IRAQ WAR - LOOKING GLASS NEWS | |
Beating the Drums of War. US Troop Build-up: Army & Marines authorize "Involuntary Conscription" |
|
by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya GlobalResearch.ca Entered into the database on Wednesday, August 23rd, 2006 @ 15:55:59 MST |
|
The Timing of U.S. Troop Build-up: Iran and the Broader Middle East U.S. Army & Marines are recalling thousands of Inactive Servicemen
If one places a frog in a kettle of boiling water, the frog will immediately
jump and try to escape, but if you place the frog in a kettle of cold water
then heat the kettle gradually, the frog will obliviously, without any notice,
remain in the kettle as the temperature of the water rises and the frog eventually
boils to death. The significance of this is that gradual change can be and is
believed to be unperceivable. This strategy and concept can likewise be used
on societies and groups in a variety of manners. It is now being specified and openly stated that the U.S. Marines have started
recalling or legally summoning thousands of ‘inactive servicemen’
to serve in Iraq and the Middle East, where the number of U.S. troops and contracted
security personal are dropping towards hap-hazardous levels that seem to be
worrying American commanders in Iraq and the Pentagon’s military planners,
especially in light of the recent escalation and intensifying tension(s) and
resistance to Anglo-American occupation in the Middle East and Afghanistan.
The U.S. Army too, undermined by shortfalls in manpower, has ordered over a
reported 14,000 ‘inactive servicemen’ back to fight in what is cited
as the ‘War on Terror,’ as opposed to the ‘fighting in Iraq
or Afghanistan.’1 Already thousands of servicemen have
disserted, even applying for refugee status in Canada, and thousands more are
AWAL (absent without authorized leave). The compulsory recall to military service has come about and materialized in
almost complementary and balancing—if one can use these words for what
seem to be actions of an adversarial nature—coordination with the timing
of several other and important international events. The compulsory recall of
‘inactive servicemen’ in the United States might even go unnoticed
in North America and most the world until analysts, historians and later generations
look back at the present events unfolding in these contemporary times, years
from now and place them into focus within a larger matrix of events. This could
just be the ‘tip of the iceberg,’ but this seems to be nothing less
than a watered down and concealed ‘military draft’ and it is only
the continuation of a systematic conscription of military troops and former
servicemen in a stealthy and cautious manner. This looks as if it is an unprecedented
event in the recent military history of the United States; something that has
not happened since the ‘full draft’ during the American war in Vietnam
and the World Wars. The obligation of military service or military conscription
was not initiated after the tragic events of 9/11—the trigger that augmented
and accelerated the aggressive militarization of American foreign policy—nor
during the Anglo-American invasion of Iraq in 2003. In fact the only time a
draft has seriously been mentioned or entertained publicly is in the circumstances
and likelihood that the United States should find itself attacking Iran or both
Iran and Syria. The Timing of the U.S. Troop Build-up: Iran, and the Broader Middle
East A look at the international events unfolding concurrently within the same timeline
and the same or flanking geographic setting(s) of the Marine Corps deployment
is something that can be forgiven for arousing certain suspicion(s) in individuals
about the strategic methodology of such a move or rather series of moves. Firstly
the official multi-facetted Iranian response has been announced by Ali Larijani,
the Secretary-General of the Supreme National Security Council of Iran, and
by the Iranian government, via diplomatic channels in Tehran to all the Permanent
Members (the P5) of the Security Council and Germany, in regards to the so-called
EU-3 (French, British, and German) package of incentives offered to the Iranians
if Iran should forfeit its legal right—which is guaranteed under the Non-Proliferation
Treaty and international law—to produce nuclear fuel. Secondly, the large
scale war games being held throughout Iran and adjacent to U.S., American-led
Coalition, and NATO forces are unfolding under a very well planned and strategic
timetable as were the large scale military exercises held by Iran in April 20062.
