Mediaboss Marketing

So far, the Trump administration is keen on a show of force, to demonstrate that Tehran wont win this round.

Hundreds of U.S. paratroopers from the 82nd Airborne Division boarded C-17 Globemaster aircraft on January 1. They are part of the 750 sent to the Middle East after an Iran-backed militia fired rockets that killed a U.S. contractor and, in response, U.S. airstrikes killed two dozen militiamen. Then pro-Iranian protesters, guided by Iraqi politicians, attacked the U.S. embassy in Baghdad. This is President Donald Trumps Iraq moment. He said it wont be another Benghazi, where terrorists attacked a U.S. diplomatic compound and a CIA annex, killing U.S. ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, causing the U.S. to withdraw from the city.

The Trump administration is now at a crossroads in its Iran policy and in its wider Middle East strategy. Since walking away from the flawed Iran deal, the U.S. has been pushing maximum pressure sanctions against Iran. Iran has been testing American resolve, attacking oil tankers in the Gulf of Oman in May and June 2019, downing a sophisticated U.S. drone, sending a drone swarm to attack Saudi Arabia, and firing rockets at Israel. Iranian-backed groups have also carriedout eleven attackson bases in Iraq where U.S. forces are present. Trump had been reticent to retaliate,calling off strikesin June after the drone downing. But in mid December, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo warned of a decisive response if the rocket attacks continued. The U.S. also sanctioned Iranian-backed groups in Iraq, including Harakat Hezbollah al-Nujaba, and Qais Khazali, leader of Asaib Ahl al-Haq. The message was clear: If its forces are harmed, the U.S. will take action and will pressure Irans proxies in Iraq.

Kataib Hezbollah, led by Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, launched 32 rockets at the K-1 military base on December 27, killing a U.S. contractor and wounding four U.S. personnel. Muhandishas a long history ofattacking Americans, plotting attacks on the U.S. embassy in Kuwait in the 1980s. He has worked with Hezbollah in the past, and in the mid 2000s he opposed the U.S. in Iraq. U.S. airstrikesin December killedtwo dozen Kataib Hezbollah members, including officers of the unit in Syria and Iraq, in contrast to similar airstrikes Israel has carried out against pro-Iranian groups there. Israel prefers precision strikes that usually kill fewer people.Israel allegedlystruck Kataib Hezbollah in June 2018. For the U.S., the decision to strike was about sending a message that Irans proxies will pay for their actions.

On December 30, a senior State Department official said that the U.S. is serious about confronting Irans activities. Pompeo has said that all Iranian-commanded forces must leave Syria. He went to Iraq in May 2019 to warn of credible threatsagainst us by the Iranians and their proxies. Irans regime studies U.S. decision making and has been poking and prodding all year. It strikes at U.S. allies to see how Israel and Saudi Arabia will respond. Riyadh did not respond to the September attack on Abqaiq;Israel has carriedout more than1,000 airstrikeson 250 targets in Syria.

Iran also wants to show the U.S. that it can circumvent sanctions. Indias foreign minister visited Iran in December, and Iranianforeign minister Javad Zarifwent to Qatar, Oman, Russia, and China. Irans president recently went to Malaysia and Japan.Iran, Russia, andChina held a joint naval drill, and Iran is working on an economic port agreement with India in Irans Chabahar, port which is a lifeline for Afghanistan. Unsurprisingly, Iran has hosted the Taliban, in an effort to pressure theU.S. in Afghanistan.

What can the U.S. do next? Senator Lindsey Grahamhas called on alliesin Iraq to stand with the US. Pompeo has calledout senior Iraqipoliticians and militia leaders for their ties to Iran and for their role in attacking the embassy. He has also called on leaders in Israel, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates tobuild support for U.S.responses.

There are several hurdles now in Iraq. This is Americas Iraq 5.0 moment. In August 1990, the U.S. sent forces to Saudi Arabia to confront Iraqs invasion of Kuwait. The U.S. returned to Iraq in 2003 to remove Saddam Hussein. After the 2007 surge to defeat the Iraqi insurgency, American forces left in 2011. President Barack Obama sent troops at the invitation of Baghdad to help defeat ISIS. Now, facing a potential confrontation with Iran, the US. deployment to Iraq to defend the embassy has been a majorfocus for CENTCOM,U.S. special forces, and OperationInherent Resolve, the anti-ISIS campaign. This indicates how serious U.S. forces are in taking the next step. Trump has spoken out against endless wars, but his team wont countenance more attacks on U.S. forces. This could lead to calm, if Tehran appreciates that Washington is serious; toclearer U.S. support for Israels actionsagainst Iran; and to an anchoring of U.S. forces in areas of southern Syria and the autonomous Kurdistan region of Iraq, a stable and safe area where the U.S. is generally welcome.

