This ain't Hell, but you can see it from here

Category: Terror War

  • Lieberman; what happened to my party?

    Joe Lieberman explains the rift in the country over the war and the reason Democrats willnever have a coherent foreign policy until they shake of the far Left’s chains in the Wall Street Journal this morning in Democrats and Our Enemies;

    The attack on America by Islamist terrorists shook President Bush from the foreign policy course he was on. He saw September 11 for what it was: a direct ideological and military attack on us and our way of life. If the Democratic Party had stayed where it was in 2000, America could have confronted the terrorists with unity and strength in the years after 9/11.

    Instead a debate soon began within the Democratic Party about how to respond to Mr. Bush. I felt strongly that Democrats should embrace the basic framework the president had advanced for the war on terror as our own, because it was our own. But that was not the choice most Democratic leaders made. When total victory did not come quickly in Iraq, the old voices of partisanship and peace at any price saw an opportunity to reassert themselves. By considering centrism to be collaboration with the enemy – not bin Laden, but Mr. Bush – activists have successfully pulled the Democratic Party further to the left than it has been at any point in the last 20 years.

    Far too many Democratic leaders have kowtowed to these opinions rather than challenging them. That unfortunately includes Barack Obama, who, contrary to his rhetorical invocations of bipartisan change, has not been willing to stand up to his party’s left wing on a single significant national security or international economic issue in this campaign.

    The Democrat Party saw 9-11 and George Bush’s reaction to it as a political opportunity rather than a crisis for which we needed to unite and speak to the world with one voice. Obama continues to be a divisive element rather than a uniter – despite his empty rhetoric as hope for change. The only thing that’s changed is the face.

    Lieberman goes on to explain that John McCain is the only candidate in this election who recognizes who are our enemies and who are our friends, unlike Barak Obama who has a naive view of world thinking words will soothe the savage breast. Democrats should really think about why Lieberman has gone from their Vice Presidential candidate to pariah in just eight years. Maybe it’s not Lieberman that’s the problem here.

  • A lesson in there, somewhere

    A couple of articles caught my eye today while reading the news and my blogrollees. From Buttle’s World which pointed me to Talisman Gate who writes that Al Qeada admits that it’s beat in Iraq;

    A prolific jihadist sympathizer has posted an ‘explosive’ study on one of the main jihadist websites in which he laments the dire situation that the mujaheddin find themselves in Iraq by citing the steep drop in the number of insurgent operations conducted by the various jihadist groups, most notably Al-Qaeda’s 94 percent decline in operational ability over the last 12 months when only a year and half ago Al-Qaeda accounted for 60 percent of all jihadist activity!

    He includes a chart that needs no translation;

    1210537329_chart.png

    Well, that was from last Thursday.

    This is from today’s McClatchey newspapers under the headline Iraqi Troops Welcomed in Sadr City for First Time;

    Iraqi security forces entered Baghdad ‘s Sadr City in large numbers on Tuesday for the first time since followers of anti-American cleric Muqtada al Sadr agreed two weeks ago to let them in.

    No U.S. troops accompanied the Iraqi forces. The agreement specifically barred Americans from entering the Shiite Muslim enclave.

    In a symbolic gesture, representatives of Sadr and a group of tribal sheiks met the Iraqi forces with a copy of the Quran, the Islamic holy book, to welcome their presence into the city.

    Today I read this from CNN;

    The commander of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia’s Force 47 told reporters in Bogota Monday — a day after surrendering — that “the solution is not through war. There must be dialogue.”

    artfarcgetty.jpg

    Nelly Avila Moreno, center, alias Karina, is escorted by soldiers after surrendering.

    Nelly Avila Moreno, 45, whose nom de guerre was Karina, said she and her longtime male companion made the decision jointly to abandon the FARC group, based in the jungle, at 5 a.m. Sunday.

    She said pressure from Colombian soldiers had been key to their decision, and she called on her fellow rebels to follow her example.

    So I guess there can be victories against terrorists by keeping pressure on them and taking the war to them. I don’t expect the word to be broadcast across the country, but there’s still a lesson in there if anyone is willing to look for it.

  • J-Post: Bush plans Iran attack

    690286519_a3d632b5ec.jpg

    The Jerusalem Post reports that, according to Israeli Defense officials, President Bush plans an attack on Iran before he leaves office;

    US President George W. Bush intends to attack Iran in the upcoming months, before the end of his term, Army Radio quoted officials in Jerusalem as saying Tuesday.