Thirdly the Israeli siege of Lebanon—which seems to have entered a new
phase of low spectrum warfare under the veil of the United Nations Security
Council resolution which was catered to Israeli requirements—seem to have
simmered down, but with the likely projection of being protracted, continued,
and tied to other regional trials, players, and events, including Syria. Fourthly,
the United Nations Security Council deadline set for Iran to halt its uranium
enrichment is drawing to an end, with only days till August 31, 2006. These
events and manoeuvres appear to all be the ingredients of a conflict that is
and has been fermenting and building; for all its dramatics and repartee ‘the
Middle East is a powder keg waiting to be disturbed’—even further. The Role of Mercenraries in Iraq There has been a steady U.S. troop build up in occupied Iraq that has been
going on for months now, without even studying the unofficial numbers and concealed
figures of mercenaries and private security contractors. In mid-August most
the members of an approximately 380 member U.S. Army brigade from Alaska, 172nd
Stryker Brigade, who were sent home from a military tour of duty that was already
extended by the Pentagon in war dilapidated and fatigued Anglo-American occupied
Iraq were ordered and forced to return to their posts in the Baghdad area after
just returning to the United States.3 U.S. troops have also
slowly been marshalled into Iraq from neighbouring Kuwait and other places where
they are not urgently vital or needed. The citizens of Iraq were also expecting
Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al-Malaki to establish a timetable for the departure
of American, British, and Coalition troops from Iraqi territory during his visit
to Washington D.C., but have instead saw the Prime Minister fully agree with
the American programme for Iraq and non-commitment to a troop withdrawal timetable
for Iraq; instead the Iraqi Prime Minister accepted and committed himself publicly
for an increase of American forces in and around the Iraqi capital, Baghdad,
in the thousands, along with Iraqi forces as security and auxiliary. Prior even
to the arrival of the Iraqi Prime Minister in Washington D.C., the U.S. Secretary
of Defence, Donald H. Rumsfeld, stated that the number of troops in the Baghdad
area had increased from approximately a force of 40,000 to 55,000 troops. In contingent with the U.S. troop build up, mercenaries, which reportedly make
the second largest group after American troops in Iraq, have also been proliferating
into Anglo-American occupied Iraq and NATO garrisoned Afghanistan, but what
is more noteworthy is the overflow of these groups into places of close geographic
proximity in the region. Many young men from within the United States and around
the world seeking American citizenship or green cards have also been loured
into the circuits of the U.S. military and mercenary groups. After the U.S.
launched the ‘War on Terror, the Bush Jr. Administration made it easier
for foreign-born residents living in the United States who joined the military
to gain full American citizenship as a way to boost the militaries demographics.
A whole set of obstructions to American citizenship were instantly removed to
make enrolment and recruitment in the U.S. military more desirable and appealing.
The Asia Times has reported that “of the 15,000 new US citizens who were
naturalized in the week of July 4, hundreds were from the military. Foreign
legal residents make up 2% to 3% of the US military, but they are becoming citizens
in record numbers. The largest number of foreigners in the US forces is from
the Philippines (25 %). According to the Migration Policy Institute, 410 Indians
were actively serving the US military in the year 2004.”4 For example, Blackwater, a private security firm founded by a former U.S. Navy
SEAL and specialized in “military, law enforcement, peacekeeping, and
stability operations challenges”5 is an American firm
of mercenaries that has been contracted by the Pentagon to work and guard American
officials and facilities in both Iraq and Afghanistan, but has also been contracted
to work in Iran’s northwester neighbour, the Republic of Azarbaijan under
the raison d'être of supporting the special naval commando forces of the
Caucasian state. This is something that is imaginably something neither the
Russian Federation nor Iran are delighted with because of the Republic of Azarbaijan’s
westward political orientation towards the United States and NATO. Troop Build-Up in Baghdad and the Green Zone Baghdad is being reinforced with more and more U.S. troops as is pivotally
important Green Zone (also called the International Zone). The Green Zone is
the world’s largest gated community in central Baghdad and is the heavily
guarded diplomatic and governmental area of closed-off streets in central Baghdad
that accommodates the multitudes of Americans and British officials, including
Zalmay Khalilzad, the powerful U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, U.S. and Coalition military
commanders, and the executives and representatives of major foreign corporations
contracted or operating in Iraq. The U.S. Embassy alone has been reported to
employ at least 5, 500 individuals being by far the largest American diplomatic
mission in the world. The currant new embassy complex being built is also the
largest American embassy complex in the world; the compound will be comprised
of 21 buildings across 104 acres. In the event of the outbreak of a war or any
possible violent conflict between the United States and Iran, the Green Zone
