Meanwhile, in Mosul

[robbo203]

I see RT with their hashtag "MosulSOS" are making a big issue of the difference in the way the Western media treated the "liberation" of Aleppo by Russian and Syrian forces and the manner in which they treat the current liberation of Mosul by US, Iraqi and other forces.  In the case of the former the loss of civilian lives was regarded as a human tragedy bordering on, if not actually tantamount to, a war crime.  In the case of the latter and even in spite of the fact that numbers of civilians killed is significantly higher, this is regarded by that same media as simply a case of unfortunate collateral damage when the figures are even mentioned at all Irritating though I find RT to be as a right wing mouthpiece for all sorts of reactionary causes of the Trump and Brexit variety ,  I think it has a point in this case

[jondwhite]

Like a stopped clock, even right-wingers can be correct sometimes, for example here's Peter Hitchens on the comparison between Mosul and Aleppohttp://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2017/03/some-good-reasons-for-not-being-taken-in-by-anti-russian-propaganda.html

[Anonymous]

robbo203 wrote:

I see RT with their hashtag "MosulSOS" are making a big issue of the difference in the way the Western media treated the "liberation" of Aleppo by Russian and Syrian forces and the manner in which they treat the current liberation of Mosul by US, Iraqi and other forces.  In the case of the former the loss of civilian lives was regarded as a human tragedy bordering on, if not actually tantamount to, a war crime.  In the case of the latter and even in spite of the fact that numbers of civilians killed is significantly higher, this is regarded by that same media as simply a case of unfortunate collateral damage when the figures are even mentioned at all Irritating though I find RT to be as a right wing mouthpiece for all sorts of reactionary causes of the Trump and Brexit variety ,  I think it has a point in this case

 RT is like a clock pendulum because they have a different apporach in their Spanish version, and the commentaries are different too. I can see more reactionaries on the English version than in the Spanish version

[robbo203]

mcolome1 wrote:

robbo203 wrote:

I see RT with their hashtag "MosulSOS" are making a big issue of the difference in the way the Western media treated the "liberation" of Aleppo by Russian and Syrian forces and the manner in which they treat the current liberation of Mosul by US, Iraqi and other forces.  In the case of the former the loss of civilian lives was regarded as a human tragedy bordering on, if not actually tantamount to, a war crime.  In the case of the latter and even in spite of the fact that numbers of civilians killed is significantly higher, this is regarded by that same media as simply a case of unfortunate collateral damage when the figures are even mentioned at all Irritating though I find RT to be as a right wing mouthpiece for all sorts of reactionary causes of the Trump and Brexit variety ,  I think it has a point in this case

 RT is like a clock pendulum because they have a different apporach in their Spanish version, and the commentaries are different too. I can see more reactionaries on the English version than in the Spanish version

 Thats interesting. Although living in Spain and having access to RT in Spanish,  Ive tended to look mainly at the English version, English being my mother tongue.  When I have looked at the Spanish version I was under the impression it was mainly a dubbed version of RT in English e.g. the Keiser Report and so on.  But I guess there must be original Spanish programmes on RT in Spanish.  In  the English version, Peter Lavelle, the presenter on Crosstalk, openly professed to being a conservative and on the main news you often see interviews being given with representatives of the far right like EDL or UKIP as well as free market types like Mises.Org.  You can see the strategy at work here which fits the agenda of the Russian capitalist state nicely,  Ride the wave of right wing populism in the West and give encouragement to it to weaken the power of the traditional western political establishment with its traditional Russo-phobia.  Le Pen for example has argued for lifting sanctions against Russia and its curious that we are seeing more support for Russia coming from the Right rather than the Left or soft left.  RT's political bias is not always obvious because sometimes you get a few lefty type programmes thrown into the mix to confuse the viewer but fundamentally I would say RT is a right wing channel

[Anonymous]

robbo203 wrote:

mcolome1 wrote:

robbo203 wrote:

