Suffragettes are so sexy.

Suffragettes with guns - even sexier.

Suffragette with a gun and a 1-O-1 patch. Wow.

Now that's my idea of a feminist. No one is going to be putting Zalkovsky in a burka, and I'd bet that self-assurance and self-respect is contagious. Can you imagine what Zalkovsky must look like to an Iraqi girl?

If we can get more of these sort of pictures and fewer of Madonna and Britney Spears (etc.) out in the world, just imagine what it would be like.

We've really lost touch of the definition of hero.

Damn the media.

Of course, that woman has the right to break into that Iraqi home at night, force the woman onto her knees at gunpoint, put a bag over her head, put her in a prison (do they have the right to have their families notified yet, I don't think so).

She must love all of that, too!

The sexiness of our troops must be the truth of how free Iraq is now.

Iraq is so free that Bush is always there, basking in the freedomosity.

Journalists are simply evil for not leaving the Green Zone and writing about this calvacade of freedom, this liberation tango, and when have the liberal press corps ever commented on the sexiness of girls in combat boots?

It has been over four years since 9/11.

80-90% of the world was for the invasion of Afghanistan. Very few support us in Iraq.

The violence in Iraq increases month by month by month, quarter after quarter after quarter.

When are you ever going to wake up and demand that the people who have messed this up so badly (especially Rumsfeld) get fired?

Attacks Per Day reach six month moving average high

We fired Generals during WWII. We fired Generals in every way.

But not the Bush administration. Apparently, it doesn't matter what happens, we need to give promotions to nutjobs who think black splotches on film = evil.

Please replace "in every way" with "in every war" except that I am not 100% sure of that. We fired/demoted Generals during WWI and WWII, during the Civil War and the War of American Independence.

Don't worry about the corrections, JS Narins, we understand where you're coming from.

From the perspective of someone who thinks the attractiveness of our troops is not really relevant in guaging the progress of the war, which, month by month, gets worse?

Ok, just so we are clear.

Nice pic!

Attacks Per Day reach six month moving average high

What is going Al Zarqawi to get boring the Iraqis with murder?

The same he obtained in Jordan.

Last year, our local PBS affiliate interviewed a returning guard unit about their experiences in Iraq, where they were policing an area in or near Baghdad. One of the most memorable points was when one of the women described how little girls, often with their mothers motioning encouragements nearby, would come up and ask permission to touch her hair or simply touch her clothing.

So what do we have?
We have an official US Army photo released as a lifestyle feelgood ad !!!
Heck, what good looking impressionable poor white 18 year old American girl wouldn't want to sign on to travel 10 thousand miles to hand out cosmetics and chat about glamor?
Gimmeeee a break !
Stalin in the USSR in the mid 30's had similar feelgood public photo-posters of himself holding and embracing children, all the while his policies were killing thousands of children. My Dad took photographs of these posters.

The photo of the two women chatting facial cream tips while thousands die is, in context, truly pornographic.

And say, money is being spent on cosmetics (???) for apparently well-heeled women while the Baghdad hospitals are severely lacking basic sterile products?
Say it ain't so, America !

Every village needs an idiot. Meet ours.

Yes! All cosmetics, nay, all luxuries must be banned by vikander edict until all injustices have been conquered by vikander righteousness!

Lon live vikander!
:-p

Nice one Joe.

Geez. It's a pic of an American soldier handing out humanitarian aid. Staged? Maybe posed, though it doesn't look it.

But does anyone doubt that there are female soldiers in the US military handing out humanitarian aid? Does anyone doubt that at least some Iraqi women appreciate it and maybe even (shudder!) smile at times? Does anyone doubt that the role of women in the US armed forces and the role of women in Iraq are pivotal in the 21st Century?

So what's the problem?

My secretary is about to rotate home from an extended tour in Iraq, and should be home before Christmas. She has kept in touch with me while overseas, including sending photos back. There's one that sticks out ofr me; Rebecca called it "being friendly." In it, she is standing in full body armor and a helmet, with her m-4 slung over her shoulder. She is with a family, and evryone is facing the camera with a big smile on their face. The wife is wearing a chador, and only her face shows. The family's daughter, who can't be more than about 6 years old, isn't facing the camera. She's focused on Rebecca, and you can make out the smile on her face.

