Faith, Beer, and Other Things That Interest Geoff

Pentagon Report Supports al Qaeda - Saddam Links

Labels: al qaeda, iraq

So What Will the Excuse be Now?

Iraq is making political headway towards reconciliation.

The Surge is working. Al Qaeda in Iraq is in collapse.

So what will the excuse be now for abandoning Iraq? Maybe they figure Iraq will be stable, they'll pull out, and can claim credit to the anti-war people while not causing a humanitarian disaster.

Labels: iraq

I May Not Vote for McCain in the Fall

Campaign Finance Reform is an unconstitutional mess. I don't trust McCain to appoint strict constructionists to the Supreme Court.

The reasons to vote for him are two:
1) pulling out of Iraq early will lead to genocide, etc.
2) he won't be as bad in regards to the oncoming nanny state, although I think the march of the nanny state seems inevitable.

Not a ringing endorsement.

Labels: iraq, mccain, politics

Al Qaeda Is Being Slaughtered

“Al Qaeda in Iraq is defeated,” according to Sheik Omar Jabouri, spokesman for the Iraqi Islamic Party and a member of the widespread and influential Jabouri Tribe. Speaking through an interpreter at a 31 October meeting at the Iraqi Islamic Party headquarters in downtown Baghdad, Sheik Omar said that al Qaeda had been “defeated mentally, and therefore is defeated physically,” referring to how clear it has become that the terrorist group’s tactics have backfired. Operatives who could once disappear back into the crowd after committing an increasingly atrocious attack no longer find safe haven among the Iraqis who live in the southern part of Baghdad. They are being hunted down and killed. Or, if they are lucky, captured by Americans.

Al Qaeda attracts murdering, evil people. When they do what they do for long enough, they wear out their welcome. Even in Baghdad.

Labels: al qaeda, iraq

The Comments of Gen. Sanchez That Went Unreported

In his speech to the Military Reporters and Editors Association in Washington, D.C., on Friday, Sanchez accused reporters of "unscrupulous reporting, solely focused on supporting an agenda and preconceived notions of the U.S. military."

Without naming a specific company, Sanchez said "parent media organizations" have political agendas that direct the news coverage of the war and in some cases put U.S. service members in deadly situations.

"What is clear to me is that you are perpetuating the corrosive partisan politics that is destroying our country and killing our service members who are at war. My assessment is that your profession, to some, has strayed from these ethical standards and allowed external agendas to manipulate what the American public sees on TV, reads in newspapers and what they see on the Web," Sanchez said.

Ironic, considering the comments were left out confirm the problem he was talking about.

Gen. Sanchez apparently ripped everyone. Those are usually good speeches.

Labels: iraq

Iran's Proxy War Against the U.S. and the Iraqi Government (PDF)

Bookmark and read later.

Labels: iran, iraq

Pleasing the Peace Activist Community

Here is an interesting picture I saw on a peace activist website.



Now, what is interesting about this? This pre-dates the Iraq War. What were they complaining about? Sanctions against Iraq were hurting Iraqis. They wanted them lifted. Prior to 9/11 there was pressure to lift sanctions on Iraq.

So they didn't want pressure on Iraq. But they didn't want an invasion.

The only other option was to let Saddam Hussein run around amuck.

Labels: iraq

It Appears Dems Freaking Out About Surge Success

Go here and here.

Labels: iraq

Interesting Take on Iraq

Everyone is missing the most important point about what seems to be happening in Iraq!

There is only one major question that dominates everything else in Iraq -- what are the customers buying? When it comes to those selling al Qaeda terror bombings of civilians, the customers are deciding in increasing numbers that they don't like it.

I can understand liberals, given their love of government and its top-down "solutions", focusing on the state of Iraqi democracy. I don't understand libertarians and those who focus on the market missing this.

What is important is that ordinary muslims, not just in Iraq, are looking at the terror bombings killing ordinary Iraqis and deciding that this is not what their religion is all about. More and more of them are deciding that they don't want it anymore. So support for the terrorists and their cause is declining among muslims in Iraq and around the world.

Hey people! This is good. THIS is the big issue. The whole point of democracy in Iraq is to show ordinary muslims how life can be better when you don't obsess about blowing up infidels. If we are making progress on that main goal anyway, without as much progress in the originally chosen method, let's focus on that important point.

Sure, a stable democracy is better than not having one. It would still pay huge dividends. But let's not get diverted from the primary goal which is reducing the danger from Islamic terrorists. If the terrorists continue to lose support from those they seek to influence, we are making progress --real and very significant progress.

Labels: iraq

NY Times OpEd: A War We Just Might Win

Here is the most important thing Americans need to understand: We are finally getting somewhere in Iraq, at least in military terms. As two analysts who have harshly criticized the Bush administration’s miserable handling of Iraq, we were surprised by the gains we saw and the potential to produce not necessarily “victory” but a sustainable stability that both we and the Iraqis could live with.

