Maybe if they found the missing nine billion dollars that “went away”, these things would be operational.
In a troubling sign for the American-financed rebuilding program in Iraq, inspectors for a federal oversight agency have found that in a sampling of eight projects that the United States had declared successes, seven were no longer operating as designed because of plumbing and electrical failures, lack of proper maintenance, apparent looting and expensive equipment that lay idle.
The United States has previously admitted, sometimes under pressure from federal inspectors, that some of its reconstruction projects have been abandoned, delayed or poorly constructed. But this is the first time inspectors have found that projects officially declared a success - in some cases, as little as six months before the latest inspections - were no longer working properly.
The inspections ranged geographically from northern to southern Iraq and covered projects as varied as a maternity hospital, barracks for an Iraqi special forces unit and a power station for Baghdad International Airport.
At the airport, crucially important for the functioning of the country, inspectors found that while $11.8 million had been spent on new electrical generators, $8.6 million worth were no longer functioning.
At the maternity hospital, a rehabilitation project in the northern city of Erbil, an expensive incinerator for medical waste was padlocked - Iraqis at the hospital could not find the key when inspectors asked to see the equipment - and partly as a result, medical waste including syringes, used bandages and empty drug vials were clogging the sewage system and probably contaminating the water system.
The newly built water purification system was not functioning either.
No foreign diplomat has been closer or had more access to President Bush, his family and his administration than the magnetic and fabulously wealthy Prince Bandar bin Sultan of Saudi Arabia.
Prince Bandar has mentored Mr. Bush and his father through three wars and the broader campaign against terrorism, reliably delivering - sometimes in the Oval Office - his nation’s support for crucial Middle East initiatives dependent on the regional legitimacy the Saudis could bring, as well as timely warnings of Saudi regional priorities that might put it into apparent conflict with the United States. Even after his 22-year term as Saudi ambassador ended in 2005, he still seemed the insider’s insider. But now, current and former Bush administration officials are wondering if the longtime reliance on him has begun to outlive its usefulness.
Bush administration officials have been scratching their heads over steps taken by Prince Bandar’s uncle, King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, that have surprised them by going against the American playbook, after receiving assurances to the contrary from Prince Bandar during secret trips he made to Washington.
For instance, in February, King Abdullah effectively torpedoed plans by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice for a high-profile peace summit meeting between Prime Minister Ehud Olmert of Israel and the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, by brokering a power’sharing agreement with Mr. Abbas’s Fatah and Hamas that did not require Hamas to recognize Israel or forswear violence. The Americans had believed, after discussions with Prince Bandar, that the Saudis were on board with the strategy of isolating Hamas.
BAGHDAD - A car bomb exploded Saturday in the Shiite holy city of Karbala as the streets were packed with people heading for evening prayers, killing at least 58 and wounding scores near some of the country’s most sacred shrines. Separately, the U.S. military announced the deaths of eight American troops, including three killed Saturday in a single roadside bombing outside Baghdad.
With black smoke clogging the skies above Karbala, angry crowds hurled stones at police and later stormed the provincial governor’s house, accusing authorities of failing to protect them from the unrelenting bombings usually blamed on Sunni insurgents. It was the second car bomb to strike the city’s central area in two weeks.
Near the blast site, survivors frantically searched for missing relatives. Iraqi television showed one man carrying the charred body of a small girl above his head as he ran down the street, while ambulances rushed to retrieve the wounded and firefighters sprayed water at fires in the wreckage, leaving pools of bloody water.
The blast took place about 7 p.m. in a crowded commercial area near the shrines of Imam Abbas and Imam Hussein, major Shiite saints. The U.S. military said American forces were on the scene; the Iraqi army asked for medical supplies.
This whole thing is bugging me,” said Tom Heffelfinger, who says he doesn’t know why he might have been under scrutiny.
WASHINGTON - Former U.S. Attorney Tom Heffelfinger’s name was on an early list of attorneys that the Justice Department considered firing, a congressional aide said Friday.