I'll bet that in all her life, this was the first woman she had met with any authority, and I'd bet the thought that was going through her mind was "When I grow up I want to be like her." Rebecca is a staff sergeant, so the sight of a petite woman ordering men around is an experience she will remember. It bodes well for the future.

Cosmetics? It looks like applesauce or yogurt to me!

no, no, cant be a smile, everyone in Iraq is sad all the time, its NOTHING but bombings and shootings 24/7, nothing else happens in Iraq, hell the sun dont even shine (climate be damned). Its Mordor, Mordor I tell you.

Hell, even the much maligned MSM is more cued in than THAT. ABC News, God bless em, had a report last night from Northern Iraq - before talking about how mixed things are in Mosul, they showed Irbil - where people dont just go out, they go to the market at night, theres economic boom, and "everyone is happy all the time" (well I dont beleive THAT, but I get the idea)

It's certainly a nice picture.

And I like nice pictures as much as the next old softie.

It has everything to do with the idealist's perspective on Iraq.

Unfortunately it has zero to do with the realists perspective on Iraq.

It does little to explain why Safia Taleb al-Suhail won't be staying in Iraq, nor why she is so disillusioned with the situation as it's developing there. And as she said "When we came back from exile, we thought we were going to improve rights and the position of women. But look what has happened -- we have lost all the gains we made over the last 30 years. It's a big disappointment."

It's likely she had unrealistic expectations about what could be accomplished in Iraq. After all, like most of the people we looked to for advice on Iraq, she hadn't set foot in the country for over 20 years.

But then that's been a recurring problem hasn't it?

Great picture, and Joe had me laughing so hard I almost fell out of my chair.

People forget how much change we are fostering over there, just by being there! Not any of the combat patrols, or the security work, or even the rebuilding will compare to just having a couple hundred thousand Americans hanging out for a few years telling you what life can be like.

Take a look at Vietnam. The old foagies may still want to fight a communist war, but the young generation want I-pods, MTV, and McDonalds. You can make a big difference just by being an example.

RIGHT ON!

Murdoc, RPL, and some others,

The key to victory in the GWOT (AKA Islamofascism) is to win the war of information over the validity and credbility of the ideologies/cultures in conflict to meet the desires, wants, and needs of its people.

The ideologoy of Islamofacism is destined for failure as it does not recognize the fundamental truth of the free will of men and women.

A a key facet in the war of information is to drive this point home. Certain pathological practices of radical Islamic culture have roots which predate Islam to the nomadic Bedouin tribal cultures of the Arabian Penisula and Northern Africa.

These abhorent practices that include pedophilia and male dominated theocratic hegemonies do not foster good trading relationships within the modern world. The treament of women as nothing more than chattel is one of these pathological practices.

A key strategic strategy in winning this war of words and ideals is to empower the women of Islam.

See this thought at the end of this peice:

GEO-POLITICAL STRATEGIC ANALYSIS ON WAR ON TERROR

Read More Here

Now my real question is why the world's leading feminists and women's organization are not enraged and demanding change?

I guess they are too busy with more important things like the Augusta National golf course, home of The Masters, refusal to admit women members. Go figure!

Akin to the equity of the terrors of Saddam and our "tortures" at Abu Grade that the LL and the MSM would have us believe.

I suppose I should add a disclaimer to my previous post.

I really believe that the US would like to leave Iraq with women having at least the level of autonomy that they had when we entered Iraq. But political consideration had to be given in order to get the interim constitution passed.

And perhaps in the big scheme of things the issue isn't the be all end all that you go "all in" to ensure it is resolved to your satisfaction. But as Ron points out it's an important part of the entire puzzle.

Civil Affairs conducts medical and veterinarian visits to local villages. Female soldiers are needed for these visits because of the local customs. Women will not come out to receive needed medical care unless female soldiers are present.
The civil affairs visits are vital to winning the hearts and minds of the Iraqi and Afghani people. Most of the supplies (other than medical supplies) is donated by organizations back in the states. Our church provided over 500 pairs of shoes to be distributed to Afghani children. Frostbite is a very real problem in the mountains of Afghanistan.
Truth be told, there was no shortage of volunteers for civil affairs missions while I was deployed.
BTW, I like the photo.

There are times when the best policy in a debate is not to attempt an elaborate rebuttle, but simply to allow your opponent to keep sticking his foot deeper into his mouth.