I see RT with their hashtag "MosulSOS" are making a big issue of the difference in the way the Western media treated the "liberation" of Aleppo by Russian and Syrian forces and the manner in which they treat the current liberation of Mosul by US, Iraqi and other forces.  In the case of the former the loss of civilian lives was regarded as a human tragedy bordering on, if not actually tantamount to, a war crime.  In the case of the latter and even in spite of the fact that numbers of civilians killed is significantly higher, this is regarded by that same media as simply a case of unfortunate collateral damage when the figures are even mentioned at all Irritating though I find RT to be as a right wing mouthpiece for all sorts of reactionary causes of the Trump and Brexit variety ,  I think it has a point in this case

 RT is like a clock pendulum because they have a different apporach in their Spanish version, and the commentaries are different too. I can see more reactionaries on the English version than in the Spanish version

 Thats interesting. Although living in Spain and having access to RT in Spanish,  Ive tended to look mainly at the English version, English being my mother tongue.  When I have looked at the Spanish version I was under the impression it was mainly a dubbed version of RT in English e.g. the Keiser Report and so on.  But I guess there must be original Spanish programmes on RT in Spanish.  In  the English version, Peter Lavelle, the presenter on Crosstalk, openly professed to being a conservative and on the main news you often see interviews being given with representatives of the far right like EDL or UKIP as well as free market types like Mises.Org.  You can see the strategy at work here which fits the agenda of the Russian capitalist state nicely,  Ride the wave of right wing populism in the West and give encouragement to it to weaken the power of the traditional western political establishment with its traditional Russo-phobia.  Le Pen for example has argued for lifting sanctions against Russia and its curious that we are seeing more support for Russia coming from the Right rather than the Left or soft left.  RT's political bias is not always obvious because sometimes you get a few lefty type programmes thrown into the mix to confuse the viewer but fundamentally I would say RT is a right wing channel

 Are you talking about LIve news, or written news ? I read the written news, and in the commentary I can find some Cuban ( from Miami )  right wingers who are still living in the 1959 giving their opinion, and they are totally reactionaries, , but  there are some Argentenian, Cuban ( from the island of Cuba ) and Venezuelan leftwingers giving another version.Russia is doing what was not able to be done during the Cold Car which was to make large capital investment an  a Russian minister able to attend an  international  Latin American summit, therefore they do not want to present a reactionary face toward that region. They already have large capital investment in Venezuela, Cuba, Brasil, Argentina and the Caribbean, and they forgave Cuba international debt that they had with the Soviet Union. Russia was able to do some millitary excercise in the Caribbean with the Venezuelan NavySeveral countries in Latin America are buying weapon  from Russia, specially Venezuela and Nicaragua, the idea is like Chavez said that they do not want the  Yankees to find them with the pants down, and to fuck them without vaseline, and they are buying modern weapons and they are able to find parts. In the old days the US was selling them old millitary hardware or left over from WWII.The Iranian have a factory to produce AK-47 in Venezuela, and they have large investment in Ecuador, and Nicaragua, they already have a news center broacasting in Spanish, like in the old days Radio Teheran was transmitting in different languages, and Moscow Radio had a very good broadcasting in the Spanish language to compete with The Voice of The AmericasThis is a situation that the Trumpers do not want to  understand, this is a change world, the old days when  the US ruling class was able to kick ass all over the earth do not exist any longer, there are too many capitalists kicking ass in different part of the world, and also the Chinese capitalists already made an offer to Mexico that probalbly they will not refuse,  that in case that Nafta fail they are willing to step in and form their own commercial carter with Mexico, and that was one of the issues that Obama tried to avoid, and China has large investment in Cuba.Israel was complaining that Venezuela and Nicaragua were taking investments from Iran, and making alliances with terrorists,  but they have investments in Colombia,  but they are selling weapon to the terrorists of the goverment of Colombia, and to the guerrillas fighters, and FARC control a large territory which has large deposit of petroleum

[Young Master Smeet]

https://airwars.org/news/1000days-two-bombed-cities/

Quote:

Unlike the allegations made against Russia at Aleppo, claims of civilians killed by the Coalition around Raqqa seem to attract little to no international media attention. Yet the sources for allegations both against the Russians and the Coalition are often identical -activists on the ground, with access to a network of people in the various locations where civilian casualties are occuring.