But Iraq is at a crossroads as well. Three months of Iraqi protests, often against Irans heavy-handed role in the country, means that many Iraqis are disappointed by the abuses of the same militias that target Americans. Iraqs prime minister has resigned because of the protests, and Iraqs president must choose a new leader. Amid a major crises with the U.S. and Iran, Iraqis are caught, held hostage by militias but wanting to avoid another round of fighting.

Iran wants to pressure the U.S. to leave Iraq. So far Trump is keen on a show of force to demonstrate that Iran wont win this round.

View original post here:
Iran Is Testing U.S. Resolve in Iraq - National Review

About 1,400 cuneiform tablets that were possibly stolen from Irisagrig, a 4,000-year-old lost city in Iraq, have just been revealed.

Even though archaeologists know the tablets originated in that lost Sumerian city, they don't know where the city is now located. Only looters have that location, archaeologists said.

The newly examined tablets describe the palace of Irisagrig and the animals kept on the grounds, including lions and dogs; the tablets also detail a festival held in a temple dedicated to a god of mischief.

Related: See Photos of an Ancient City Discovered in Iraq

The new find shows that the company Hobby Lobby whose co-owner, Steve Green, helped found the Museum of the Bible in November 2017 in Washington, D.C. had far more cuneiform tablets obtained (possibly illegally) from this city, and other sites in Iraq, than previously believed.

The 1,400 Irisagrig tablets, along with 600 cuneiform tablets from other archaeological sites in Iraq, are detailed in the book "Tablets From the Irisagrig Archive" (Eisenbrauns, 2019) by Marcel Sigrist, professor emeritus at cole biblique et archologique franaise de Jrusalem, and Tohru Ozaki, a retired lecturer at the University of Shizuoka in Japan.

The tablets were recorded by hand, but not photographed, between 2012 and 2016, during which time "they were in Oklahoma in the storerooms of Hobby Lobby," Sigrist told Live Science. "They bought these tablets I never knew how it happened. It was not really my business" Sigrist said.

In 2017, Hobby Lobby paid a $3 million fine for importing artifacts illegally from Iraq, and the company forfeited about 450 cuneiform tablets and 3,000 clay bullae (a type of seal) that were returned to Iraq, a settlement statement from the U.S. Department of Justice said. However, 223 of those 450 cuneiform tablets were seized in January 2011 in Memphis, Tennessee, by U.S. Customs and Border Protection. Though Sigrist didn't have the opportunity to study those tablets, another scholar, named Eckart Frahm, did. He described them in a 2017 interview with Live Science. A few of those 223 tablets contain 4,500-year-old magical incantations, Frahm said at the time.

Related: Cracking Codices: 10 of the Most Mysterious Ancient Manuscripts

The combination of the 1,400 newly published tablets from Irisagrig, 600 newly published tablets from other Iraq sites and 223 tablets that were seized in January 2011 means that the total number of cuneiform tablets once owned by Hobby Lobby exceeds 2,200.

After the Sigirst and Ozaki studied the tablets, some of the artifacts now appear to be missing. John Marzulli, a spokesperson for the U.S. Department of Justice, said that, aside from the 450 cuneiform tablets mentioned in the 2017 settlement statement that announced Hobby Lobby's fine and forfeiture of artifacts, he has no information about any other cuneiform tablets once owned by Hobby Lobby.

A spokesperson for Iraq's antiquities minister said that about 3,817 artifacts once owned by Hobby Lobby had been returned to the Iraq embassy. It's unclear how many of these returned artifacts are cuneiform tablets; however, if 3,000 clay bullae were returned to Iraq, as the U.S. Department of Justice claims, that means that only up to 817 cuneiform tablets out of the 2,200 that Hobby Lobby had could have been returned to Iraq.

Related: Top 10 Battles for the Control of Iraq

Sigrist said that after 2016 he never received any communication from Hobby Lobby. "When I approached them, I never received any answer anymore," and he decided to describe the tablets in a publication so that scholars could become aware of the artifacts' existence. Hobby Lobby has not responded to requests for comment.

The newly published cuneiform tablets tell of numerous economic and administrative transactions that happened at Irisagrig. Inscriptions on the tablets describe how the rulers of the city kept lions and fed them with the carcasses of cattle. The "lion shepherds," those who took care of the lions, received rations of beer and bread.