This is one of those times.

Great photo. And Amen to all those who wrote regarding the power of our female service members as an example.
But it does remind me of what happened in S.A. after the first Gulf War. Once hostilities had died down, we essentailly caved to the S.A. morals police and locked up our women on base and didn't let them act or dress in anyway that might "insult" our hosts. I hope that is one mistake we dont make again.

davebo:

don't look at this Nov. 19, 2005 article

Oh what the heck:

BAGHDAD - Safia Taleb al-Souhail has ambitions to be Iraq ‘s first woman president one day. A month before a poll in which she hopes to win a parliamentary seat, the former exile is upbeat about women‘s rights and democracy.

She says the only reason a new Iraqi constitution approved in a referendum last month did not do as much for women as she hoped was a lack of time to negotiate the details, and she is sure changes can be made in the new parliament.

"I believe our situation as women is going to be much better in the near future," says Souhail, a leading anti- Saddam Hussein activist who was invited to U.S. President George W. Bush President George W. Bush‘s State of the Union speech in February where she made headlines by hugging the mother of a U.S. marine killed in Iraq.

"I‘m very serious," says Souhail, 40, assessing her political chances. "I will run for election for Iraqi president. Of course not this time, but maybe next time."

I'd say that our men and women in uniform, together, are a representation of America.

I don't mean that as some soldier on a pedestal way, I mean that, when you have been at war with people for awhile, you tend to depersonalize and dehumanize him. Much easier to shout death threats and plan murder if you don't know him.

I'd say it works the other way for us, too. OUr men and women see something that they would never have known before about a place where most people never thought of it and didn't think of it after 9/11 in a very good light (hey, when you dehumanize people, much easier to push the button).

Either way, they don't have to be perfect out on patrol, just human.

If we can sneak in a nice looking pleasant human among them to boost the image, all the better. If that person is a woman in authority that goes to directly contradict Islamist doctrine that says the freedom of the US and the way women behave or are "treated" is immoral and people can see she is not "immoral", but just like them, then the Islamist loses.

it doesn't even take five minutes for the first seed to be planted.

But, that goes the same for the other activities. So, as one complainer above says, this girl also has the ability to kick down the door and search your house in the middle of the night.

So do the police in the United STates, all be it with a warrant. by the way, you know that they just don't take an anonymous tip and go bust down people's doors just for the hell of it? It has to be collaborating with other additional information. still not always right, but you notice the difference is, if nothing is there, nobody is taken. They don't take the whole familty. They don't break things up or burn it down. They are not pillaging rampaging armies, but acting like extremely well armed police.

anyway, the point of the question was not to force you to view propaganda to influence you, but wondering what message is sent with every action not reported in that photo.

I think it says "good" "nice" "not satan"

Cosmetics? Heh. Talk about projection!

Yeah, things are getting worse in Iraq by the day. Dream on, liberals.

JS Narins and Tom Vikander - please look at the picture and read your comments again and have a think about what you sounds like.

Done that?

Good - now go away and do us all a favour!

Cheers.

Murdoc: I don't know about the "lifestyle" part, but this is definitely a feelgood. That pic, and the elections, have my Iraq-might-not-be-a-s**thole-after-we-hand-stuff-over sense tingling. Slightly.

Thank you!

#2 js narins:

You know, I'd take the "things-are-deteriorating-in Iraq" bargraph you linked to a little more seriously if I knew what your sources and methodology were.

And the last time I tried, the root URL of your website wouldn't let me se anything. Curious.

Any chance you'd be willing to point us at a URL where you document this bar chart of yours?

Thanks...

Nortius: I didn't even consider his claim worth Fisking, but since you ask about it.

Even if you grant his statistics that attacks per day are increasing, which I won't until I do some research, they don't prove what he claims to prove.

So, attacks are going up he says, this doesn't on its own prove things are getting worse. We need to consider the outcome of these attacks to see if they are achieving thier objectives. So lets see what the outcome has been. Citing icasualties.org, a site clearly not operated by a proponent of the war but whose numbers are meticulous and impeccable in thier research, we find the following:

Iraqi civilian deaths are down on a six month trend:
http://icasualties.org/oif/IraqiDeaths.aspx

Iraqi Military and police deaths are down on a six month trend:
http://icasualties.org/oif/IraqiDeaths.aspx

(icasualties maintains no numbers for Iraqi deaths prior to 2005, but clearly things are not getting worse month after month quarter after quarter even if attacks are getting more common.)