in Baghdad will certainly be a priority to defend for the United States and
separately a possible target attacked by order of probability by ballistic missiles,
Iranian air power, the Iraqi groupings allied with Iran, and finally Iranian
troops. The Mystery of Coalition Casualty Figures, the Inverse Relationship(s)
between Civilian Deaths and Coalition Deaths, Sectarian Violence, and Balkanization
There also seems to be a apprehensive and guarded inverse relationship in the
‘official numbers’ of casualties and fatalities of U.S. troops and
Iraqi civilians, which could mean a numerous amount of arguments on the hypothetical
and practical levels; there is growing sectarian violence in Iraq, the sectarian
violence is causing the insurgents to fight each other rather than the occupation
forces (e.g., U.S. troops), figures are being doctored/falsified/hidden, and/or
the United States has—tactically speaking—progressed in its operations
in Iraq, but there is more to this picture. Emerging from Iraq are formal and
informal reports and voices saying other than what the White House and Pentagon
are claiming. There are diffidently, without question, hidden figures and numbers
on the mercenaries—termed as security contractors for public relations
reasons—being brought into Iraq from Latin America6 and
all over the world—a by-product of the role of globalization in modern
warfare—whose deaths do not get counted as American casualties and thus
help marginalize the real human costs of the war for the United States and non-Iraqi
denizens. The fact that there are scores of unaccounted dead—besides the
phenomenally large amount of Iraqis—is verified by Robert Frisk one of
the world’s most highly decorated foreign correspondents and the corresponding
journalist on the Middle East for the British newspaper, The Independent, has
written with Patrick Cockburn that “At least 18 000 mercenaries, many
of them tasked to protect U.S. troops and personnel, are now believed to be
in Iraq, some of them earning $1,000 (U.S.) a day. But their companies rarely
acknowledge their losses unless—like the four American murdered and mutilated
in Fallujah three weeks ago—their deaths are already public knowledge.
(…) many of the heavily armed Western security men are working for the
U.S. Department of Defence—and most of them are former Special Forces
soldiers - they are not listed as serving military personnel. Their [the mercenaries]
losses can therefore be hidden from public view.”7 Robert Fisk has also written in regards to the Iraqi sectarian violence that
it seems like a deliberate approach through American subsidized terrorism “to
provoke an Iraqi civil war so that Sunni Muslim [Arabs] insurgents spend their
energies killing their Shia [Arab] co-religionists [fellow Muslims] rather than
soldiers of the Western occupation forces” through staged terrorism.8
One can not be blamed for thinking that there is considerations on dividing
the nation-state of Iraq like a planned demolition. The President has repeatedly
ruled it out, but politicians have been none to say one thing and to move in
another direct. After all the balkanization and the subsequent finlandization9
of states has proven a sturdy tool in the past Yugoslavia. US’ stated
objective to help and promote Yugoslav unity but divided it. One can merely
look at the benefits of divide and conquer historically in the colonial era
in Africa—which is still suffering from the artificial drawn and manipulated
boundaries in more ways than one—and India and at the Balkans and the
former Soviet Union in the post-Cold War era Deceiving the Public on the Military Agenda from Woodrow Wilson to
Bush Jr. U.S. Congressmen Ron Paul (Republican Party) of Texas wrote in an article titles
‘The Crime of Conscription,’ in November 26, 2003, that “Woodrow
Wilson orchestrated our entry into World War I by first promising during the
election of 1916 to keep us out of the European conflict [World War I], then
a few months later pressuring and manoeuvring Congress into declaring war against
Germany. Whether it was the Spanish American War before that or all the wars
since, U.S. presidents have deceived the people to gain popular support for
ill-conceived military ventures. Wilson wanted the war and immediately demanded
conscription to fight it. He didn’t have the guts even to name the program
a military draft; instead in a speech before Congress calling for war he advised
the army should be “chosen upon the principle of universal liability to
service.” Most Americans at the time of the declaration didn’t believe
actual combat troops would be sent. What a dramatic change from this early perception,
when the people endorsed the war, to the carnage that followed (…) Many
of our [American] reservists and National Guardsmen cannot wait to get out [of
Iraq or Afghanistan] and have no plans to re-enlist. The odds are that our [the
U.S.] policy of foreign intervention, which has been with us for many decades,
is not likely to soon change. (…) To get more troops, the draft will likely
be reinstated. The implicit prohibition of “involuntary servitude”
under the 13th Amendment to the Constitution has already been ignored many times
so few will challenge the constitutionality of the coming draft.” The Authority to involuntarily conscript individuals in the Ongoing
War: What does that mean? The ‘cloaked draft(s)’ or ‘back-door draft(s)’ seem
to be new, but it reality are actually in keeping with a long line of practices
the United States government has been using since the Anglo-American occupation
of Iraq started in 2003. These practices include systematically barring U.S.
