Petraeus: "we are not arming the tribes...already well-enough armed"

[sabra]

http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/armed_services_cmte_hearing_091107.html?hpid=topnews

<snip>

PETRAEUS: Senator, first of all, we are not arming the tribes. We have not provided weapons to them.

What we did initially is basically give a thumbs up when they asked if it would be OK if they pointed the weapons they did have, they were already well-enough armed, at Al Qaida because they had come to reject the Taliban like ideology and barbarity of Al Qaida in the Euphrates River Valley.

And at this point, their salaries in Anbar Province, of the vast majority of these individuals are being paid by the central Iraqi government because they have been picked up as members, have either joined the army or joined local police forces up and down the Euphrates River Valley.

Let's ask Major General Rick Lynch about that:

<snip>

The US high command this month gave permission to its officers on the ground to negotiate arms deals with local leaders. Arms, ammunition, body armour and other equipment, as well as cash, pick-up trucks and fuel, have already been handed over in return for promises to turn on al-Qaida and not attack US troops.

The US military in Baghdad is trying to portray the move as arming disenchanted Sunnis who are rising up in their neighbourhoods against their former allies, al-Qaida and its foreign fighters. But the reality on the ground is more complex, with little sign that the US will be able to control the weapons once they are handed over. The danger is that the insurgents could use these weapons against American troops or in the civil conflict against Shia Muslims. Similar efforts by the US in other wars have backfired, the most spectacular being the arming of guerrillas against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan.

Major General Rick Lynch, a senior US commander in Iraq, insisted no weapons would be given to insurgents who had attacked Americans. "We have not crossed that line," he said.

The US said it would use fingerprinting, retinal scans and other tests to establish whether insurgents had been involved in fighting against American troops.

OK fine, if their are using the arms they already had, where did it come from?

http://rawstory.com/news/afp/Unguarded_munition_sites_still_feed_03222007.html

As of October 2006 US forces had still not secured all of the unguarded munition sites in Iraq, allowing thieves to keep stealing war material and stoke the country's violence, a US government report said Thursday.

The Government Accountability Office said that not enough soldiers were available to take control of massive arms dumps across Iraq after the March 2003 invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein.

"Not securing these conventional munitions storage site has been costly, as government reports indicated that looted munitions are being used to make improvised explosive devices (IED) that have killed or maimed many people, and will likely continue to support terrorist attacks in the region," the GAO report summary reads.

"Conventional munitions storage sites were looted after major combat operations and some remained vulnerable as of October 2006."

[bdamomma]

1. hey I wouldn't doubt this statement.

As of October 2006 US forces had still not secured all of the unguarded munition sites in Iraq, allowing thieves to keep stealing war material and stoke the country's violence, a US government report said Thursday.


I wouldn't put it pass our own thugs who are ruining our country from doing this, just to have their perpetual never ending war.

[TwilightGardener]

2. How about the fact that the Coalition is paying bribes to militias

(the ones the Brits were fighting) to keep the supply port of Basra open? How fucked up is THAT??

[shain from kane]

3. How about this? We don't give them any arms, we take their arms. We don't give them any money, we

set up a perimeter around them, and tell them to begin living in a civilized manner. We train who we need to restore order, and provide them with weapons, as needed, within the perimeter. They need less weapons, not more weapons.

[sinkingfeeling]

4. How does he know? The military cannot account for a quarter of a million weapons sent to Iraq.