The tablets also tell of the many dogs that were kept in Irisagrig's palace, mentioning the carcasses of animals that were fed to them and how the "dog shepherds," those who cared for the dogs, got rations of bread and beer. Dogs were very important for the security of the palace, Sigrist said. "When you are in the desert, you need protection, custodians, and the dogs are the best custodians you can have in these areas," he said.

The tablets tell of food given out at a king named Amar-Suen's festival, which took place at the Temple of Enki, a god of mischief and wisdom. The tablets also tell of the numerous officials who served the king, such as the "sagi," officials who were often cupbearers to the kings of Irisagrig.

The newly described tablets date to a time when Irisagrig was involved in few conflicts and things were fairly peaceful, Sigrist said. In later times, Irisagrig's territory fell victim to invasion and wars.

Originally published on Live Science.

Read the rest here:
1,400 Ancient Cuneiform Tablets Identified from Lost City of Irisagrig in Iraq. Were They Stolen? - Livescience.com

Millions of casual news consumers began their week believing that over the weekend, Iraq expelled the U.S. military from the country. The United States, they thought, now faced the decision to quickly leave or illegally occupy.

Had they flicked through many of the cable or network stations, or read a few headlines on their phones or at the gas station, these Americans had heard the presidents decision to kill the general of Irans elite Quds force was made with no understanding of the potential reactions. If they read The New York Times or caught any of its parroting on friendly news shows, they might even think the president had stunned the Pentagon officials who had only offered the kill option to make other options seem reasonable.

The problem presented here is none of these three scenarios is accurate. The U.S. military is not currently under any order to leave Iraq, though in Americas interest they should, and they might. Further, the Pentagon does not present a president with military options thats ramifications have not been considered, nor does the chairman of the Joint Chiefs ever present the president a fake option.

For non-Arabic speakers, reporting in the main news outlets [New York Times] and [Washington] Post is so misinformed (either on purpose or because of incompetence) that you might think that the Iraqi State has officially voted for ejecting U.S. forces from Iraq, wrote Hussain Abdul-Hussain, the Iraqi-Lebanese chief of Kuwaiti newspaper Al Rais Washington Bureau.

The vote, he explained, was a party-line vote by Shia Iran supporters in the parliament. Kurdish and Sunni lawmakers had boycotted the session despite threats from the very same Shia militia that kicked off the current cycle of violence, leading to a barely functioning quorum in the chamber.

Of course, to admit threats of political violence from pro-Iranian militia would undermine the media narrative that the parliament, like the militia mob that attacked our embassy, represents everyday Iraqis. What these pro-Iranian lawmakers passed was no United States ouster, but a non-binding, partisan resolution that the United States should leave. The quorum, Abdul-Hussain writes, was 170 of 328 (half + 4, just like Hezbollah designated a [prime minister] in Lebanese parliament with half + 4).

Iraqi Parliament Passes Resolution to End Foreign Troop Presence, The New York Times blared. Four paragraphs down into the copy, by Reuters, the reader learns the resolution is non-binding.

Repercussions mount over U.S. strike, with Iran nuclear deal pullback and Iraq call for U.S. troop pullout, the Los Angeles Times tells us, waiting 14 paragraphs to explain the resolution is not binding, objectively failing the reader. That the president played golf, by contrast, is treated to the fifth paragraph.

The Washington Post, which elected to use the Associated Presss write-up, didnt include the important non-binding information at all. Iraqi Parliament calls for expulsion of U.S. troops from the country, it says. Thats it. Headline, as well as copy.

Fine, you might think. Headline space is limited; in todays digital environment reporters and editors must more than ever grab a readers attention in the first few moments; the intricacies of the process can wait further down for the more committed news consumer. Sounds reasonable. Any editor currently in the business is familiar with the struggle. Then, since the purposes of a headline and opening are to inform the reader with reliable information they can use, these outlets failed. [Either] on purpose, Abdul-Hussain writes, or because of incompetence.

So what, you might ask. The United States might actually leave, so whats the harm? The harm lies in the either the incredible ignorance of journalists or, worse and sadly just as likely, the willing manipulation of readers to serve a political end.

The vast majority of Americans are casual consumers of the news. They have families, jobs, bills dozens of concerns more pressing and tangible than world news consumption. These news consumers rely on headlines, television chyrons, and brief summaries to stay generally informed on what is occurring in the world, and when those things are misleading they are misled, regardless of if reality is buried deeper in the story.

But what about the more committed consumers? Maybe those who have family serving in the military and want to know whats going on? These readers and viewers might have been treated to The New York Times reporting that top military officials were flabbergasted and immediately alarmed about the prospect of Iranian retaliatory strikes on American troops in the region after the presidents decision to kill Gen. Qassem Soleimani. Pentagon officials have often offered improbable options to presidents to make other possibilities appear more palatable, the story reads.