Heffelfinger, who was appointed by President Bush in 2001, resigned voluntarily in February 2006, nearly six months before the first of eight U.S. attorneys were sent packing.
Heffelfinger said Friday that if his name did appear on a list for possible termination — something he won’t believe until he sees it himself — then it was because he may have displeased “one or two people with the Department of Justice.”
He said he was confident that he had not raised hackles in the White House or the Minnesota congressional delegation.
“This whole thing is bugging me,” Heffelfinger said of the press reports and speculation about whether he was shoved out the door to make room for a more clubby prosecutor.
“It’s been going on now for a couple of months, so I’d just as soon get it out in the open.”
Heffelfinger said he’s been trying to understand why he might have been targeted. “The only thing I can think of is my advocacy on behalf of Native American issues,” Heffelfinger said.
26-Apr-2007 3 | US: 3 | UK: 0 | Other: 0
US NAME NOT RELEASED YET Al Anbar Province Hostile - hostile fire
US Corporal Willie P. Celestine Jr. Al Anbar Province Hostile - hostile fire
US Lance Corporal Adam Loggins Al Anbar Province Hostile - hostile fire
24-Apr-2007 1 | US: 1 | UK: 0 | Other: 0
US Specialist Jeremy E. Maresh Baghdad Non-hostile - suicide
23-Apr-2007 12 | US: 11 | UK: 1 | Other: 0
US Lance Corporal Dale G. Peterson Al Anbar Province Hostile - hostile fire
US Sergeant Brice A. Pearson Sadah - Diyala Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack
US Sergeant Randell T. Marshall Sadah - Diyala Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack
US Specialist Jerry R. King Sadah - Diyala Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack
US Staff Sergeant Kenneth E. Locker Jr. Sadah - Diyala Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack
US Specialist Michael J. Rodriguez Sadah - Diyala Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack
US Staff Sergeant William C. Moore Sadah - Diyala Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack
US Sergeant Michael L. Vaughan Sadah - Diyala Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack
US Private 1st Class Garrett C. Knoll Sadah - Diyala Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack
US 1st Lieutenant Kevin Gaspers Sadah - Diyala Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack
US Private 1st Class Jeffrey A. Avery Muqudadiyah - Babil Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack
UK Kingsman (private) Alan Joseph Jones Basra (Al Ashar district) - Basrah Hostile - hostile fire - small arms fire
21-Apr-2007 6 | US: 6 | UK: 0 | Other: 0
US Staff Sergeant Marlon B. Harper Baghdad (western part) Hostile - hostile fire - small arms fire, RPG
US Private Michael J. Slater Taji - Baghdad Non-hostile - vehicle rollover
US Sergeant William W. Bushnell Baghdad (southwest of) Hostile - hostile fire - RPG attack
US Staff Sergeant Steven R. Tudor Baghdad (eastern part) Hostile - hostile fire - indirect fire
US Private 1st Class Christopher M. North Baghdad (southwest part) Hostile - hostile fire - IED, small arms fire
US Corporal Ray M. Bevel Yusufiyah - Baghdad Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack
20-Apr-2007 2 | US: 1 | UK: 0 | Other: 1
US Lance Corporal Jeffery A. Bishop Al Anbar Province Hostile - hostile fire
POL Corporal Tomasz Jura Diwaniyah - Qadisiyah Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack
19-Apr-2007 3 | US: 1 | UK: 2 | Other: 0
US Chief Warrant Officer Dwayne L. Moore Mahmudiyah - Babil Hostile - hostile fire - rocket attack
UK Trooper Kristen Turton Maysan Province Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack
UK Corporal Ben Leaning Maysan Province Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack
18-Apr-2007 3 | US: 3 | UK: 0 | Other: 0
US Private 1st Class Jason M. Morales Baghdad (northwest part) Hostile - hostile fire - small arms fire
US Corporal Wade J. Oglesby Taji - Baghdad Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack
US Corporal Michael M. Rojas Taji - Baghdad Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack
“You officers amuse yourselves with God knows what buffooneries and never dream in the least of serious service. This is a source of stupidity which would become most dangerous in case of a serious conflict.”
