You are such a stickler.
The New Zealand Soldier's mother is from Mozambique and carries both Passports.
Several US soldiers are Mexican Nationals on the accelerated citizenship plan.
Hence 36. So what do you have to say about that?

Stephen Colbert has a good relationship with the Hungarian embassy. I'm sure he'd be willing to contact the Ambassador for you.

(I think I'm actually serious here. This sounds like perfect fodder for Colbert.)

Why is it that, say, CNN is not reporting this?

I mean, granted, its a little thing, and probably not too important. But I was pretty confused when I heard it too. And surely some people would want to know how flimsy this coalition really is, especially since Bush threw out the number 36 to try to prove its not flimsy.

Why is everyone ignoring the Saudi contribution? They're loyal allies of ours, and I understand that many of them have found their way to Iraq to join the fight.

"Why is everyone ignoring the Saudi contribution? They're loyal allies of ours, and I understand that many of them have found their way to Iraq to join the fight."

Mordant humor to be sure, easterpig. Too good not to sting.

i think he's also counting kurdistan.

easterpig,

That's exactly right! Without the Saudis' contribution, our whole War on Terror would never have gotten off the ground!

www.asecondlookatthesaudis.com

We should never forget the sacrifices they've made.

Iceland still doesn't have a "troop" on the ground, so why is it still being counted?

Code word = profit, as in "For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul?"

Bush can gain all of Iraq, but he still will have forfeited his soul.

You elitist liberals! The preznit's figure is clearly in base 12. He's talking to all the six-fingered, six-toed brother-cousins in the REAL AMERICA, not you guys.
.

Reminds me of the Dave Chapelle skit when he played "Black Bush" and mentioned the "Zulu Nations" as part of the Coalition of the Willing. Classic.

I was stuck on 35, counting the United States and Iraq, but I just figured it out. He's counting Iran as #36, and that's how he's going to justify invading them.

I agree; a pie chart with accompanying table is SORELY needed. It would say it all...

Also, be sure to include a list of which forces are in the process of pulling out. When the UK is gone by the end of the year, the pie will basically be one color.

But don't forget Poland!!!

I wonder if the White House is counting all the private contractors in the list of "36" countries.
Are those from other countries members of the military or hired contractors?

China sent 12,000 play stations, right?

Afrika Baambaata and the Rhythm Nation did a
USO tour.
Ok, I did rip that off Dave Chappelle...

We gotta be kicking azz with a colation like THAT ready to ROLL, eh?

For the record, here's the White House list of how it counts the nations "in" Iraq:

For the record the Pres said, "Troops on the ground."

It would be interesting to know how much "foreign aid" dollars each of the "36" countries are recieving, and how that breaks down per "soldier". I expect that some countries are being paid hundreds of thousands, or even millions, for the use of their soldier. Talk about a privatization scheme!

I believe Iceland sent carrier pigeons. A carrier pigeon counts as a "troop", yes?

Can the numbers be assigned to each of these countries. Also, I belive South Korea will withdraw its 200 after surrendering to the Taliban

The whole speech had the feel of a political thriller movie about futuristic fascism in which a zombie like mouthpiece read his lines on teevee to a complaisent on one hand and world wearily cynical on the other populace.

Bush's warped mind was thinking "69" and his dyslexic mouth spouted 36 instead...

maybe they're counting Bosnia AND Herzegovenia as TWO nations. and Netherlands is PLURAL, so that's more than one right their. (and Holland should be counted). ... and the U.K. includes falklands and gibraltar etc. ... and what about iraq itself? ... and if we're sending troops from Guantanamo that would put cuba in the mix ... so we're really closer to 45-50.

I just don't know what to think of Bush's speech without a pie chart. Please help me. I need to know. I need to know if this man is honest. Please make pie chart.

Codeword: "Seed," as in the devil hath spat his seed upon the dry dusty desert floor and called it Freedom.

Anyone wanna take bets that half of the Coalition is comprised of fewer than 500 troops?

Iraq Weekly Status Reports
http://www.state.gov/p/nea/rls/rpt/iraqstatus/
September 12, 2007 See Page 33

Data from the Iraq Index
www.brookings.edu/fp/saban/iraq/index.pdf
September 13, 2007 See Page 28 & 30

Coalition Partners as listed at MNF-I
http://www.mnf-iraq.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=9201&Itemid=128

Look around online and see if you can find more numbers...

Coalition Troops: 11,732

Albania
Armenia
Australia [550]
Azerbaijan
Bosnia-Herzegovina
Bulgaria
Czech Republic
Denmark [55]
El Salvador
Estonia
Georgia [2000]
Japan [5]
Kazakhstan
Korea [1200]
Latvia
Lithuania
Macedonia
Moldova
Mongolia
Poland [900]
Romania [600]
Singapore
Slovakia
Ukraine
UK [5500]
US [168000]

Note: Fiji participates as a part of the UN mission in Iraq.