The amazing thing here is its almost certainly factually true while also deeply misleading: The four reporters on the byline found at least two top military officials who said they were flabbergasted by the presidents call. Notice the information here isnt sourced. Its not according to Pentagon officials involved in the decision process, Pentagon officials involved in the drafting of options, or even Pentagon officials with first-hand knowledge of the presentation. Its what we call Voice of God it is simply said, and so it is.

No decent editor would let that pass without digging in deeper, and the Timess editors certainly did. Who are your sources? What is their knowledge of the situation? Why arent we naming them? Do you have confirmation? These were all asked as a matter of basic practice, yet none of the answers are even hinted at in the article. Even descriptions of the officials level of involvement or reason for request for anonymity were excluded. This, to be clear, requires a level of comfort with displaying an incredible disdain for the reader.

Further, is the outlined scenario at all plausible? Keep in mind this is a president the Times has repeatedly and breathlessly warned is crazy, impulsive, callous, vicious, and constantly feared by patriotic government employees doing their best to restrain him. Still, these reporters are willing to believe the career military and civilian leaders of the Pentagon float ideas they consider dangerous or stupid? Of course not, but disbelief is routinely suspended in the face of bias-confirming story lines.

Were any of these people in the room or involved in the planning process? Certainly not, or they would not have been surprised by the call. Additionally, they would have reviewed the potential repercussions.

The options that go to the executive are vetted through the Joint Staff and the Office of the Secretary of Defense before they are presented to the president, Alex Plitsas, who served for a time as chief of sensitive activities for the assistant secretary for special operations under President Barack Obama, told The Federalist. Legal counsel reviews them, as does everyone else [in the chain].

You dont, he stated emphatically, do throwaway COAs [course of actions].

There is also zero reason to believe Join Chiefs Chairman Gen. Mark Milley or Secretary of Defense Mark Esper were doing any of what The New York Times reported. So why was this a story at all? Short answer: it fit The Narrative of an irrational president making decisions that terrify his own commanders. A Narrative, in this case, teed up for reportersby Obamas own Iran man.

But often, The Narrative is false. Or, as President Donald Trump prefers, fake news.

Read more from the original source:
Media Coverage Of Iraq Is A Case Study Of Ignorance And Manipulation - The Federalist

BAGHDAD (AP) U.S. troops fired tear gas on Wednesday as Iran-backed militiamen and other protesters gathered outside the American Embassy in Baghdad for a second day set fire to the roof of a reception area inside the embassy compound.

Dozens of Iran-allied militiamen and their supporters had camped out at the gates of the embassy overnight, a day after they broke into the compound, trashing a reception area and smashing windows before pulling back. It was one of the worst attacks on a U.S. diplomatic mission in years.

The U.S. Marines guarding the embassy fired tear gas Wednesday as more crowds arrived and after the protesters lit a fire on the roof of the reception area. Smoke rose from the building. There have been no reports of any injuries since the protests began.

The militiamen were protesting deadly U.S. airstrikes that targeted an Iran-backed militia over the weekend, killing 25 fighters. Those strikes were in response to a rocket attack on an Iraqi army base that killed a U.S. contractor.

The violence comes as Iran and its allies have faced unprecedented mass protests in recent months and after heavy U.S. sanctions on Iran that have cratered its economy and raised tensions across the region. In Iraq, the protesters have been angered at their own governments corruption and economic mismanagement, as well as its close ties to Tehran.

President Donald Trump blamed Iran for the attack on the embassy and Defense Secretary Mark Esper later announced the immediate deployment of an infantry battalion of about 750 soldiers from the Armys 82nd Airborne Division to the Middle East. He did not specify their destination, but a U.S. official familiar with the decision said they will go to Kuwait.

Iran has denied any involvement in the attack on the embassy. Foreign Ministry spokesman Abbas Mousavi was quoted by state media on Tuesday as warning the U.S. against any miscalculation in the worsening standoff.

Irans supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, criticized the U.S. airstrikes on the Iran-backed Iraqi militia on Sunday. In remarks carried by the semi-official ISNA news agency, he accused the U.S. of taking revenge on Iran for the defeat of the Islamic State group, which he said was an American creation.

In an apparent reference to Trumps allegations of Iranian involvement, Khamenei said that if the Islamic Republic makes a decision to confront any country, it will do it directly.

The U.S. and Iran have vied for influence over Iraq since the 2003 U.S.-led invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein. Iran has close ties to Iraqs Shiite majority and many of its major political factions, and its influence has steadily grown since then.

