Archive for April, 2017

A Father’s Torment: Iran Took Richard Ratcliffe’s Family and He Can’t Get Them Back – Wall Street Journal (subscription)

A Father's Torment: Iran Took Richard Ratcliffe's Family and He Can't Get Them Back
Wall Street Journal (subscription)
A Father's Torment: Iran Took Richard Ratcliffe's Family and He Can't Get Them Back. For a year, the British accountant has sought the release of his aid-worker wife, Nazanin, after Iran jailed her for allegedly threatening national security. His ...

and more »

Continued here:
A Father's Torment: Iran Took Richard Ratcliffe's Family and He Can't Get Them Back - Wall Street Journal (subscription)

Trump Travel Ban Back in Court as Iran Groups Open New Front – Bloomberg

Iranian-American groups attempted to deliver another legal blow to President Donald Trumps efforts to keep refugees and immigrants from six mostly Muslim nations out of the U.S.

Those groups, plus about a dozen people, asked a U.S. judge in Washington Friday to block portions of the presidents March 6 executive order and to add that ruling to previous decisions from Maryland and Hawaii federal courts that put parts of his edict on hold nationwide.

U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan immediately wanted to know what it was those suing wanted from her. What are you asking me to enjoin? the judge asked plaintiffs attorney John Freedman when he stepped to the podium, adding later that she didnt want to grant or deny his clients request, just as an academic exercise.

Freedman called the presidential decree inherently discriminatory, and said Chutkans ruling is needed to protect the the rights of his clients.

A win in Washington would likely boost arguments in support of the prior rulings when a federal appeals court considers the Maryland appeal next month, University of Richmond law professor Carl Tobias said.

Theres all kinds of reasons to proceed, he said, explaining that a win gives opponents of the presidents immigration crackdown public and legal momentum and provides reinforcement in the event either the Hawaii or Maryland outcome is overturned. Each of those trial-level courts answer to a different regional federal appeals courts. Divergent appellate outcomes would likely send the cases to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Trumps order was his second attempt to halt for 90 days the issuance of visas to travelers from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen, while simultaneously stopping refugeesfrom entering the U.S. for 120 days. The prior order, issued Jan. 27, was more broadly written. It was blocked by a San Francisco-based appeals court reviewing a decision in federal court in Seattle.

Attorneys challenging Trump have contended the orders were thinly disguised attempts to bar Muslims from entering the U.S., fulfilling a campaign pledge. Freedman and plaintiffs lawyer Johnathan Smith each cited statements made by the president and his advisers as proof of motive for the order.

Government lawyers have fought to separate those campaign comments from acts taken after the president took office. But that defense has been undercut by the presidents own rhetoric. At a Nashville, Tennessee, rally only hours after the March 15 ruling by a Hawaii judge, Trump called the revised policy a watered-down version of the failed first effort, adding that he still preferred the first.

Acting Assistant Attorney General Chad Readler touted the differences between the first and second executive orders in court, telling Chutkan the revised version was facially neutral with regard to religion. He said the measures were necessary national-security precautions and that courts cant second guess the presidents judgment in protecting the country.

Chutkan, a one-time federal public defender appointed by former President Barack Obama in 2014, is the first judge to consider the legality of the presidents decree since U.S. District Judge Anthony Trenga in Alexandria denied a request to block it on March 24.

The most important market news of the day.

Get our markets daily newsletter.

The Washington lawsuit was filed by the Pars Equality Center, a Menlo Park, California-based social and legal-service organization for Iranian-Americans. Among those joining Pars in that case is the Iranian American Bar Association, whose president, attorney Babak Yousefzadeh, was one of two people who testified in support of their bid for an order blocking Trumps decree, at an April 18 proceeding before Chutkan.

The presidents order, Yousefzadeh said, was preventing Iranian medical students from participating in U.S. programs and depriving Iranian Americans from enjoying the same rights as other Americans, including the ability to be visited by relatives from overseas and have them take part in family occasions.

Plaintiffs lawyer Smith argued for the Washington-based Universal Muslim Association of America, which had filed a parallel suit.

The cases are Pars Equality Center v. Trump, 17-cv-255, and Universal Muslim Association of America v. Trump, 17-cv-537, U.S. District Court, District of Columbia (Washington).

More here:
Trump Travel Ban Back in Court as Iran Groups Open New Front - Bloomberg

Iraq vet talks about his Netflix movie, pulling CQ in Saddam’s palace, debunking ‘dysfunctional veteran’ stereotype – ArmyTimes.com

Former Spc. Chris Roessner enlisted in the Army on July 11, 2001, hoping to earn some money for college.