US Wounded are down compared to this point last year:
http://icasualties.org/oif/woundedchart.aspx

Note that the dip in US wounded corresponds to the increase in Iraqi deaths. This clearly indicates that the IAF has limited operational capacity. They can focus on killing Americans, or they can focus on killing Iraqi's, but they can't do both and they haven't been able to increase their net operational capacity in the past year.

US fatalities are down compared to this point last year, and certainly aren't steadily getting worse despite the usual and expected jump during Ramadan:
http://icasualties.org/oif/US_chart.aspx
http://icasualties.org/oif_a/CasualtyTrends.htm

I don't think that there are clear trends in that graph, except that its clear that at times things have been both worse and better than at present. What I do know is that for two years now, various anti-American groups have been claiming to see a 'hockey stick' in the near future in which the ammount of US deaths would start increasing exponentially. That repeatedly hasn't happened. Equally clear down turns are also hard to find and I wouldn't want to claim that the numbers prove we are winning (if you look at past wars casualty rates can be seen to be bad predictors one way or the other IMO), but claiming you can see defeat in the current casualty trends is utterly bogus. Also bogus is claiming that an increase in the number of failed attacks carried out by the enemy is evidence that they are winning. Also bogus is claiming that the failure of the enemy to give up is evidence that they are winning.

I'll do you one better, look at areas of Iraq 'secured' since the shooting war ended. Somebody ought to do a map. We were taking casualties all over Iraq, then we forged a peace with the Shiia and the entire south up to Najaf became very safe. Between a couple of Stryker brigades Mosul has become practically secure. Much of Baghdad including bad hotspots like Haifa street, the road to the airport, and the Sunni town south of the city have quieted down. Sadr City is said to be undergoing a remarkable rebuilding.
Then you look at how US troop garrisons have moved. We dont need troops in the south anymore. Some of the most violent parts of Baghdad are now patrolled only by Iraqis (Haifa Street). That is how we suddenly have thousands of troops available to take the battle to Western Anbar when before there was virtually nothing. Make no mistake, that is an increase in US force, not by bringing in more troops but by freeing up guys already there. Is there any reason to think that will stop? Look at a map of Iraq and imagine the 'violent' areas and how they have shrunken over time. Thats not how a successful insurgency is supposed to work. Quite the opposite. Thats how I know we're winning. Not to mention more and more Iraqis and trained up every day, while the older ones taht have already freed us up become even more experienced. The biggest mistake the critics make is not realising time is on our side, not theirs. We grow stronger daily, not weaker.

yes soon the Iraqis will be greeting us with flowers and candy just like we were told !

"yes soon the Iraqis will be greeting us with flowers and candy just like we were told !"

This has been bothering me for a long time.

I wish I could do a trace back on that meme. I wonder who the first person who said 'flowers and candy' was? I don't recall this. When I listened to speaches, they tended to be cautionary.

As best as I can tell it was a liberal opponent of the war who first said 'flowers and candy' in this context. Much like the only people who want to bring back the draft are those opposed to the war, the only people who I recall ever talking about 'flowers and candy' are liberals. I've seen attributions of the statement to Richard Perle, but they are never in quotation marks and never part of a longer passage and certainly never with a date and time. I've seen attributions of the statement to Paul Wolfowitz, but never in even a complete sentence. I've seen attributions of the statement to Ahmed Chalabi, which seems more likely, but again without any sort of citation.

I've about concluded that since no one seems to know when the statement was made or even who made it, that everyone that is sure someone said it is just quoting someone else that is sure someone said it. I mean surely, if someone in the administration actually said this, surely it would behoove the debater to actually quote it formally. It shouldn't be difficult to find an actual quote, as I've been repeatedly assured that it was said many many times.

Nonetheless, whatever was said, there actually have been lots of actual 'flowers and candy' incidents. For example:

http://northcoastjournal.com/090403/cover0904.html
http://www.smokymountainnews.com/issues/05_04/05_26_04/fr_massey.html
http://www.jsonline.com/news/gen/apr03/132438.asp

Some people in Iraq see us as liberators. Some people in Iraq see us as invaders. Is that so hard to understand? It's a three block war folks.

