It's not often someone writes a snotty five-page memo that ends up indirectly costing his nation upwards of $8.3 billion, but Paul Wolfowitz likely now has that distinction. The U.S. deputy defense secretary's edict to ban Russia, France, Canada and Germany from participating in U.S.-funded Iraqi reconstruction is a marvel of grasping small-mindedness.

"International support and cooperation are necessary for progress in Iraq," Wolfowitz writes -- and then three sentences later he asserts that all kinds of international support and cooperation from Russia, France, Canada or Germany would not only be unwelcome, but would jeopardize "the essential security interests of the United States."

Still two sentences later he asserts, "Every effort must be made to expand international cooperation in Iraq," and then three sentences later he concludes that "limiting competition for prime contracts [i.e., snubbing the Russians and the rest] will encourage the expansion of international cooperation in Iraq."

There's not been a single intentional or unintentional slight America has offered Russia in the past 30 odd years to which Russia has not immediately responded tit-for-tat.

Wolfowitz states frankly that he sees tremendous chunks of the money being doled out as rewards for loyalty -- as money to benefit not Iraqis but "contractors," whether Micronesian, Uzbek or, most likely, Texan.
So Americans are borrowing billions of dollars to feed rapaciously overcharging corporations, and that is not some unhappy byproduct, but the actual plan, now formalized in the Wolfowitz memo.
mr ed - methinx the battles within the administration are bigger than the iraq occupation.

when five of its captured soldiers were paraded in front of the Iraqi television cameras in march, Donald Rumsfeld, the US defence secretary, immediately complained that "it is against the Geneva convention to show photographs of prisoners of war in a manner that is humiliating for them". He is, of course, quite right. Article 13 of the third convention, concerning the treatment of prisoners, insists that they "must at all times be protected... against insults and public curiosity". This may number among the less heinous of the possible infringements of the laws of war, but the conventions, ratified by Iraq in 1956, are non-negotiable. If you break them, you should expect to be prosecuted for war crimes.

Scores of Iraqis have been killed or injured in bomb attacks targeting police stations and those cooperating with coalition forces since the US-led invasion of the country.

In an attack yesterday - overshadowed by the later announcement of Saddam's arrest - 17 police officers were killed in an explosion in Khalidiyah, around 35 miles west of Baghdad.
Lieutenant Colonel Ali Amer, the station's commander, said that, in addition to the eight fatalities, 10 officers were injured in today's blast.
mred????????????/

Whether one liked Saddam Hussein or not, he was the legitimate President of a great Arab nation, and his humiliation was the humiliation of all Arabs.
"All inquiries about doing business in Iraq are referred to a select list of intermediaries issued by the American authorities", I was told by an Australian businessman. "All are Jewish and most of them are Israeli. Heading the list is the Israeli law firm that Douglas Feith (an American extreme-Zionist official) is a partner in".
But Israeli politicians foresee an even better outcome. "Deposed Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein could be offered a deal in which he would give his captors information on . how he smuggled some of the weapons of mass destruction into Syria," said the military observer of the Israeli daily Haaretz.
"In exchange, he would face life imprisonment and not be executed for war crimes", It will save George W. Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair' bacon, following accusations that they lied to their people to justify war. More important, it would accomplish an old wish of Israeli leaders: the US tanks would roll into Damascus. With the conquest of Syria, the next stage of the Middle East subjugation to Israel would be complete, and the road to Saudi oil riches would be open. With the conquest of Syria, the next stage of the Middle East subjugation to Israel would be complete, and the road to Saudi oil riches would be open. In short, Hussein's capture will not bring peace to Iraq and the Middle East. Most probably, it will be used to jump-start the new round of war in the troubled area.

mred - oops - the penny has dropped
its starting to make sense.
'im saddam and im here to negotiate'
i wonder if the following happened:
1. somehow saddam and the ams were in contact
2. 'if u let us capture you on our terms and tell us that your hidden wmds are in syria, u (or more probably, peep he cares about) can live'
this solves a few problems:
1. sh is captured
2. the mysterious wmd debacle is resolved
3. we (sic) get to invade syria

soon, it wont be over

" Washington's closest Iraq war ally Britain said Monday it would play "no part" in any trial of Saddam Hussein that might lead to his execution. "
Iraq's captured ex-dictator might face execution under a special court set up by the Iraqi Governing Council days before Saddam's capture. The United States, which is holding Saddam, allows execution.

Straw said "He wouldn't understand the truth if he fell over it."

Mr. Hussein cited the transcript of his meeting on July 25, 1990 in Baghdad with US Ambassador April Glaspie. When Saddam asked Glaspie if the US would object to an attack on Kuwait over the small emirate's theft of Iraqi oil, America's Ambassador told him, "We have no opinion…. Secretary [of State James] Baker has directed me to emphasize the instruction ... that Kuwait is not associated with America."

we are going to treat him according to the Geneva Conventions, but his .. status has yet to be determined."