fix the old soldier's home, which is fast approaching Walter Reed levels of dilapidation.
http://www.defenselink.mil/specials/heroes/history1.html

[Highlander]

Colonel,

I'm not arguing with you.

But if you are going to accuse Bush and Cheney of crimes against the American soldier. Then I think, you should be specific. As to what you precieve these "crimes" to be.

[Dave of Maryland]

With all respects to Highlander & yourself, we know the charges.

We are looking for a leader. Which last year's elections failed to give us.

Someday July 4 will be a day to celebrate again.

[Ronald]

"Was this not a crime against the souls of the junior soldiers encouraged and pressured to do such things?"

I agree that when we discuss the costs of torture, we frequently forget what it does to those who perpetrate it.

[Cold War Zoomie]

Two words: Gross Negligence.

[Arun]

At least let them be tried in the court of public opinion!

[J]

fred,

i'd venture to say that some of those 'billions' went into cheney's new mansion.

neocon = mismanagement + criminal malfeasance.

[jdledell]

Highlander - With all due respect, within the confines of a Blog entry, I think the Colonel has laid out his charges pretty well. If you are looking for a wordy legal indictment, this is not the place. I applaud the Colonel for his forthright, no BS, recital of the Bush and Company catastophic errors.

[William R. Cumming]

As a practicing Catholic (which I am largely in ignorance of Church doctrine) you rightfully charge these minions with violation of "natural Law" but also violation of International Law and the laws of the United States. A devastating and in my judgement accurate indictment but the bill of particulars is still in draft. And new culprits arise even before the old ones have been made accountable. Time will tell as to accountablilty.

[Dan M]

Well put colonel.

The last time i spent any time with the men asked to risk their lives for this charade was 3 years ago now. A Marine company in Anbar, with the added twist that they were reservists. A viagra salesman; a reputed "gentlemens club" owner from Nola (he had apparently been shot twice in civilian life); your assortment of college kids, both malingerers and future scholars; a crack sniper who in civilian life was a swat team member from bryan texas and whom i was very taken with (who has struggled mightily with PTSD for years now); etc...

My friend the sniper comes particularly to mind now. As patriotic as the day is long, with never a word of complaint about being there. But he, like almost every man in the company, had no idea why they were there. Once they'd got in country and learned a little bit about the Iraqis, they'd scratch their head. Fight people that want to hurt my family? Yes sir, reporting for duty. But what do these idiots in anbar have to do with any of it.

These men were used as instruments in service of a hair-brained academic theory, and the academecians never gave a thought for their wellfare from day one.

Pat is right. The men who visited this crime upon them will pay some day. But probably not on this earth.

[Grimgrin]

DoM: "We are looking for a leader. Which last year's elections failed to give us.".

Really? Bush, like it or not was a leader. I'm looking for a follower. Specifically someone who will follow the public opinion that the wars on drugs and terror are lost and start finding a new path. It will take someone of no small character to follow the needs and wants of the public. But I'm sick to death of leaders of all stripes, good or bad and I'm sick to death of the assumption that I need or want to be lead.

As for the Col. Lang's list of charges, Amen to that. Here's hoping justice is served in this world and recorded for history, rather than deferred to the next where it must remain speculation.

[linda]

here's another crew i would love to see indicted; it's grotesque that they continue to suck up billions in taxpayer dollars:

Did toxic chemical in Iraq cause GIs' illnesses?
By SHARON COHEN, AP National Writer

...Among the issues now rippling from the courthouse to Capitol Hill are whether the chemical made people sick, when KBR knew it was there and how the company responded. But the debate is more than about this one case; it has raised broader questions about private contractors and health risks in war zones.

Questions, says Sen. Evan Bayh, who plans to hold hearings on the issues, such as these:

"How should we treat exposure to potentially hazardous chemicals as a threat to our soldiers? How seriously should that threat be taken? What is the role of private contractors? What about the potential conflict between their profit motives and taking all steps necessary to protect our soldiers?

...KBR denies any wrongdoing...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090627/ap_on_re_us/us_toxic_legacy_of_war/print

[par4]

Gallows next to the reflecting pool. As far as I'm concerned you can leave them hanging until the crows pluck their eyes out.

[steve]

Excellent post, thank you.

I would add a count of war profiteering to the indictment.

[Babak Makkinejad]

Col. Lang:

Is that even possible under the Laws of the United States?

Does any one else know?

[fanto]

Colonel, the facts are pretty clear, many citizens know them but what puzzles me is the relatively low volume of outrage about all these crimes in the military; do you, or other discussants here have an explanation why it is so?

[Homer]

One has to admit that Maliki, al-Hakim, et al are cool, heartless sons of bitches.

As evidenced by the almost total absence of the completion of US directives (e.g., oil carbon law, re-Baathification, etc) they've always had a publicly stiffened raised middle finger raised to the US since day one.

Despite that finger, all sorts of bullshit was generated by the main stream media (ABC, worst: Terry McCarthy was highly productive) to make Iraq a success story.

If you compare the media coverage of Dawa in the 80s with that in the post 911 era, you will see what I mean.

Why Dawa was taken off state's list of state sponsored terrorist groups was never examined.

Shit like that.

The feasts and festivals should be no surprise to anybody.

The writing has been on the wall since the results of the first election were published.

Al-Maliki, al-Hakim, et al had NO history of co-operation with the US, whereas they had decades of experience with Iran.

Bushies did a heckuva job, no?

[John Kirkman]

Any history of or lessons learned by the trials at Nuremburg are disregarded by our government. This government is elected by and represents us. Where is the outcry for justice? Someday, we, who show no justice to others, will be shown none in return, and fate will bring that day. There can be no peace without justice.

[Farmer Don]

Colonel,
A clear summation.
I agree with you 100%.

[Mac Nayeri]

Impressed by your honesty.

[William R. Cumming]

Yes to BABAK's question. It is possible under the LAWS of the US!