    The official claimed that a senior member of the president’s entourage said during a closed meeting that Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney were of the opinion that military action was called for.

    However, the official continued, “the hesitancy of Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice” was preventing the administration from deciding to launch such an attack on the Islamic Republic.

    I figure Iran has a few months to think about it, though. I suspect that any attack would come after the November elections but before a new President takes office to blunt the political impact. Given the fact thatthe president waited until after the midterm elections in 2006 to announce the “surge”, it only makes sense. It may also complicate any plans that Iran’s clients have for the inevitable attack on US interests in 2009.

    Of course, the next few months will become an opportunity for Iran to reverse it’s current slide toward conflict and president Bush won’t have to use the hammer on them. But, it’s Iran choice, isn’t it?

  • Trading National Security for pork

    Last week in the Congressional offices, I heard Sheila Jackson-Lee tell members of the IVAW that she wanted to be their soldier in Washington. At the time, I asked who will soldier for the troops who are still engaged. That afternoon, Jackson-Lee and her colleagues went across the street and proved that they weren’t going to be the soldiers for our forces engaged overseas by voting down funding for the war.

    Today I learn, from the Associated Press that the Senate won’t be their soldiers either;

    Despite numerous veto threats, senators in both parties have loaded up President Bush’s war funding bill with a grab bag of domestic programs, including work permits for immigrant farm labor and heating subsidies for the poor.

    The Senate was scheduled to begin debate on the measure Tuesday, just days after a key panel added more about $28 billion to Bush’s budget request for this year and next, with almost $50 billion more for a big expansion of veterans benefits under the GI Bill over 2010-2018.

    The new GI Bill and Democratic priorities like extending unemployment benefits are simply the big-ticket add-ons, both of which have drawn veto threats. There’s also $50 million to track down child predators, $400 million to help rural schools and $350 million fight western wildfires, just for starters.

    Senators are acting as if the war funding bill coming to the floor Tuesday is the last train leaving the station, and, as a result, have added billions of dollars for pet programs and hitched on several policy “riders” as well. Few if any other spending bills are likely to come before the Senate this election year, which makes the supplemental measure an even more attractive vehicle for carrying spending proposals that would stall otherwise.

    So, here we are, coming up on Memorial Day when we’re supposed to honoring the people who died in this nation’s wars, and Congress is playing cheap and petty political games with the funding of those who are still living by funding, to the tune of $75 billion, useless social programs that have nothing to do with our national security.

    I guess it’s a lot easier to soldier-up when you’re surrounded by cowards.

  • Ceasefire agreement doesn’t cease fire

    The Mahdi Army signed a ceasefire agreement yesterday that promised the Iraqi government access to Sadr City if they promised not to send in US troops, but according to The Washington Times, the Sadrists aren’t keeping their word;

    “It doesn’t look like a cease-fire to me,” said Maj. Kyle Ferger, executive officer of the 1st Battalion, 6th Infantry Regiment. “Just last night there were more than a dozen [incidents] along the wall.” The wall, made of 12-foot-high concrete slabs, was begun in mid-April to block Shi’ite extremists from infiltrating the two neighborhoods using cross streets along al-Quds to fire rockets at the Green Zone, the seat of the Iraqi government, U.S. military and diplomatic headquarters. Citizens can still travel between the southern and northern sections of Sadr City, but would have to use three main roads where Iraqi soldiers search vehicles for weapons and munitions.

    The BBC corroborates the story;

     Lt Col Steven Stover blamed what he called “special groups” for provoking Monday’s clashes, saying: “They are obviously not listening to any agreement.”

    Tens of thousands of gunmen profess allegiance to Moqtada Sadr and his Mehdi army, but it is unclear how much influence he has over them, and over splinter groups.

    The fighting in Sadr City followed the launching of a government crackdown on Shia militias in the southern city of Basra in late March.

    LT Nixon, in the theater, warns;

    Media will most likely spin this to make the U.S. forces look like the aggressor in some “purge” campaign. In reality, we’re just shooting back.

    Mostly because these thugs aren’t familiar with the term “ceasefire”. I remember a battalion of the 24th Division taking on an Iraqi Republican Guard Division three days after the ceasefire in 1991 after the 24th Division took fire from the Iraqis. The only thing they understand is “dead”.