After the furnace-like heat, the first thing you notice when you land in Baghdad is the morale of our troops. In previous trips to Iraq we often found American troops angry and frustrated — many sensed they had the wrong strategy, were using the wrong tactics and were risking their lives in pursuit of an approach that could not work.

Today, morale is high. The soldiers and marines told us they feel that they now have a superb commander in Gen. David Petraeus; they are confident in his strategy, they see real results, and they feel now they have the numbers needed to make a real difference.

Everywhere, Army and Marine units were focused on securing the Iraqi population, working with Iraqi security units, creating new political and economic arrangements at the local level and providing basic services — electricity, fuel, clean water and sanitation — to the people. Yet in each place, operations had been appropriately tailored to the specific needs of the community. As a result, civilian fatality rates are down roughly a third since the surge began — though they remain very high, underscoring how much more still needs to be done.

Labels: iraq

Democratic-YouTube Debate

Apparently, Joe Biden tried to give a realistic answer about pulling out of Iraq. He has no hope for being President.

Hillary Clinton completely smoked Obama in one answer.

Senator Obama said in the debate that he would meet with the leaders of rogue nations; Senator Clinton said she would first make sure that such meetings were not intended as propaganda.

Pundits generally saw hers as the better answer, underscoring her experience on the world stage and at the same time casting Senator Obama as inexperienced.

Today, Senator Clinton drove home the point by directly criticizing Senator Obama’s statement.

“I thought that was irresponsible and frankly naïve,” Mrs. Clinton told the Quad-City Times in Iowa.

Hillary Clinton is completely right. Obama's answer is incredibly naïve.

Diplomacy is a good thing. But when you need to be diplomatic from a position of strength, craziness, etc. Not weakness. I think Hillary actually understands this.

Unless Obama is just saying what he thinks will sound good to Democratic voters.

Labels: barack obama, diplomacy, hillary clinton, iraq, joe biden

U.N. Secretary General Warns Against U.S. Withdraw from Iraq

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon warned Monday that an abrupt U.S. troop pullout could deepen the crisis in Iraq, and he urged the United States to keep the Iraqi people in mind when making decisions on the increasingly unpopular war.

Ban said both the United States and the international community have a responsibility not to abandon the Iraqi people.

Now, a good conservative would say if the U.N. wants input they need to sacrifice. And we wouldn't be in the mess in the first place if the U.N. hadn't handled their responsibilities with Iraq prior to the war.

However, what can a good liberal say? The U.N. and world opinion should count for a lot.

But regardless, it should give us pause when the head of the U.N. thinks a withdraw would be so dire that he is unwilling to toe the leftist line. That's serious.

Labels: iraq, united nations

Pentagon Rebukes Hillary Clinton Over Iraq

"Premature and public discussion of the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq reinforces enemy propaganda that the United States will abandon its allies in Iraq, much as we are perceived to have done in Vietnam, Lebanon and Somalia," Edelman wrote.

He added that "such talk understandably unnerves the very same Iraqi allies we are asking to assume enormous personal risks."

Analysis of how we leave our allies to the wolves because it is convenient for us seems right on the mark. We are a disposal society that aborts babies because they are inconvenient to us. Our allies have noticed the general pattern from Vietnam onwards.

When the going gets tough, we get going.

Labels: iraq, vietnam

One Soldier's View: Why Congress Should Embrace the Surge

Very interesting article. In the New York Times.

WHEN the civilian hierarchy fails them, soldiers tend to seek solace in Clausewitz’s observation that war is an extension of politics. But in 2005 and 2006 the reverse was true in Iraq: the battle churned in place, steadily eroding the administration’s credibility and America’s psyche, while most politicians stood on the sidelines, content to hurl insults at one another until the battlefield offered a clear political course.

What was most remarkable, however, was the military’s inability to grab the reins and articulate a realistic war plan for Iraq. At home, recruiting, supply and deployment crises were solved; but in Iraq the generals continued to offer assessments of the fight that were as obviously inaccurate as those trumpeted by the politicians. The goal was to put Iraqi forces in the lead, but as a consequence, large-scale battlefield adaptation was scarce.

Today the civil-military relationship has righted itself, yet soldiers like me who believe that Iraq can be stabilized face a bitter irony. On one hand, the military is finally making meaningful adjustments to the complex fight. On the other, the politicians are finally asserting themselves. The tragedy is that the two groups are going in opposite directions.

Labels: iraq

Victor Davis Hanson on the Progression of Support for Iraq War

Always good to hear from a knowledgable war historian.

Labels: iraq

A Test of Wills and the Senate Resolution

Osama bin Laden thought the United States was soft. "A paper tiger." Apply a little bit of pressure and they will capitulate.

Now, with that in mind, what does unwillingness to succeed in Iraq signal to our enemies? How about Muslims who under pressure in the Middle East?

Would you want to align with the United States? I don't know about you, but I know my real friends. They help me when things are going badly. They don't abandon me.

Labels: iraq