Two years later, he was passing time during charge-of-quarters duty at the presidential palace in Tikrit, Iraq, watching a classic Vietnam War movie, when he decided that one day, he'd like to tell his own war story on screen.

"I put in Oliver Stones movie 'Platoon,' " Roessner, 33, told Army Times in a Thursday phone interview. "I was so deeply touched by that movie because it was so personal, and it wasnt a war movie in the sense of, 'Take that hill, or kill that bad guy.' It was about young men, who look young. And to watch young men go through a year of the Vietnam War in a way that was specific and was also beautiful -- I really connected with that."

Roessner, a civil affairs specialist, spent three months in Kuwait waiting for the war to get started, he said, and then a year in Iraq that saw a sea change in the War on Terror.

"We moved into the presidential palace, and we had about three months of what I called the honeymoon period where it felt like my job was basically to shake hands and kiss babies. It felt like I was more in a parade than a convoy," he said. "That lasted for, like I said, a couple months. Then, seemingly overnight, everything changed. There was a lot of insurgent activity. Im sure people were pouring over the borders from Syria and Iran. And it became pretty violent pretty quick."

Still sorting through his experiences a decade later, Roessner wrote and then signed on to executive produce "Sand Castle," which premieres Friday on Netflix.

The film follows a civil affairs squad, through the eyes of Pvt. Matt Ocre, tasked with rebuilding a destroyed water pumping station in Iraq, and the challenges of winning the locals' trust while butting heads with the pessimistic Special Forces captain trying to root out insurgents among the villagers.

The University of Southern California film school graduate talked to Army Times about his perspective from the Army's nation-building force and trying to tell more authentic stories in Hollywood.

"I'm looking desperately forwhat I call my 'Coming Home' narrative," he said. "I would really like to tell a story about a bunch of men and women re-assimiliating to life after the war."

Some answers have been edited for brevity. What is your version of Iraq? Thats actually a really great question, and it allows me to preface it with this: Everybodys Iraq experience is different, and everybodys military experience is different. And if I had a different job, the movie I wrote would be different. And if I deployed to Iraq in 07, as opposed to 03, the movie would be different.

So my experience was, I got to see Iraq in a time when we were very welcomed. At least it felt that way. And then it seemed like I spent the next year of my war trying to get back to that first three.

Is the movie autobiographical?

I would say that my allegiance is to the feeling of war. It is a fictional film, but as has been stated many times by many authors that are smarter than I, fiction can be truer than true. What I tried to do, and what I hoped I succeeded in is, is imparting on the audience the feeling of war even if I have to magnify things and change things. To me, the feeling of war is falling in love with something and having it killed in front of you, over and over again. For me, and for all the rest of the filmmakers, one of the things I said to them is, I dont think were going to make people feel like they're at war by shaking the camera and shooting it like a documentary. If you want to know what war is like, watch "Restrepo."

What fiction can do is, in a two-hour time period, leave the audience with a complex feeling that doesnt quite have a name. And thats what war is. War is the realization that people have been hurt and people have been killed and at best, youve maybe moved the giant ship a half of a degree. But thats kind of the job.

Theres a line in the trailer that starts, I'd love to say I'm here to fight for freedom Did you write that, or was that a re-write down the road?

I didnt write that line, and personally, I hate it. I do. This is the tricky part: Because Im a veteran, because I wrote a movie, people at large can make the assumption that I had control or I signed off on everything that happened.

I want to be clear that Im proud of the film in its entirety, but Id be lying if I said that everything is something that I signed off on, or agreed with or didnt fight adamantly that it come out.

So that line, I dont care for at all. But the core of the question is, did I question why I was there? And I think I certainly did and I feel like most of the people around me did. Again, not because, 'Are we doing good or are we doing bad?'

It was because, wait a minute. I thought we were going to be out of here in six months thats what we were told. Then it was nine months. Then it was a year. Then, all of the sudden Im in college and I realize, holy shit, the kids who are in Iraq now were like nine years old when I was there. Thats a pretty far leap from, You guys told us it was going to be six months.

I never thought that I was doing a bad thing. The reality of my experience is, everything that we set out to do was wholly good.

So for example, there was collateral damage at one point. This Iraqi bakery got destroyed. It wasnt our fault or anything like that, but we still took it upon ourselves to fix this bakery because we knew this local business was very important to the population and the proprietor of this bakery was well respected in this village.

So we worked really hard to fix it, and felt a feeling of success when we got it done. But then, I think a few weeks later, it was bombed again because the insurgents were sending a message that, 'If you accept the help of the Americans, well make you pay.'

Thats the complexity of the feeling. We did the right thing, we earned their trust, we fixed something that was busted. But you still pay a price for that.