troops in the Marine Corps and U.S. Army from leaving the proximity or near
proximities of Iraq or Afghanistan, called ‘stop loss orders’ and/or
prolonging military tours of duty beyond what was established/understood/promised
to or with American servicemen and/or assigning multiple/consecutive military
tours of duty and/or obstructing/delaying the retirement of American servicemen.
These compulsory orders for involuntary duty are not a new norm, but rather
a reoccurring norm. Marine Colonel Guy Stratton, the officer in charge of the Marine Corps section
responsible for ‘man-power,’ has indicated that “the service
[Marine Corps] is short some 1,200 volunteers over the next 18 months to fill
roles in the War on Terrorism.”10 It should be noted
that the fighting in Iraq is referred to in military terminology and jargon
as ‘the War on Terror/Terrorism;’ this gives some insight on the
objectives of the ongoing military engagements and their mandates in the Iraq
and Afghanistan—simply put the theatre of military operation(s) is flexible
and can be expanded. The presidential authorization of the involuntary recalls is hypothetically
also applicable to any war(s) with Syria or Iran or Sudan if such action is
cited or justified as an expansion or rather continuation of the stated mission
of waging a ‘War on Terror.’ The War on Terror is a war destined
to proliferate beyond Afghanistan and Iraq, it was destined to be a global war
that the public has constantly been told to expect to last past their lifetimes—it
is an open ended concept that gives flexibility to equally valuable maneuvering
room to those fighting it. Colonel Stratton is quoted as saying that, “the authority [to power to
involuntarily conscript individuals] is until G.W.O.T. [the Global War on Terror]
is over with” and “until we’re told to do otherwise [stop],
we’ll use it [the power to involuntarily conscript individuals] force.”11
While the length of each activated servicemen’s tour of duty
is theoretically restrict, this is not a tangible principle; there are military
service men that have done three separate tours of military duty in Iraq. There
is also no finite limit set on the authorization of the Marine Corps to involuntarily
recall or conscript Marines for jobs in the ongoing ‘War on Terror.’