NATO and non-MNF-I countries:

Hungary
Iceland [1]
Italy [0]
Netherlands
Portugal
Slovenia
Turkey

---

Note:
Italy withdrew troops in 2006.

"Iceland still doesn't have a "troop" on the ground, so why is it still being counted?" Posted by: anonymous

Dick Cheney, who we all recognize is a government unto himself, once visited Iraq. His six deferments require twelve boots, so I think W only needs another 24 to make it up to 36.

He should draft a centipede.

...did you hear the one about the stupid redneck who thought Petreaus was the "surgin' gen'ral."

crosspost from the wee hours of FDL this morning;

"50 ways to leave a Bad War" (you know the tune)
..we were on a mission in that
thin-skinned old Humveee
The guys just out in front of us,
they hit an IED
We tried to help them in their struggle
To get free...
There must be fifty ways
To leave a bad war...

You know it's really not our habit
To attack
But there's a lot of oil buried in Iraq
They had it once before,
and now they want it back
There must be fifty ways
To leave a bad war
Fifty ways to leave a bad war

You just jump on a ship, Dick
Forget about the Iran plan
You don't need to destroy, Roy
Just set our troops free
Hop on the plane, Jane
No need to complain, James
Just get out of Baghdad
And set em' all free.

You know he came home
having nightmares, wracked with pain
I wish we could go back in time
To change it all again
He said "I appreciate that"
And would you please explain
About the fifty ways
to leave a bad war..
fifty ways to leave a bad war

And in the darkness of that
fallen angel flight
coffins surround you
and you know it isn't right
They felt the kiss of death
as they battled through the night.
There must be fifty ways
To leave a bad war
Fifty ways to leave a bad war

Wrapped up in a bag, Jack
Laid out on a plank, Hank
completely destroyed, Roy
With a tag on your feet.
Missin' a limb Slim
Or shot in the head Fred.
Just one of the wounded, Lee
That's how it can be.

Because

There must be...
fifty ways to leave a bad war...

With the over-media on the Iraq war, and in some consideration of the 'pragmatic analysis' of the circumstances, I find it refreshing that this news site is a concurrent source for the government corruption news of our elected representatives. I however think that this site marginalizes it's ability to be unique by focusing on the Iraq war debate, or 'absence of a debate.'

It is not inconsistent to have adamantly opposed the invasion before the war began in Iraq as a matter of existential analysis based on initial propositions of the need for that war, oppose even more vociferously the concept of an imperial presidency and groupthink, that included humans rights violations and civil rights violations, and to have had that stated disagreement be an essential 'policy disagreement' that affected employment and had consequences.

But the circumstances have now been changed, and despite initial objections and analysis being borne to fact, (that Iraqi sectionalism and willingness to endorse western ideas) was limited and overstated, and that the coercive elements of using the element of fear and torture for internal public consumption and at detention facilities a flawed concept in the battle of hearts and minds, that now:

DESPITE the bad policy and poor leadership, and absence of any management of expectations, that the real possibility of just leaving Iraq does not at the present exist!

IPSO FACTO, before the 'debate' if you want to call it that, there was no real choice but to 'stay a course' that was borne of the peculiar and myoptic beliefs of the neoconservative segment of the Republican party.

It might be said this way, that the only worse decision made in the wake of a string of already implimented policies, is to now leave Iraq and create exactly what was our initial effort to prevent. That would be a failed nation state and a safe haven for radical islamic spread of values.

Make no mistake about it: Did the false accusations of WMD's pan out? NO! Did the existence of a tie-in between Saddam and 911 exist? NO! Did the Iraqi's greet us with flowers? NO! Was the troop requirements that Rumsfeld declared 'wildly off the mark' be in fact what was required? YES! Did the administration violate US constitutional law with COITELPRO activities and FISA violations? YES Did the acts of unlimited detention and torture violate Geneva? YES!

In my opinion should the POTUS be impeached? YES!

But that does not change the current reality of the circumstances in Iraq nor would it advert a meltdown of ethnic cleansing and failed state status where removing troops at this juncture would be only the 'capstone' of stupidity in US policy originating from the debacle already created.

You might not like the circumstances, but you should damn sure recognize them for what they are!

I see the 'debate' as moot as the US really doesn't have a plan-B policy. I see the 'debate' moot as we cannot allow the Iraq situation to become a humanitarian crisis that eclipses anything seen in Kosovo, Bosnia, and that regionalized ethnic loss of life from sectarian fighting.

Will the mission continue? Count on it! Will it be funded? You bet!

This was a false dialouge with pre-determined result all about political verbiage for the internal public discussion, where even the 'actors' in Iraq, who did photo opps are props.. who got sucked into a for-gone conclusion!