  • USS Michael Murphy

    Secretary of the Navy Donald C. Winter announced this week that the Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer will be named the Michael Murphy. Murphy, you will remember was the SEAL, killed in Afghanistan who was posthumously awarded the Medal of Honor. This is a proper tribute to a hero.
    Centre Daily News has more.
    LT Murphy’s Medal of Honor Citation:
    FOR SERVICE AS SET FORTH IN THE FOLLOWING

    CITATION:

    FOR CONSPICUOUS GALLANTRY AND INTREPIDITY AT THE RISK OF HIS LIFE ABOVE AND BEYOND THE CALL OF DUTY AS THE LEADER OF A SPECIAL RECONNAISSANCE ELEMENT WITH NAVAL SPECIAL WARFARE TASK UNIT AFGHANISTAN ON 27 AND 28 JUNE 2005. WHILE LEADING A MISSION TO LOCATE A HIGH-LEVEL ANTI-COALITION MILITIA LEADER, LIEUTENANT MURPHY DEMONSTRATED EXTRAORDINARY HEROISM IN THE FACE OF GRAVE DANGER IN THE VICINITY OF ASADABAD, KONAR PROVINCE, AFGHANISTAN. ON 28 JUNE 2005, OPERATING IN AN EXTREMELY RUGGED ENEMY-CONTROLLED AREA, LIEUTENANT MURPHY’S TEAM WAS DISCOVERED BY ANTI-COALITION MILITIA SYMPATHIZERS, WHO REVEALED THEIR POSITION TO TALIBAN FIGHTERS. AS A RESULT, BETWEEN 30 AND 40 ENEMY FIGHTERS BESIEGED HIS FOUR-MEMBER TEAM. DEMONSTRATING EXCEPTIONAL RESOLVE, LIEUTENANT MURPHY VALIANTLY LED HIS MEN IN ENGAGING THE LARGE ENEMY FORCE. THE ENSUING FIERCE FIREFIGHT RESULTED IN NUMEROUS ENEMY CASUALTIES, AS WELL AS THE WOUNDING OF ALL FOUR MEMBERS OF THE TEAM. IGNORING HIS OWN WOUNDS AND DEMONSTRATING EXCEPTIONAL COMPOSURE, LIEUTENANT MURPHY CONTINUED TO LEAD AND ENCOURAGE HIS MEN. WHEN THE PRIMARY COMMUNICATOR FELL MORTALLY WOUNDED, LIEUTENANT MURPHY REPEATEDLY ATTEMPTED TO CALL FOR ASSISTANCE FOR HIS BELEAGUERED TEAMMATES. REALIZING THE IMPOSSIBILITY OF COMMUNICATING IN THE EXTREME TERRAIN, AND IN THE FACE OF ALMOST CERTAIN DEATH, HE FOUGHT HIS WAY INTO OPEN TERRAIN TO GAIN A BETTER POSITION TO TRANSMIT A CALL. THIS DELIBERATE, HEROIC ACT DEPRIVED HIM OF COVER, EXPOSING HIM TO DIRECT ENEMY FIRE. FINALLY ACHIEVING CONTACT WITH HIS HEADQUARTERS, LIEUTENANT MURPHY MAINTAINED HIS EXPOSED POSITION WHILE HE PROVIDED HIS LOCATION AND REQUESTED IMMEDIATE SUPPORT FOR HIS TEAM. IN HIS FINAL ACT OF BRAVERY, HE CONTINUED TO ENGAGE THE ENEMY UNTIL HE WAS MORTALLY WOUNDED, GALLANTLY GIVING HIS LIFE FOR HIS COUNTRY AND FOR THE CAUSE OF FREEDOM. BY HIS SELFLESS LEADERSHIP, COURAGEOUS ACTIONS, AND EXTRAORDINARY DEVOTION TO DUTY, LIEUTENANT MURPHY REFLECTED GREAT CREDIT UPON HIMSELF AND UPHELD THE HIGHEST TRADITIONS OF THE UNITED STATES NAVAL SERVICE.

    SIGNED GEORGE W. BUSH

  • No, it’s not him

    In headier and news-starved times, everyone convinced themselves that the leader of al Qaeda in Iraq had been captured, but US officials in Iraq deny that it’s true (Fox News/Associated Press link);

    The U.S. military denied Friday that the leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq — Abu Ayyub al-Masri — had been captured, saying instead that a man with a similar name was arrested in the northern city of Mosul.