A presidential order from the commander-in-chief has sanctioned the Marine
Corps to issue involuntary recall orders to members of the Individual Ready
Reserve (IRR), part of the non-active force of ex-military personal. Marines
serve for four years on active military duty and after under the guidelines
of service generally serve another four years in the Primary Reserve where they
have the option of volunteer to return to active duty to fill vacant stations
and posts. Unlike the servicemen in the Primary Reserves who keep active by
continuing their training and drills those ex-military personnel who are listed
under IRR must be ready to serve the United States if they are all called up
in case of a national emergency or an attack on the United States. There are
currently 59,000 former Marines serving in the Individual Ready Reserve.12
The servicemen who decide to leave active duty or retire automatically become
members of the IRR which is generically a standardized system used by military
organizations in their defensive procedures around the world. The presidential
authorization allows the IRR’s activation to be open-ended, which means
thousands of former and retired Marines, with a demographic number of 35,000,
will be called back to active service in both Anglo-American occupied Iraq and
Afghanistan. All Signs lead to more Militarization and possibility for Conflict
in the Middle East Even the term being used by some mainstream media, G.W.O.T seems to be the
innovation of the public relations firms that the Pentagon and White House have
so heavily replied on in selling or hiding their wars from the American public
and a great deal of the world. This is how negative perception is controlled
and being managed so that there is no significant surge in domestic anger. With
careful public relations campaigning, propaganda, and rhetoric such as terminology
that is warped or replaced to disassociate or de-link meanings the Pentagon
has been covering its tracks on the domestic front in the United States and
treading inch by inch towards a developing ‘back-door draft;’ one
that will be definitely be needed if there is to be ensuing conflict with Iran
and Syria in a yet another Middle Eastern war. The White House and other organelles
of government have been continuously saying one thing in regards to the fighting
in Iraq and the continued promises or hopes of troop pullouts/disengagement
from Iraq, but actually doing the opposite. The statements of troop pullouts
and diplomacy are merely posturing to keep the public at bay, while their seems
to be no real desire for any long term U.S. military disengagement and departure
from the Middle East. The Pentagon has authorized the building of permanent
super-bases in Iraq, while working on the domestic campaign in the United States
with the White House to systematically desensitize the American population and
let them gradual without perception accept the long-term interests of the U.S.
military agenda in the Middle East and Central Asia. At the same time more U.S.
troops and contracted mercenaries are slowly being sent into Iraq, Afghanistan,
and the in areas adjacent to Iran. There is a manifesting build up of U.S. manpower
in Iraq while in Afghanistan the forces of NATO are freeing up American forces
and resources to head to Iraq and facilitating the American concentration of
troops. Even in other NATO countries, such as Canada, there is silent mobilization
of troops and reserve forces. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Notes 1 The Times (U.K.), August 23, 2006, US orders Marines back
into service http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2324785,00.html
2 April, 2006 military games occurred when Iran had successfully
enriched uranium for the first time and crossed the threshold that the United
States had threatened it not to dare to cross. 3 The Seattle Times, August 15, 2005, 300 soldiers from Alaska
called back to Baghdad http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003199268_iraqdig15.html
USA Today, August 15, 2005, Army recalling 300 troops to Iraq who just arrived
home in Alaska http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-08-14-troops-return_x.htm
4 Asia Times, July 30, 2005, In the US Army now http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/GG30Df03.html
5 Blackwater’s own advertisement, http://www.blackwaterusa.com
6 Reuters, August 21, 2006, Iraq, Afghanistan lure poor Latin
American guards http://today.reuters.co.uk/News/CrisesArticle.aspx?storyId=N14198783
Note: Reuters conveniently does not mention the number of
presumed casualties on the part of what it terms as ‘security guards’
7 Information Clearing House, April 13, 2004, Deaths of scores
of Mercenaries not reported http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6031.htm
8 The Independent, 28 April, 2006, Seen through a Syrian lens,
‘Unknown Americans’ are provoking civil war in Iraq http://news.independent.co.uk/world/fisk/article360624.ece
Note: there are various other articles on the subjects, ones
that also talk about British and Israeli roles in creating sectarian and ethnic
divisions in Iraq and a balkanization agenda for Iraq and the Middle East; the
allegedly Iranian dominated so-called ‘Shia Crescent’ that is getting
increasingly popular mention in the lexicon of the Western analysts and Arab
dictators alike seems to be one of the devices and concepts used to create a
sectarian wedge between Muslim populations 9 Finlandization is a political term originating in Germany
used to denote a nation that is pacified or neutral/neutralized and collaborated
with the wants of its more powerful neighbours; such as the relationship of
Finland during the Cold War vis-à-vis with the Soviet Union 10 Reuters, August 22, 2006, Marine Corps to start involuntary
troop recalls 11 Reuter, August 22, 2006, Marine Corps to start involuntary
troop recalls 12 ABC News, August 22, 2006, Marines Ready to Call Back Thousands
of Reservists |