it's mind-boggling how little attention the latest u.s. offensive in iraq is getting. its absolutely staggering, they're bombing in iraq again. but who exactly they are bombing when military leaders regularly contradict each other on who is responsible for the attacks on u.s. forces? (official explanations ping-pong between "saddam loyalists" and "foreign fighters"–the other likely culprits, frustrated and armed iraqis who were suddenly unemployed when bremer abolished the iraqi army, are almost never mentioned by any military authority figures)
i heard a story on n.p.r. yesterday when driving back from my hearing which explained that some of the bombing is targeting houses of people who live in the tikrit area. some of the demolition is also apparently being done the old fashioned way, with bulldozers. the military official who was interviewed on the n.p.r. piece explained that the homes were selected because they had somehow been involved in attacks against u.s. forces–either because the u.s. believes attacks were planned from the homes or because the attackers used the homes for cover when they attacked. the official noted that residents of the demolished homes were given 1/2 to 1 hour warning that their home was slated for demolition so they could clear out their belongings.
so, to review, u.s. forces have been able to determine which houses were involved in attacks against the u.s., but not which people. so they have decided to attack the houses in lieu of going after the actual attackers. the owners of the houses, whom the military apparently believes are innocent--for they do not arrest the owners when they warn them about the houses demolition--are nevertheless punished by being rendered homeless. also reflect for a minute how long it took you to move pack up and get your belongings out last time you moved. when i moved out of our 2-bedroom apartment in chicago it took days to just box all my crap up, much less get it out. just moving the boxes out took several hours. so most of these people are losing not only their homes, but most of their personal possessions. the n.p.r. story described the owners sifting through the rubble of their house after it was demolished.
this is how we are winning the hearts and minds of the people in iraq? especially those in the center of "the sunni triangle" where people are least in favor of the american occupation? (for an example of the type of outrage this will generate even outside the "triangle" see this post from the iraqi blogger riverbend).
with this policy, the u.s. is basically adopting israel's tactics in the west bank. for years they have demolished the houses of the family members of suicide bombers, over the protest by much of the outside world. considering how effective the israeli policy has been in winning over the palestinian population, we can see exactly where this policy in iraq is leading. furthermore, as billmon pointed out a few days ago the demolition policy violates the geneva convention. it's not only ineffective, but illegal.
meanwhile, you have to look hard to even find mention of the bombings and demolitions in the news. the coverage of iraq is already going the route of afghanistan. the fighting there barely ever makes it into the newspaper anymore, much less on news broadcasts. even when american forces are killed in afghanistan, it is a small story of a couple of lines buried deep in the paper. but can we really expect otherwise? after all, michael jackson was just arrested!
