Iraqi Women Thank Americans (Would A President Kerry Liberate Them?)

[TexanBob]

Iraqi women tour U.S. with this quiet, stunning message: Thanks
The Detroit News

Laura Berman

They are two Iraqi women on a tour of the American Midwest, conveying a simple but somehow stunning message.

To wit: Thanks for liberating Iraq. Thanks for sending American troops. You Americans are a lovely people.

Taghreed Al-Qaragholi, 30, and Surood Ahmad Falih, 33, are college-educated, professional women who have flourished in post-occupation Iraq.

They are believers in democracy, believers in the current transformation of their country. As women, they feel particularly affected.

Both insist that their lives, and those of most Iraqis, have improved since Saddam Hussein's statue was toppled in Baghdad.

Falih, who watched family members being bombed in their own car under Saddam's regime, has no doubts that the situation has improved.

For 10 years, as a United Nations employee, she's worked with a small Kurdish village in Iraq whose male population was completely eliminated during the Saddam regime.

"There are no men. Zero," she says. "It was very bad there. There was no safe place."

She carries a folded e-mail print-out from a South Carolina soldier's mother - a woman who invited her to stay with her family - and tears flood her eyes when she speaks of other kindnesses she's experienced in the United States.

Both women are here under the auspices of the Iraq-America Freedom Alliance, a coalition of Chaldean, Kurdish and Muslim groups, among others. And that group is, in turn, funded by a U.S. foundation whose board members include Steve Forbes, former U.N. Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick, and Al Gore's former aide, Donna Brazile - a foundation committed to what its spokesman, Bill McCarthy, calls "an aggressive war on terrorism."

These two women are here to say good things about the U.S. presence in Iraq, and to encourage an American response to terrorism, and during their visit Wednesday to the Detroit area, they did so with conviction and charm.

They describe themselves as women fighting for the rights of women in Iraq - rights they say have now been won, if not fully secured. Under the country's new constitution - the document that Al-Qaragholi laboriously typed and re-typed while its words were being debated and repeatedly changed - women are guaranteed representation in the parliament.

"Before women had no political rights. Now we have four government ministers who are women, six deputy ministers. It is very different than under Saddam Hussein," says Al-Qaragholi, who is an administrator with one of Iraq's political parties. She also says that women make up 60 percent of the population, a gender distortion produced by years of war and political executions.

She sees her two younger sisters, ages 18 and 17, as newly hopeful about their lives and futures.

"Before, we educated ourselves to be able to leave. We were like machines, and we kept our emotions inside," said Falih.

Both women insisted that most Iraqis support the American troops. "We want to say thank you to the mothers and fathers of American soldiers," says Falih.

They are here, uttering words Americans do not often hear. And no matter how you might feel about the American military presence in Iraq, their clear sense of hope is at once surprising and affecting.

================================================

And why is America not hearing their words?

================================================

August 05, 2004, 8:04 a.m.
“Iraqis Want Us There”
U.S. Army commander says unbalanced news threatens troop morale.

By W. Thomas Smith Jr.

On the night of April 6, 2003, Lt. Col. Stephen M. Twitty called his subordinate commanders together a few miles south of Baghdad. "Guys, this is it," the black 39-year-old from Chesnee, South Carolina told his officers. "We're going to take the fight into Baghdad. Some of us in this room may die, and that's okay. Just know it's for a good cause." He then offered up a short prayer and dismissed his commanders.

The following morning, Twitty's unit, Task Force 3-15 (3rd Battalion, 15th Infantry Regiment) of the Army's 3rd Infantry Division began an epic eight-hour struggle to race up the primary highway into Baghdad, seize and hold three key intersections along the way, and then keep the road open for follow-on American forces.

"It was one hell of a fight," Twitty told National Review Online earlier this week. "A lot of people back here in the states seem to marvel at how Baghdad fell without putting up much of a fight. I don't get angry when I hear that, but it bothers me when I think of the soldiers killed and wounded and the work we did during that eight hours of continuous, high-intensity fighting to get that thing under control."

Intense indeed: The soldiers of Task Force 3-15 often found themselves outnumbered by enemy troops which included members of Saddam Hussein's vaunted Republican Guard, Fedayeen militia, and foreign fighters. The enemy was stubborn, often suicidal on the attack, and at various times during the fighting, the Americans found themselves to be perilously low on ammunition. Not that there wasn't enough ammunition to go around, but U.S. forces were advancing so fast and far beyond their supply lines that soldiers and ammo moving up from the rear were often slowed by running battles and rear-guard actions with enemy forces that had not yet been destroyed.

By day's end, two of Twitty's men were dead and 45 wounded out of his 600-man task force (1,000 men total, if counting the 400 troops who were battling enemy forces south of Baghdad).

"Isn't that a miracle?" he says. "I actually feared I was going to lose 90 percent of my lead company."