    Iraqi authorities on Thursday said Iraqi police commandos captured the leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq in a raid in the northern city of Mosul.

    “Neither coalition forces nor Iraqi security forces detained or killed Abu Ayyub al-Masri. This guy had a similar name,” said Maj. Peggy Kageleiry, a U.S. military spokeswoman in northern Iraq.

    The story goes on to recount that numerous phone calls to Iraqi officials confirmed that it was indeed al-Masri, however that doesn’t seem to be the case at all.

    “We called the commander of Ninevah operations 10 times and every time he insisted it was Abu Hamza al-Muhajir because when they caught him, they asked him whether his name was Abu Hamza al-Muhajir and he said yes,” al-Askari told the Associated Press by phone.

    He added that the commander repeatedly “insisted that it was him, how can we deny him then.”

    There had been false alarms in the past about al-Masri. At least twice — in 2006 and May 2007 — reports circulated that he was dead, but they were later proved wrong.

    How many times has the Associated Press used this same excuse for broadcasting news that isn’t true, with even less reliable sources than the Iraq military and police?

  • Civil War in Lebanon

    I guess Hezbollah decided that attacking Israel head-to-head is too costly, and seein’s how they’re just bloodthirsty thugs that need to kill, they’ve decided to declare war on the Lebanese Army – an army they’re reasonably certain they can beat, cowardly pussies that they are (from Gateway Pundit – the best resource on the war, by the way);

    Hezbollah rockets hit the home of majority leader Saad Hariri on Friday.
    ABC News Australia reported:

    A rocket has hit the outer wall of the house of Lebanon’s majority leader Saad Hariri, as fighting continues for a third day in the country’s capital Beirut.

    A source close to the Sunni politician says no one was injured by the attack on the leader’s west Beirut residence.

    The attack comes as several Sunni neighbourhoods in west Beirut, considered strongholds of Lebanon’s ruling coalition, have fallen under the control of rival Hezbollah-led militants.

    Hezbollah also forced the closure of pro-government media and took control of a pro-government TV station. Hariri’s Future TV is off the air after being threatened by the Hizbullah militia. Hezbollah also set fire to the al-Mustaqbal newspaper building.

    Yesterday Gateway Pundit also pointed to Talisman Gate who explains how the situation in Sadr City influenced the clashes in Lebanon;

    Ostensibly, Hezbollah is responding to the Lebanese government’s decision to sack the security chief of Beirut’s international airport, and to dismantle Hezbollah’s secure landline-based communications network that had been expanded recently.

    What could have spurred-on this over-reaction on Hezbollah’s part, which has been manifested so far with flexing its muscles in the Sunni area of Beirut, seemingly showing-up the government as weak and vulnerable?

    I believe Iran needed to show the United States and its Arab allies that it can humiliate them by overrunning the government they back in Beirut and that they’d be unable to do anything about it, and I believe that Iran needed to make this point now because the Mahdi Army in Iraq has collapsed.

    The Associated Press in the Wall Street Journal concurs;

    The clashes are the latest turn in a test of wills between the Hezbollah-led opposition and the government of Mr. Saniora. The U.S.-backed government has only a slim majority in Parliament, and the two sides have been locked in a 17-month power struggle that has kept government at a standstill.

    The fight could have implications for the entire Middle East at a time when Sunni-Shiite tensions are high. The tensions are fueled in part by the rivalry between predominantly Shiite Iran, which sponsors Hezbollah, and Sunni Arab countries like Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

    The leaders of Qatar and Syria held talks on Lebanon in Damascus, which wields influence with Hezbollah and has close relations with Iran. Syria’s official news agency said the two sides agreed the conflict in Lebanon was an internal affair and expressed hope the feuding parties would find a solution through dialogue.

    I’m not sure why the Associated Press continues to call this the “US-backed government” since there are a lot of nations that back the constitutionally-elected government of Lebanon.

    Gateway Pundit also writes that the Hezbollah thugs mark their territory with pictures of Syria’s president Assad. So we can expect the UN to condemn Iran’s and Syria’s support of these anti-government thugs any minute now. Associated Press reports that Arab nations have called for an “emergency” meeting – in two days. Some emergency meeting.

    Will we see Nancy Pelosi talk her good pal Assad into leaving the Lebanese alone? Will Obama take some time and talk to Ahmadinejad?