Thats what I mean. Its not like I felt ever at any point that, "What Im doing here is morally wrong." I dont have any of those nightmares about what I did there. But I do know that, just by the nature of being there, no matter what your intentions are, youre going to alter the course of other peoples lives.

There are some controversial plot points, like an Iraqi leader telling the soldiers they're unwelcome, and Ocre slamming his hand in a door to avoid deployment. Are those based on true events?

The first part: the Iraqi leader. It is true to form that you will speak to Iraqi leaders who are very happy to have you there, but they know that it is a very dangerous thing for them to do.

But then you also find Iraqi leaders who dont want to help you at all. People who see this as an opportunity to milk the U.S. government for some cash, and they dont want to help their people as much as you would hope. Atypical, but a true experience.

The smashing the hand in the door, thats a scene that sort of happened on set. I never wrote that scene. But I think where it came from was this idea to kind of amplify how that character felt at the beginning of the movie.

That way, by the end of the film, people have an understanding of how far hes coming since the starting point. Did it gut-check you at all that two Englishmen were cast as the leads?

It didnt, but I will say, there are a few characters in the film that I was adamant must be American. Theres a character named Chutsky, who could only be played by American. Because there is a certain American swagger and loudness, that comes with charge. And you cant invent that if youre not American. I dont give a shit if youre Laurence Olivier you cant play that kind of American if youre not American.

It didnt give me pause at all to have Henry Cavill and Nicholas Hoult, because they were super serious about the movie. And Henry Cavill, by the way his brother is in the British special forces, and when we had a conversation, he was like, "I take this stuff very seriously." And I was like, "Me too, and thats what I need."

There are only so many actors in the world, there are only so many who will get your movie green-lit, and there are only so many whose schedules will line up at the exact right time. I personally am very pleased by how those two guys, in particular, performed.

Why did you settle on the water pumping station as the core conflict?

The water pumping station evolves from the same place of trying to fix that bakery, right? Trying to do something that is important to the local community. If you make them feel safe, if they trust you, then they will help. And you feel a lot of success in that. The pumping station is invented, but its a cinematic way to take that same feeling and turn it up again. What I usually say is that, my experience in the Iraq War felt a bit Sisyphean in that, I would push a boulder up the hill alongside the other men and women that I served with, and then it would roll back down again. And then we would push it up, and it would roll back down again.

You dont get to see that a lot in war movies. Its funny the current sergeant major of the Army, who is an infantryman, was tasked with fixing a water treatment facility in Iraq when he was deployed, just because that was the most useful thing for them to be doing at the time.

Im really glad that you brought that up, because this wasnt intentional if my goal was, how can I translate my experience? You start to hit on some universal themes.

The reason why Im very proud that this movie got made, and the reason its a miracle that it got made, is that it takes a look at a war experience in a way that isnt super Hollywood-ized.

The experience of this war is very different than the Vietnam War or World War II. Its the realization that you are doing a lot of nation building and youre entrusting 20-year-old kids to help a town elect a mayor. Youre doing a lot of organizing of people and youre trying to get this different culture to understand how to organize institutions that account for their basic needs.

Im speaking from the civil affairs perspective, so Im sure people could challenge me and say otherwise. But the challenge for my time in Iraq, and the challenge for the Army as a whole remaining true to our values and remaining deeply empathetic even when youre given reason not to be, thats the real struggle for Matt.

How long will you want to help when people start dying? What I think Matt and the guys realize is, you cant throw up your hands, you cant abandon your humanity, because it is the only tool that will allow you to be successful.

The reason why Im proud overall of the movie is because it shows, number one, that the goal of the soldiers in the film is not to take the hill or shoot the bad guy. The reason those films are always made is because theyre the most entertaining and the most digestible for an audience.

To me, thats always done a disservice to what I felt war was for me. I believe that this film will sit pretty nicely in that gap between action and excitement and night raids, but also is very much concerned with the complex problem of rebuilding a village, of earning trust with a culture you dont know anything about. I think that matters.

Id rather see a 21-year-old kid rescue his buddy who just lost his arm, because thats real. That happened. Id rather see that portrayed than Captain America.

You mentioned you want to write a television show or miniseries about returning from war. Do you identify at all with the pop culture, 'dysfunctional veteran' narrative?

Yeah, I hate it. This is the best conversation Ive had about this movie in the 50-some interviews Ive done. Im not bullshitting you. This is fantastic. Im so tired of that narrative, the same way I was tired of the narrative of the American soldier in popular culture. From what Ive experienced, for myself and the guys I talk to -- I do a lot of work with veterans groups. Im a member of the Pat Tillman Foundation. I do a lot of work with guys who have PTSD and they say some pretty fascinating things.