A miracle perhaps, but the low casualty numbers were also a result of overwhelming U.S. firepower, a determination to hold newly captured ground, and superior equipment and protective gear. "I had six or eight soldiers who were shot in the chest, but lived because of the new body armor we use," says Twitty. "Rounds [bullets] were literally stuck in the armor plating. Two soldiers were shot in the back and lived. One shot in the stomach and lived. Two shot in the head, but lived because of the design of the Kevlar helmet."

Oddly, many Americans back home were led to believe that enemy troops defending the Iraqi capital simply collapsed in the face of the American army. A great misconception, argues Twitty, who points to the watered-down version of the fight for Baghdad as an ironic result of the battle's ferocity.

"The battle was so intense, the reporters were all hunkered down behind vehicles," he says. "Reporters are usually out front trying to get the story, but the fighting was so hot, many of them were scrambling for cover."

Twitty adds that he has a great deal of respect for combat correspondents, and that much of the reporting during the offensive combat phase of the war was in fact solid, because embedded journalists were traveling with the troops, eating the same food, sleeping in the same holes, dodging the same bullets. "They saw the good and the bad and they usually reported both," says Twitty.

Today, with the occupation phase of the war being conducted, journalists are still near front-line units, but few are actually embedded with the troops. And according to Twitty, only select events are covered, and rarely are they the positive stories.

"The news lacks balance, because you have the media staying in comfortable places like the Palestine Hotel," says Twitty. "They're no longer ducking for cover. They're only coming out and getting snapshots of incidents. They rarely see and almost never report the good things. And there are American soldiers out there doing great things for the Iraqis, every single day. They are interacting with children, vaccinating people, delivering supplies, building hospitals, schools, and athletic fields. The Iraqi standard of living is rising, but the media doesn't report that. What they report are the suicide bombings, RPG attacks, and beheadings."

Twitty concedes it is not exciting to see a group of soldiers carrying textbooks into a school building, but it is exciting to see something blow-up. "Don't get me wrong, the ugly stuff needs to be reported, but so does the good," he says.

Unbalanced reporting, Twitty fears, may eventually begin to erode troop morale.

"Currently, morale among the troops is extremely high," he says. "A number of factors contribute to that, not the least of which is the progress they see being made everyday. What troubles the soldier is when he or she reads newspapers from home, and sees that only the bad news is being published. They see news that makes the situation look as if America is a hated, bungling occupier and the country is on the verge of collapse. That's just not so, and the soldiers on the ground know it's not so."

Asked if the Iraqis have welcomed the Americans with open arms, Twitty is quick to say, "without a doubt. The vast majority of the Iraqi people are glad we are there. They want to be safe and secure. When we go into an area, they are often all over us. It is only a minority — guerillas and foreign fighters — who do not want us there."

Is the war in Iraq part of the overall global war on terror, or a separate conflict? Twitty argues both are inextricably connected. "Look, I'm not a politician, but I know what I've seen," he says. "For me personally, regardless of whether or not Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, he did have plenty of torture chambers and mass gravesites. That's terrorism. The Iraqis are thankful we are there to eradicate it, and America and the world is safer for that."

===============================================

In the media's War On Bush, it's easy to overlook how successful our invasion has been. Here are two stories that say Americans are doing a great job, that most Iraqis are grateful we are there and the picture isn't nearly as bleak as the news media wants you to believe.

I've heard other stories from soldiers who say the news reports they hear from back home paint a far darker picture than what is actually taking place.

Is there a blackout on good news from Iraq because the press overwhelmingly wants Kerry elected? Would we still be facing a building Iraqi threat under Saddam today if we had had four years of President Kerry?

True, we have lost 900 American lives and spent large amounts of money. But it is difficult to see the benefit of that cost if the news media insists on not telling you.

[Exile_In_SJ]

well the media does have a bias, and coupled with its tendency to want to cover bad news as opposed to good news, we get nothing but bad news from Iraq.

We need some of the kind of pro-american reporters we had from WWII to provide some balance.

Most reporters are reporters first and Americans second which is not the best thing.

[alkemical]

I want real news, i don't want editors.

But seeing how Bush is hanging with the Pope - freeing women isn't something that either of them actually support (since both are fundamental-conservatists - they often believe a womans place is in the kitchen - makin' dinner).

But No matter who is going to be or who was president - we were going into iraq no matter what.

[Crushaholic]

Originally Posted by amesj523

But seeing how Bush is hanging with the Pope - freeing women isn't something that either of them actually support (since both are fundamental-conservatists - they often believe a womans place is in the kitchen - makin' dinner).

Is that why Condi Rice is National Security Adviser? Is that why Bush's first press secretary was a woman (Karen Hughes)?

[Exile_In_SJ]

Kerry might, if the French gave him permission.

[alkemical]

Originally Posted by Crushaholic

Is that why Condi Rice is National Security Adviser? Is that why Bush's first press secretary was a woman (Karen Hughes)?

He takes a page out of the lefts book - you give some 'token' positions to some groups - to make it seem you aren't this and that.

