Gordon Brown’s Government took another tentative step to distance itself from President Bush yesterday, as one of the Prime Minister’s chief lieutenants delivered a series of coded criticisms of American foreign policy.

Douglas Alexander, the International Development Secretary, used a speech in Washington last night to rebuke what many in Labour’s ranks regard as Mr Bush’s unilateralist and high-handed approach.

Mr Alexander said that a country’s might was “too often measured in what it could destroy” and that “in the 21st century, strength should be measured by what we can build together”.

Stressing the need for an internationalist approach to foreign policy issues, he called for "new alliances based on common values, ones not just to protect us from the world, but ones which reach out to the world."   more »

Within the Green Zone, a few brothels have been opened (disguised as a women's shelter, hairdresser, or Chinese restaurant) but are usually closed by authorities after reports about their existence reach the media.

The U.S. military claims that it officially forbids its troops to be involved in prostitution.

But private contractors brag on sex websites that they have sometimes been able to find Iraqi or foreign women in Baghdad or around U.S. military bases.

These highly paid security contractors have much disposable income, and are not held accountable to anyone but their companies.   more »

"Sometimes the debate over Iraq is cast as a disagreement between those who want to keep our troops in Iraq and those who want to bring our troops home," he said.

"And this is not the real debate. I don't know anyone who doesn't want to see the day when our brave service men and women can start coming home. . . .

"The real debate over Iraq is between those who think the fight is lost or not worth the cost and those who believe the fight can be won, and that, as difficult as the fight is, the costs of defeat would be far higher."

On a literal level, at least, Bush is wrong. The current debate in Congress is precisely about whether U.S. troops should start coming home soon or whether they should stay in Iraq until some ill-defined and potentially unattainable goals are met.

On a more philosophical level, however, Bush may be right. The debate over the war is also becoming a debate between those who believe in Bush and share his beliefs about the war -- and those who don't.   more »

Homeland Security Michael Chertoff gave an interview to the editorial board of the Chicago Tribune, claiming that the US was at heightened risk of new terrorist attacks.

Prior to the 2004 elections, there was an intensive campaign of so-called “Washington whispers,” that is to say, suggestions that a terrorist attack in the US was likely and might significantly influence the elections.

In July of 2004, the Bush administration requested a detailed analysis of what steps it should take to cancel the 2004 elections in the event of a terrorist attack.

It is entirely legitimate to ask whether Chertoff’s comments are the beginning of a campaign to prepare the possible cancellation of the 2008 elections.   more »

“The president wants to play on Al Qaeda because he thinks Americans understand the threat Al Qaeda poses,” said Bruce Riedel, an expert at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy and a former C.I.A. official.

“But I don’t think he demonstrates that fighting Al Qaeda in Iraq precludes Al Qaeda from attacking America here tomorrow. Al Qaeda, both in Iraq and globally, thrives on the American occupation.”

Military intelligence officials said that Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia’s leaders wanted to expand their attacks to other countries.

But Bruce Hoffman, a terrorism expert at Georgetown University, said that if American forces were to withdraw from Iraq, the vast majority of the group’s members would likely be more focused on battling Shiite militias in the struggle for dominance in Iraq than on trying to follow the Americans home.   more »