Something akin to, "When I came back from Iraq, it wasn't the bombs and the bullets and the blood the caused me the most problems. It was this feeling of trying to re-find my purpose."

If this movie doesnt speak to your war experience as a veteran, thats okay. But I hope that you write your movie or you writeyour book or you go on a speaking tour, because every veteran has a story to tell and it deserves to be heard.

I hope that if people dont see themselves in this movie, that they take a swing at it. Because I want to see their films, I want to read their books.

Were kind of at a time now where, the people who served at the start of the war are in their 30s and 40s, and thats old enough to start talking about what happened. And I think its time to start making art that relays what weve experienced.

Originally posted here:
Iraq vet talks about his Netflix movie, pulling CQ in Saddam's palace, debunking 'dysfunctional veteran' stereotype - ArmyTimes.com

Counter-ISIS Strikes Target Terrorists in Syria, Iraq – Department of Defense

SOUTHWEST ASIA, April 21, 2017 U.S. and coalition military forces continued to attack the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria yesterday, conducting 32 strikes consisting of 80 engagements, Combined Joint Task Force Operation Inherent Resolve officials reported today.

Officials reported details of yesterdays strikes, noting that assessments of results are based on initial reports.

Strikes in Syria

In Syria, coalition military forces conducted 21 strikes consisting of 28 engagements against ISIS targets:

-- Near Abu Kamal, five strikes destroyed seven ISIS wellheads, five oil tankers and five oil processing equipment items.

-- Near Dayr Az Zawr, three strikes destroyed two bunkers, an ISIS wellhead and a front-end loader.

-- Near Raqqa, five strikes engaged five ISIS tactical units and destroyed six fighting positions.

-- Near Tabqah, eight strikes engaged six ISIS tactical units and destroyed two fighting positions, a command-and-control node and an ISIS staging area.

Strikes in Iraq

In Iraq, coalition military forces conducted 11 strikes consisting of 52 engagements against ISIS targets:

-- Near Huwayjah, a strike destroyed an ISIS-held building and a mortar system.

-- Near Qaim, a strike engaged an ISIS tactical unit and destroyed a weapons cache, a tactical vehicle and an anti-aircraft artillery system.

-- Near Fallujah, a strike engaged an ISIS tactical unit.

-- Near Mosul, six strikes engaged seven ISIS tactical units, destroyed 11 rocket-propelled grenade systems, seven fighting positions, six vehicle bombs, five mortar systems, three vehicle bomb-making facilities, a weapons cache, a medium machine gun and an ISIS staging area; damaged 11 ISIS supply routes, four fighting positions; and suppressed two mortar teams and ISIS tactical unit.

-- Near Rawah, a strike destroyed four weapons caches, a vehicle bomb and a bunker.

-- Near Tal Afar, a strike destroyed a front-end loader.

Part of Operation Inherent Resolve

These strikes were conducted as part of Operation Inherent Resolve, the operation to destroy ISIS in Iraq and Syria. The destruction of ISIS targets in Iraq and Syria also further limits the group's ability to project terror and conduct external operations throughout the region and the rest of the world, task force officials said.

The list above contains all strikes conducted by fighter, attack, bomber, rotary-wing or remotely piloted aircraft; rocket-propelled artillery; and some ground-based tactical artillery when fired on planned targets, officials noted.

Ground-based artillery fired in counterfire or in fire support to maneuver roles is not classified as a strike, they added. A strike, as defined by the coalition, refers to one or more kinetic engagements that occur in roughly the same geographic location to produce a single or cumulative effect. For example, task force officials explained, a single aircraft delivering a single weapon against a lone ISIS vehicle is one strike, but so is multiple aircraft delivering dozens of weapons against a group of ISIS-held buildings and weapon systems in a compound, having the cumulative effect of making that facility harder or impossible to use. Strike assessments are based on initial reports and may be refined, officials said.

See the original post here:
Counter-ISIS Strikes Target Terrorists in Syria, Iraq - Department of Defense

Looking for Fun in Iraq? Bingo! – Wall Street Journal (subscription)


Wall Street Journal (subscription)
Looking for Fun in Iraq? Bingo!
Wall Street Journal (subscription)
ERBIL, IraqIt was just after 7 o'clock on a Saturday night and Erbil's hottest game wouldn't start for almost two hours. But Saamia Hanna Youssef arrived early to beat the rough-and-tumble lines for bingo. The 35-year-old, her gold-painted nails ...

Continued here:
Looking for Fun in Iraq? Bingo! - Wall Street Journal (subscription)