John Ryan: You realize, of course, that in many cases our troops WERE met with cheers and flowers (not sure about candy, though). In fact, I just watched a couple of shows about the Marines that had quite a bit of footage of Iraqis joyfully greeting them as they headed for Baghdad.

Well, it took a while but I've finally been able to track the meme back.

The 'flowers and candy' meme was started by Kanan Makiya, an Iraqi ex-pat and professor of middle east studies who had been asked to advise the President.

While I've found evidence that the administration believed that we would be greeted as liberators (something which is in at least part of the country undoubtably true), I've found zero evidence that the administration ever told the public that they expected our troops to be greeted with 'flowers and candy'. Quite the contrary, the official line of the administration at the start of the war was cautionary:

"A campaign on harsh terrain in a vast country could be longer and more difficult than some have predicted. And helping Iraqis achieve a united, stable, and free country will require our sustained commitment. Yet, whatever is required of us, we will carry out all the duties we have accepted."

As far as I can tell no administration official ever publically repeated the 'flowers and candy' meme. Not Bush, not Cheney, not Perle, not Libby, not Rove, not Rumsfeld, not anyone that I can find - and certainly not all of them all. Perhaps they did at some point, but it must not have been very often, because just tracking down who started the meme proved difficult simply because of all the misattributions and uncited quotations. What I've found is that lots of liberals repeat it, but none of them are really sure when it was said or by who, but by golly they are sure it was said. The closest I can come to someone actually saying this is an interview of Dick Cheney in which he cited the opinion of Kanan Mikiya as evidence that America could be expected to be greeted as liberators, but at no point did he use either the word 'flowers' or 'candy'.

In short, the entire meme that the American people were told to expect 'flowers and candy' is utterly bogus. It's group think. It's a lie. And I for one am sick of it.

Celebrim, its another example of letting those who refused to acknowledge or believe the honorable goals of the endeavor to begin with set the parameters for meeting those goals which they rejected in the first place. Its mad. How can those who are convinced we are on an imperial crusade for oil get to decide if we've achieved the objectives they dont believe in in the first place?

This is the female in the picture so many people have found something to say about...which is fine, but i would like to say that i put my life on the line to do my duty as a soldier whether it be to kick in doors, patrol the streets or hand out "luxury items". I do the job that i am told to do whether or not anybody thinks that by doing this we are accomplishing things. As for the comment on how we pay for these things...alot of them were paid from our own pockets...even mine. This is not all we(the soldiers in my unit) do as you should know and i have had friends killed in the last three months. Someone commented that this is not showing reality well really think....i was there handing this stuff out so im quite sure it is reality..or i couldv'e been dreaming.(not likely) My real point is if you are not there and know nothing about this war except what you see then you should realize that their are many aspects to what we are trying to accompish. And killing people is not our mission.

Janelle,
You really are our modern-day hero. Forget about all the absurd stuff being said on these blogs: here you are, young and wonderful looking, putting your life at risk daily for all of us. It is on these occasions, where two cultures meet on the street, that gestures like yours can really make a difference.

Be assured that your work will not go unnoticed, that your sacrifices will be appreciated by all of us not there with you. Those who write of talk otherwise either do not know the facts or are not smart enough to understand the situation.

Many things have been and will be said about the merits and de-merits of this war (political, economic, religious). But what should never be put in question is the dedication of all US and allied personnel on the ground, who really are only trying to do their best to get the job done and then carry on with their lives.

Good speed to you and all of your fellow soldiers (American, Iraqi, British; Italian, Polish… and anybody else I forgot) that are tying to rebuild and give a little freedom to the country. Be safe and keep up the good work!

PS: mine are just a few words of sympathy. But by the tone of your answers I read around, it really seems you do not need much help…

http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:9cvHr-Iw8qoJ:greatiraq.blogspot.com/2005_03_01_archive.html+%22Flowers+and+Candy%22+IRaq&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=us

"They’ll welcome us with flowers and candy," said retired General Barry McAffrie on nationwide TV a few days before the illegal U.S. invasion of Iraq in March 2003.

If you are interested in the Arabic translation of this article, yuo may use this LINK http://iraq4ever.blogspot.com/

But this is close enough...

"My belief is we will, in fact, be greeted as liberators." –Vice President Dick Cheney, "Meet the Press," March 16, 2003