- Frederick the Great
For the second time in a generation, the United States faces the prospect of defeat at the hands of an insurgency. In April 1975, the U.S. fled the Republic of Vietnam, abandoning our allies to their fate at the hands of North Vietnamese communists. In 2007, Iraq’s grave and deteriorating condition offers diminishing hope for an American victory and portends risk of an even wider and more destructive regional war.
These debacles are not attributable to individual failures, but rather to a crisis in an entire institution: America’s general officer corps. America’s generals have failed to prepare our armed forces for war and advise civilian authorities on the application of force to achieve the aims of policy. The argument that follows consists of three elements. First, generals have a responsibility to society to provide policymakers with a correct estimate of strategic probabilities. Second, America’s generals in Vietnam and Iraq failed to perform this responsibility. Third, remedying the crisis in American generalship requires the intervention of Congress.
The Responsibilities of Generalship
Armies do not fight wars; nations fight wars. War is not a military activity conducted by soldiers, but rather a social activity that involves entire nations. Prussian military theorist Carl von Clausewitz noted that passion, probability and policy each play their role in war. Any understanding of war that ignores one of these elements is fundamentally flawed.
The passion of the people is necessary to endure the sacrifices inherent in war. Regardless of the system of government, the people supply the blood and treasure required to prosecute war. The statesman must stir these passions to a level commensurate with the popular sacrifices required. When the ends of policy are small, the statesman can prosecute a conflict without asking the public for great sacrifice. Global conflicts such as World War II require the full mobilization of entire societies to provide the men and materiel necessary for the successful prosecution of war. The greatest error the statesman can make is to commit his nation to a great conflict without mobilizing popular passions to a level commensurate with the stakes of the conflict.
Popular passions are necessary for the successful prosecution of war, but cannot be sufficient. To prevail, generals must provide policymakers and the public with a correct estimation of strategic probabilities. The general is responsible for estimating the likelihood of success in applying force to achieve the aims of policy. The general describes both the means necessary for the successful prosecution of war and the ways in which the nation will employ those means. If the policymaker desires ends for which the means he provides are insufficient, the general is responsible for advising the statesman of this incongruence. The statesman must then scale back the ends of policy or mobilize popular passions to provide greater means. If the general remains silent while the statesman commits a nation to war with insufficient means, he shares culpability for the results.
Not only are teachers not paid enough all across the Country. Not only are classroom sizes way too large (number of students), now Chi Town cuts 775 teachers. Who’s going to teach our kids in 20 years?
About 775 probationary teachers in Chicago public schools learned Friday they are losing their jobs in a purge that district leaders say could improve the quality of instruction in the system’s most challenged schools.
The teachers were dismissed for various reasons, but the most common was an inability to manage their classrooms. Probationary teachers include those who have been in the district less than five years and others who have worked for longer than that as full-time substitutes.
More teachers were let go last year, when a budget crunch forced schools to cut hundreds of teaching jobs. This year’s dismissals were triggered largely by performance issues.
The cuts represent about 11 percent of the district’s estimated 7,000 non-tenured teachers. Last year, principals acknowledged that they fired some probationary teachers for budget reasons, and about 110 of the 1,050 dismissed then ended up being rehired at the same school.
Schools Chief Arne Duncan said the cuts allow principals to build the best teams for their schools, and they are not to solve budget problems or get rid of outspoken teachers, as some critics have alleged. He said the quality and quantity of the teaching recruits this year gives him confidence that these vacancies will be filled by educators who can better reach students in hard-to’staff schools.
Principals always have had the right to dismiss teachers who have been in the district less than five years, but the current union contract makes the process easier.
The practice of firing probationary teachers has proven to be divisive for the teachers union as it prepares for the election of new officers next month. Union President Marilyn Stewart has decried the change in the contract that allows the district to fire the teachers more easily and blames Deborah Lynch, her predecessor and campaign opponent.