[Young Master Smeet]

Did anyone see this in he News?http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-40200008?ocid=socialflow_twitter

Quote:

The UN has received reports that 231 Iraqi civilians have been killed by so-called Islamic State while attempting to flee Mosul over the past two weeks.At least 204 are believed to have been shot dead by militants during clashes with Iraqi security forces in the Shifa district last Thursday and Saturday.The UN said it had noted a "significant escalation" in such killings.There are also reports of between 50 and 80 civilians being killed in an air strike on the Zanjili area on 31 May.

Now, this is undoubtedly a brutal massacre, but why did it not get a higher billing in the broadcast news (this report is the BBC version of a footnote to cover their backs).  Iraq body count has a report of 19 burnt alive by Isis on the 10th?  This is the opfficial enemy in its death throes: the fall of Aleppo was covered minutely, so why not this?  It is a terrible battle against monsters who are maximising the civilian casualties.Simply trying to minimise the scale of he suffering lest it lead to domestic blowback?  Surely, psy-ops can spin this: the fact s the UK is involved in a hot war, hundreds if not thousands of troops are comitted to this battle, so why the silence?

[Young Master Smeet]

Well, while Mosul is quiet, this at least has made the front page of the BBC website:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-40271450

Quote:

UN war crimes investigators say US-led coalition air strikes on Islamic State militants in the Syrian city of Raqqa are causing "staggering loss of life".Hundreds of civilians are reported to have been killed since March, as coalition warplanes support an offensive by a Kurdish-led alliance.In the past week, Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) fighters have pushed into the west, east and north of Raqqa.The battle for the city has also led to 160,000 civilians fleeing their homes.

Oh, and our god friend white phospherous is back:

Quote:

Separately, Human Rights Watch warned that the coalition's use of artillery-delivered white phosphorus in Raqqa and in the last remaining IS-held parts of the northern Iraqi city of Mosul was endangering civilians.White phosphorus can be used for several purposes on the battlefield – as a smoke screen, for signalling and marking, and as an incendiary weapon.However, international law prohibits its use in civilian areas because of its indiscriminate effects. On contact, it can burn people, thermally and chemically, down to the bone.

[Young Master Smeet]

https://theconversation.com/even-if-raqqa-and-mosul-fall-islamic-state-is-far-from-finished-79370

Quote:

The extent of the coalition forces’ involvement is only now becoming clear. The West is now directly and closely involved in the war on the ground as well as in the air; many of these troops might be special forces who prefer to keep a low profile, but nonetheless, the Middle East is once again becoming host to thousands of Western “boots on the ground”.

and

Quote:

As the battle to liberate Mosul in Iraq moved deeper into the city, Navy SEALs began wearing black fatigues to blend in with Iraqi counter-terror operatives going street by street, and house by house, to flush IS fighters into the open.The same source reports that US special forces are directly engaged alongside the SDF in Raqqa. Part of the reason for this, as well as the extensive use of air power and artillery support, is that IS is proving tenacious in the extreme when defending its main bases.

and

Quote:

IS forces are still laagered in the old city, and even control three outer districts. During the fighting, they have crippled the Iraqi Army’s Counter Terror Service, or Golden Division – the very force the Baghdad government will depend on to control an expected post-Mosul insurgency.

Worth reading in full: the fall of Raqqa and Mosul will not be the end of IS, and if Rogers is right, then the Iraqi state will not be worth much when this is over.

[Young Master Smeet]

It's nearly over:https://airwars.org/news/mosuls-capture-sees-isil-vanquished-but-at-a-terrible-cost/

Quote:

But the civilian toll too has been high. Over the course of the Mosul assault, Airwars tracked over 7,200 alleged civilian fatality allegations in the vicinity of Mosul which were blamed on the US-led Coalition. Most of these incidents remain difficult to vet, and in the majority of cases several actors in addition to the Coalition are blamed – including ISIS and Iraqi security forces.

Iraq Body Count estimates that in 1 week over 100 children died of malnutrition and dehydration.The end of the Mosul Meat Grinder has been a footnote on the media, as will any final tally of the dead.  Mosul has been destroyed.