I could go on about condi-rice lying to us about WMD's though, or lying to us that they weren't there (which ever side you want to spin on) -

Or maybe we could use some religion and talk about how women are the reason why the world is so wrong and so evil (which i don't think that way since i left organized religion behind with buying into a politikal theory).

[Exile_In_SJ]

NSC is a token position? Secretary of State is a token position? wow, that's news to me.

[alkemical]

it is when they lie for and issues

[Captain_Poncho]

Originally Posted by amesj523

But seeing how Bush is hanging with the Pope - freeing women isn't something that either of them actually support (since both are fundamental-conservatists - they often believe a womans place is in the kitchen - makin' dinner).

Josh, buddy, I love you man. But that was just plain old bizarre.

[alkemical]

thanks

[Captain_Poncho]

Anytime, my friend.

[alkemical]

Captain,

I mean really - having women in cabnet roles isn't anything new or bushII brought to the table. Hell actually - aren't we the furthest behind, we haven't had a woman president yet, or hell someone not white.

I also find it funny that we say we are a country for liberty and freedom, but we are hypocrites of such (how was this country really founded?)

[Crushaholic]

Originally Posted by amesj523

I mean really - having women in cabinet roles isn't anything new or bushII brought to the table. Hell actually - aren't we the furthest behind, we haven't had a woman president yet, or hell someone not white.

The Republicans actually got closer than the Democrats in putting a woman on the ticket. Elizabeth Dole ran for the nomination once. She didn't do well at all, but I don't even remember the last woman that even tried to make it on the Democrat ballot. This isn't a Republican or Democrat issue. When the American people are ready and when the major parties are ready to field a serious candidate, they'll elect a woman or a minority as president.

[TexanBob]

The Democrats had Carol Moseley-Braun running in this year's primary but she wasn't even the top black candidate in the field.

Any woman is going to have a difficult time running for President during a time of war. It's just the perception that a woman isn't going to be forceful enough to put lives on the line if necessary.

Unfair? Maybe. But it's a very hard sell to the American public.

BTW, what about when Jeane Kirkpatrick (a Republican) was U.N. Ambassador? That was under Reagan (IIRC). She toyed with the idea of running for president but never made an official go of it.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Still working that "bush invaded Iraq in order to liberate the Iraqi people" pitch, eh?

Too funny.

Anyone remember candidate Bush's unequivocal denunciation of "nation building" during campaign 2000?

Talk about a "flip-flopper!"

And to try to pawn this story about Iraqi women off as if it's somehow representative of the feelings of the majority of Iraqis toward their invaders/occupiers is just ridiculous.

I guess it's ultimately just indicative of the extent to which Fox/CNN/MSNBS/CBS/NBC/ABC keeps its viewers blissfully unaware of the realities of the situation in Iraq.

BushCo and its oil lobby masters have seen to it that its media lapdogs show only carefully-screened news and images from Iraq to the sheeple in TV land.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Iraqi Women Thank Americans (Would A President Kerry Liberate Them?

Hey dumbass:

Does your poll group include those "liberated" women whose next of kin have been maimed and killed by American bombs?

Does it include those women who, along with their families, have been imprisoned by 'mistake,' tortured, sexually violated, and murdered by Americans in Iraqi?

Just curious.

Have you ever wondered why we haven't been shown the rest of those photos from that prison?

Probably not.

Trouble is, while Fux News is sheltering you from the truth, the rest of the world is watching.

[watermock]

He takes a page out of the lefts book - you give some 'token' positions to some groups - to make it seem you aren't this and that.

What a line of crap. You think Rice and Powell are in "token positions"?

There wasn't a single cabinet position in the Clinton WhiteHouse that was of a single monority. NOT ONE. You people are so full of shiat it's incredible.

So when Bush has 3 it's "token".

Listen Dumbass, it's called head of the Security Council, Secretary of State, Secretary of the Interior?

You people are incredible.

[watermock]

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

Iraqi Women Thank Americans (Would A President Kerry Liberate Them?
Hey dumbass:

Does your poll group include those "liberated" women whose next of kin have been maimed and killed by American bombs?

First, let's examine "next of kin" shall we dimwit?

Does it include those women who, along with their families, have been imprisoned by 'mistake,' tortured, sexually violated, and murdered by Americans in Iraqi?Just curious.

That is pretty curious, as in a pathetic assertion from an idiot. Listen to the assertion:

Women along with their families, have been tortured, sexually voilated, and murdered by Americans.

Have you ever wondered why we haven't been shown the rest of those photos from that prison?

That's because the people doing those things were taping themselves you dimwit, and they are on trial right now.

Trouble is, while Fux News is sheltering you from the truth, the rest of the world is watching.

This is another rediculous comment common from this dimwit. Fux news as you want to call it, isn't the only news source, just the one you love to ridicule while you have never watched it. This is coming from Mr. Bartcop cut and paste.

Your an idiot. There is ABC, NBC, CNN, CSpan, and MSNBC, and several others you idiot.

Noone is sheltering anything. Your a total idiot.

[alkemical]

blah blah - mock rambles on!