Iran helped to mobilize tens of thousands of mostly Shiite militiamen to battle the Islamic State group when it stormed across northern and western Iraq in 2014 as the armed forces collapsed. In the subsequent campaign against the extremists, the U.S. and Iran both provided vital aid to Iraqi forces, who eventually declared victory in December 2017.

The political influence of the Iran-backed militias, known as the Popular Mobilization Forces, has risen in recent years, and their allies dominate the parliament and the government. That has made them the target of mass protests since October that are unrelated to the attack on the embassy.

The anti-government protesters have attacked Iranian diplomatic missions and the local headquarters of parties affiliated with the militias across southern Iraq. They have also set up a major protest camp in central Baghdad.

For weeks, the anti-government protesters have been trying to enter the Green Zone housing the government and the U.S. Embassy, but have been beaten back by security forces, who have killed hundreds of demonstrators.

The militiamen and their supporters, however, were able to quickly enter the Green Zone and mass in front of the embassy, with little if any resistance from authorities.

By Wednesday morning, they had set up a small sit-in of their own, with around 50 tents set up between two main gates about 500 meters (yards) apart. Demonstrators set up a makeshift clinic and cooks with aprons reading Popular Mobilization Forces logistical support served meals out of giant pots. Mobile toilets were also set up in the area.

Vehicles belonging to the Popular Mobilization Forces, with government plates, were parked nearby, and the militiamen manned checkpoints where they searched all those arriving at the site of the demonstration.

Outside one of the gates, a Shiite cleric recited verses from the Muslim holy book, the Quran, through a loudspeaker. Another cleric led the protesters in midday prayers.

Demonstrators could be seen hurling rocks over the walls of the embassy compound, where U.S. troops responded by firing tear gas from the roofs of buildings. Iraqi security forces deployed nearby watched the standoff unfold without intervening.

___

Associated Press writers Amir Vahdat in Tehran, Iran, Bassem Mroue in Beirut and Joseph Krauss in Ramallah, West Bank, contributed to this report.

Read more:
US troops fire tear gas at pro-Iran protesters in Iraq - The Associated Press

Over the New Year holiday,pro-Iran militiamensurrounded the United States embassy in Baghdad. Ultimately, and thankfully, the American personnel remained unscathed, but it was a further reminder of the political unrest that continues to dominate that country. It also reminds us of the potential disruption that more unrest in Iraq could impact global oil markets.

TOPSHOT - A handout picture received from the US embassy in Iraq on December 31, 2019, shows a US ... [+] army apache helicopter dropping flares over Baghdad's high-security Green Zone on December 31, 2019, after Iraqi supporters of pro-Iran factions breached the outer wall of the US embassy over weekend air strikes that killed pro-Iran fighters in western Iraq. - The US State Department said that embassy personnel are safe and there are no plans to evacuate, after Iraqi supporters of pro-Iran factions attacked the compound. It is the first time in years that protesters have been able to reach the building, sheltered behind a series of checkpoints in the high-security Green Zone. (Photo by - / US EMBASSY IN IRAQ / AFP) (Photo by -/US EMBASSY IN IRAQ/AFP via Getty Images)

In recent months, Iraq has experienced large-scale protests by citizens who oppose Iranian interference in their country. The country also saw themurderofhundredsof theseprotestors. Earlier this week, the U.S.struck targetsin Iraq and Syria that were linked to Iran-backed militias.

This political unrest brings with it a potential for a real disruption to the global energy markets. In 2018, Iraq produced more oil than all but four other countries. Though reliable and updated numbers are not yet available, its oil production increase in 2019 and it is probably now the fourth largest oil producer in the world. This past summer, it produced4.88million barrels per day. But just this past week, on December 28 and 29, protestors were able toshut downan oil field that produces 90,000 barrels per day.

Iraqi oil has been less than reliable on the global market forsome time. Until recently, ISIS controlled some of the countrys oil. In the last 17 years there were also disruptions due to the military engagements caused by the U.S. invasion, conflicts between the Iraqi government and the Kurdish authorities and efforts to rebuild the countrys oil infrastructure after Saddam Husseins regime and then war. In the 1990s, international sanctions and the United Nations Oil For Food program limited the sale of Iraqi oil. In the 1980s, Iraq engaged in an eight-year war with Iran that disrupted oil production and exports.

However, lately Iraq has been producing and exporting record amounts. It typicallyoverproducesits OPEC quota. If the situation in Iraq deteriorates further in 2020, we could see real disruptions to the oil market that last more than just a couple of days, which could scare the market.

More here:
Unrest In Iraq Reminds Us Of Geopolitical Risks To Oil - Forbes