I wish this site would stay agnostic and focus on corruption of elected leaders. There is more than enough material to cover and the dilluting of the content into now partisan positions undermines this sites ability to carve a niche in cyberspace focused on criminal behaviours of elected officals without being marginalized as partisn.

JMHO.

Anonymous at 10:38...

YOUR REAL AGENDA IS PRETTY OBVIOUS TO THIS BUNCH, since when does ignoring this story make it go away?

No amount of excuses can cover the truth here. We need to get out of Iraq, ASAP, not when YOU think the ethnic cleansing won't happen. It IS happening, it WILL happen, and we aren't stoppoing it, we are there to protect oil convoys and to make Bush capable of continuing to delude himself.

That is just another lowering of the bar, you obviouysly don't have family there or you might reconsider your position.

As I see it, your argument is the new deception, it is all "they" have left, if you aren't one of t"them" then they have you by the nads...

I'd really like to see this list with numbers attached to each country - perhaps even made into a bar chart to make it more vivid.

I think to properly compare the US involvement to the other countries, we should lump all the other countries into a category called 'other' and see how that compares to the US - a simple bar chart would do nicely.

Wow My elementary school in Los Angeles was a bigger COALITION than there is in Iraq!

As for the 10:38 commentor, there's a new graduating class of Republican trained trolls coming off that Craig's list ads, just look for posts from supposed "moderates" and "libs" who are trying to co-opt these blogs, and their methods won't be straightforward, they will be subtle and progressively attepting to dampen our discussions with this feigned "lets stay on subject" crap. I may have spotted one of them making their way onto KOS recently, they alwasy come across as "a disgruntled right winger, looking for reason." And they co-opt the issues they arenn't really involved in, so they can influence us all on other issues, more germane to their agenda.

Obviously no one here was fooled this time around. Subtlety depends on stupidity for its vistims, and they won't find a lot of that here on the "lefty blogs" as they are wont to labe "us".

This type of "there's nothing here, move along" mentallity is nothing more than a very subtle campaign to turn the giant ship of the blogosphere away from its progressive roots.

These guys are so desperate, they are feigning giving up the conflict, only to come at us from our own side.

Beware the cornered beast...

You're all forgetting the state of denial.

Just simple reasoning might help a bit 10:38.

A young Iraqi who has been part of the insurgency fighting the US forces in large part because he hates his country being occupied by foreigners. The US leaves. His family tell him his effort has worked, now get a job. Or he looks around and sees AQI folks who are mostly Saudis and he wants them to leave, because he can't really see how they're helping matters. Oh, and then there are Iranians, the folks who they fought an eight year war against, and who happen to be Persians, not even Arabic speakers, and he figures maybe they should leave too.

His friends and neighbors probably agree with him. The quicker they get rid of AQI and the Persians, the better things will be.

Don't you think that young man, and his friends and family are the only ones who can change the current reality on the ground in Iraq?

The only real contribution to this reality the US can make is to tell these young Iraqis that we will give Iraq money to rebuild, but only after the situation settles down. You, Iraqis, mostly secular, can settle this situation, but only by yourselves.

JEP feels that 10:38 is "too well written." But to me the post smacked of overly abstract writing and a poseur, fancy-lingo, omniscient quality. I saw it as "sound and fury signifying nothing." By the time you tried to work your way through all the drivel, it was really pathetic.

Anyway, at this point maybe these people think we "bow to anonymous" - and that whenever a post is not attributed, we will somehow see the "wisdom" there.

I agree with JEP that we need to be vigilant. The troll people are forever describing themselves - as if all of us here run around with a "label" or something. It's kinda fun, actually, to "police" the place. I think of it as "playground duty."

Somehow a person playing a role is always going to be at a disadvantage. Sometimes they're too shrill. Sometimes too over-intellectualized. Sometimes devoid of reason.

I too agree we need to be vigilant. But they, whoever they are, whatever kind of ilk they be, are going to lack the necessary flexibility here to please their masters.

Glad to shake hands across the playground, JEP!

Cheers!

By emphasizing this stellar 36 nation coaltion, perhaps Bush has given the signal on a new Iraq policy. If each member share the responsibility equally, we can reduce the American troop commitment from 170,000 to less than 5,000, and reduce our financial commitment from $200 billion annually less than $6 billion.

Of course the U.S. has more resources and should assume greater responsiblity for the war it created. So maybe the best strategy is for the U.S. to match soldier for soldier and dollar for dollar the commitments of the other coaltions partners. Although a larger U.S. commitment, it would require a significant reduction of American forces to implement the formula.

I missed this earlier...

"Stephen Colbert has a good relationship with the
Hungarian embassy."

...would that be know as the "Colbert Rapport"?

g bush looks real dumb every time he opens his mouth. I don't need a pie chart to see there is no colalition and there never was.Thats what makes bush look stupid when he refers to the colalition. This is not a war it's an occupation, so if it's ok to pretend it's a war then isn't it ok to imagine the colalition and pretend we are winning.