[Young Master Smeet]

So, it's all over: Mosul has been liberated, at huge cost.  Over 100,000 Iraq troops were used to crush 3,000 fighters, tens of thousands of munitions were rained down on osul.  We'll not know the extent of the civilian dead, but 5-8K seems to be th quoted range. Amnesty has a report here:https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/campaigns/2017/07/at-any-cost-civilian-catastrophe-in-west-mosul-iraq/We mustn't forget IS' ruthless use of civilian hostages.

[Young Master Smeet]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-middle-east-40577265/the-civilians-fleeing-mosulhttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-middle-east-40572318/blasts-drown-out-victory-celebrations-in-mosulhttps://theconversation.com/mosul-is-liberated-but-the-fight-against-islamic-state-and-its-ideology-continues-80758?sg=d7d90b7b-202e-4b1c-a0c8-174dfb028957&sp=1&sr=1eh bottom line of all the above, the effects of the battle against IS will be felt for a long time to come, especially as, as Paul Rogers points out here:http://www.oxfordresearchgroup.org.uk/publications/paul_rogers_monthly_briefing/after_mosul_islamic_state%E2%80%99s_asian_and_african_futureThe examples of the Naxalites and Boko Haram is that such groups at the margins can persist, and climate change and economic deprivation (mixed, as the peice from the Conversation notes, with corruption) can leave young people desparate enough to join these groups.

[alanjjohnstone]

You may find this article on Amnesty International's view on "destroying Mosul to save it" worth a readhttp://www.truthdig.com/report/item/destroying_mosul_possible_us-backed_war_crimes_iraq_exposed_20170711

[Young Master Smeet]

This is particularly interesting:https://www.opendemocracy.net/paul-rogers/what-taking-of-mosul-really-means

Paul Rogers wrote:

The coalition dropped at least 4,848 bombs as part of Operation Inherent Resolve in June, an 11 percent increase over the previous month's record of 4,374 weapons released, according to statistics posted online Monday by U.S. Air Forces Central Command."In the first half of 2017, the coalition released at least 23,413 weapons, putting it on track to easily eclipse the 30,743 bombs dropped in all of 2016, and the 28,696 released throughout 2015” (see Stephen Losey, "As Mosul battle neared end, anti-ISIS airstrikes reached new peak", Air Force Times, 10 July 2017).    

And:

Paul Rogers wrote:

The CTS, which was largely trained and equipped by personnel from United States special-operations command, has borne the brunt of the intense urban warfare against combat-proven ISIS paramilitaries, many of whom have been ready and willing to die for their cause. Both sides did indeed suffer as well as inflict heavy losses in the struggle for Mosul. For its part the Iraqi army is very reluctant to release casualty figures, but its special forces may have been degraded by as much as 40%.

In the linked to article on the Zeuss Complex:

Paul Rogers wrote:

What is happening in all three countries is an enhancement of what is now called "remote warfare". It does include the use of special forces and private military companies, but most of the “fighting” is done from the air, with minimal consequences for the combatants from the coalition states. Accurate figures are difficult to come by, but by aggregating reports from diverse sources it would appear that less than twenty military personnel have been killed among the western coalition forces, a marked contrast with the probably 50,000 losses on the ISIS side.

[Young Master Smeet]

Somethign of a code:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-9d41ef6c-97c9-4953-ba43-284cc62ffdd0Mosul has been largely destroyed, half a million people are still displaced.

Quote:

More than half of Mosul's 54 western residential districts have been significantly affected.The UN describes 15 as “heavily damaged,” meaning most buildings are uninhabitable.A further 23 districts are “moderately damaged,” meaning up to half of the buildings have been destroyed or are structurally unsound, and 16 districts are “lightly damaged”.

and

Quote:

While UN satellite analysis suggests about 10,000 buildings have been severely damaged or completely destroyed, the real level of destruction is believed to be higher. Taking into account damage to multiple floors of buildings, not seen via satellites, the UN now estimates the real number of damaged buildings to be more than three times greater – about 32,000.

 Mostly civilian homes: the old city has been all but destroyed.Last Friday, 5 people were killed by a suicide bomber in Mosul.  Mass graves ae being found.

[Author]

Posts