Excellent points, JEP. "dams on that flow" - very good! "anti-bloggers" - well said!

Oh, yes, they're coaching them. I'm sure. But as you say, it's the flow... and how do you coach them to "facilitate" that flow if the object is to make log jams? So they try to become logs floating by, I guess, in hopes we won't see the debris in the river.

Hmmmm.... the art of anti-blogging.

Pie Charts! Coalition Watch!

Sure, I'd love to see numbers (even just percentages) next to the countries participating in the "coalition." But then I'd also like to see the comparison include--as a distinct component of the whole--the number of employees working for companies under contract to the US military there.

kahoneez, you are the first one I've read m,ake that pooint, and it is eztremely valid.

We will have a "privateeer" presence in Iraq long after we have a military presence.

Actually, from what I've read about Blackwater over at Jeremy Scahill's posts aty Truthdig, and his book about it, the more I am concerned abnout what those black ops will be inclined to do when they get back here.

I always wondered what happened to the boys in "Lord of the flies" and I get the feeling the same base instincts have come out in Iraq's secret military.

Sadly, this may be the modern sequel to "Lord of the Flies."

FWIW; the Dutch MinDef has list of troops employed outside of the Netherlands and there are seven detached in Iraq (NATO Training Mission Irak).

In total we had 7568 soldiers in Iraq, but we rotate the troops after 4 or 6 months and cumulate the numbers.

Didn't the original Dutch connection go through Rumsfeld and his Merck roots?

I always wondered how they got into this stupid "war" but there's an old batch of bneocons there going back to the original Dutch merchant fleet days, while their citizens have found a way to make some progress through time, those Dutch industrialists and money-changers are neocons amidst socialists.

Power Point presentation is the only way to go for such a complex breakdown of the big 36

Thanks for the pie chart, Steve! Very pretty. Coalition shrinking - shrinking fast!

I look forward to updates. And perhaps you could go back and show the progression to where we are now.

My Korean friends often laugh about this -- they have roughly 1000 troops there, but apparently they are in an out-of-the-way corner in the north, and never venture out of their base. It is a purely symbolic contribution to the coalition of the whatever, which, I gather, is exactly what the Koreans want since the majority of the public is not at all happy to have troops in Iraq in the first place.

I bet if you include the mercinaries, I mean contractors, you could add in another 20 or 30 countries represented. You could say the whole world is on our side!

Kerry talked about the 36 nations on Meet the Press today to John McCain (and McCain did not have an answer):

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20806501/page/5/

SEN. KERRY: Well, Tim, John keeps avoiding the—and the administration keeps avoiding the need to have the second component here, which is real diplomacy. Nothing that we’ve proposed is proposed in a vacuum. We’re not saying just change the mission; we’re saying use American leverage, work with our allies, work with the neighbors with a real diplomatic surge that brings the United Nations back and, in effect, creates a structure where it’s not just American treasure and American lives that are on the line. President the other day talked about 36 allies. I’ll lay odds John McCain can’t name 36 allies. I can’t. That’s an insult to American intelligence. How much are they contributing to the budget? I believe you need diplomacy, real diplomacy. It’s been absent. We deserve a president who’s going to lead us and provide that. And together, with the change in the dynamics on the ground, we can save American lives. I think John and I agree 100 percent in, in the quality of the service of our troops, the unbelievable sacrifice they’re making. We all support them, we’re proud of them, and we want them to get home safely.

Borat would be happy to know that Kazakhstan is one of the "Coalition of the Willing." Surely his country's participation is due in some part to his good will tour of America.

Greetings Liberal Socialists!

I see you all have done another good job foaming at the mouth for the past ten thousand words or so. Basically, all I see and hear in your words is a vehement desire for our defeat in Iraq.

Someone please help me understand why you do not see that the Islamofascists want to kill you, your family, and our whole American way of life. They want a muslim world and are willing to sacrifice anything and anyone to achieve their goal.

Do you libs really believe the excrement you preach or do you just hate George Bush that much? If it is honestly a hatred of GWB, how can you feel this way over the safety and well being of our country?

When we were attacked on 9/11/2001, our country was deliberately thrown into a long protracted war. There is only one objective now. Kill the enemy. There is no such thing as diplomacy as your fellow lib John F. Kerry espouses.

My next question is: Do you really think, if any of your socialist presidential candidates win the election, that they will pull out of Iraq? NOT gonna happen!

Um, I think the president might have just leaked some classified information. New Zealand deploys special forces soldiers to various places without telling anyone about it. It's quite possible some of them are in Iraq, which would be a secret, and Bush would have just blurted it out. This could be innocent idiocy, but it's more likely an attempt to discredit Helen Clark a la Valerie Plame.