Category: Terror War

I’m reading this sorry excuse for an opinion piece in the Washington Post about some whiner named Eric T. Fair who has nightmares;

Aman with no face stares at me from the corner of a room. He pleads for help, but I’m afraid to move. He begins to cry. It is a pitiful sound, and it sickens me. He screams, but as I awaken, I realize the screams are mine.

That dream, along with a host of other nightmares, has plagued me since my return from Iraq in the summer of 2004. Though the man in this particular nightmare has no face, I know who he is. I assisted in his interrogation at a detention facility in Fallujah. I was one of two civilian interrogators assigned to the division interrogation facility (DIF) of the 82nd Airborne Division. The man, whose name I’ve long since forgotten, was a suspected associate of Khamis Sirhan al-Muhammad, the Baath Party leader in Anbar province who had been captured two months earlier.

If this guy thinks this is horrible torture that should keep him up at night nearly three years after the event, he was in the wrong line of work. I have nightmares, too, but has anyone seen me anywhere on the ‘net complain about them?

Sorry to interrupt, I’ll let the crybaby continue;

I watched as detainees were forced to stand naked all night, shivering in their cold cells and pleading with their captors for help. Others were subjected to long periods of isolation in pitch-black rooms. Food and sleep deprivation were common, along with a variety of physical abuse, including punching and kicking.

Sounds like an ARTEP in Hohenfels to me. Imagine – standing naked in the dark – horrible, just horrible. Is this the best he can do? Is the best the Washington Post can do?

I googled his name and came up empty. So I went to my trusty military.com Buddy Finder and the only profile that exists for an Eric T. Fair is the one he made. There’s no public record of the military service of this guy, although he claims he was an Arabic linguist in the Army before 2000 and then a contractor in 2004. 

I am desperate to get on with my life and erase my memories of my experiences in Iraq. But those memories and experiences do not belong to me. They belong to history.

So what’s his stupid point? And what is the Post’s point? This is just a whinefest for some guy who didn’t have the stomach for being mean, and rightly terminated his service with the military. So why did he and the Post think it deserved even a column inch of space?

And why did the Washington Post put on their website next to the frontpage link to this story the picture of the poncho-clad terrorist with his arms outstretched, sandbag over his head, car battery wires attached to his hands that came out of the Abu Garaib? Did poor little Eric mention that he was forced by his paymasters to do this to innocent little beheaders? Nope. He talked about sleepless hungry nights and punching. Get a grip Eric and the WaPo. A tight grip.

But he attracts the nutroots like The American Street who suggests we waterboard the Administration, and Thoughts on an unjust war by prevenger who thinks that poor Mr. Fair doesn’t deserve to sleep because he hasn’t spoken out sooner, and the Blue Herald who wants to “lay a little pain” on the Administration (no thoughts on what he’d like to do to those poor unfortunate souls who behead others, though).

But anyway, Uncle Jimbo at Blackfive is trying to outmaneuver the MSM on the “surge” – if you have any info for him, send it.

This morning, Rowan Scarborough in the Washington Times reports;

The outgoing U.S. commander in Baghdad yesterday broke with his superiors, including President Bush, by telling a Senate committee he does not agree with their dire assessments that the Iraq war is failing.
    “I do not agree that we have a failed policy,” Army Gen. George Casey told the Senate Armed Services Committee in confirmation hearings for him to be the next Army chief of staff.

It’s the same thing I’ve been saying all along – just because the Democrats took the majority in Congress by a razor-thin margin, that doesn’t mean that we all need to admit that the war in Iraq is failing. That’s the general feeling I get from the Bush Administration lately, and journalists and Democrats are jumping on it.

For some reason, it’s now a foregone conclusion in any discussion that the war is going badly. Yeah, the American people are dissatisfied with the results and it may have something to do with the elections last November but that’s only because they are misinformed by the radicalized media who wouldn’t report good news in Iraq with a gun at their head.

I have the privilege of eating breakfast every Saturday morning with our wounded heros at Walter Reed – you know the guys and gals who’ve lost limbs and friends to the enemy. A more up-beat group has never existed. See, I get my optimism about the war from the folks who are fighting it and making the big sacrifices, not from some “scientific poll” with misworded questions.

I’d say that General Casey gets his optimism from the same people I get mine from.

According to the Washington Post this morning, rules of engagement for our troops in regards to Iranian agents has changed;

For more than a year, U.S. forces in Iraq have secretly detained dozens of suspected Iranian agents, holding them for three to four days at a time. The “catch and release” policy was designed to avoid escalating tensions with Iran and yet intimidate its emissaries. U.S. forces collected DNA samples from some of the Iranians without their knowledge, subjected others to retina scans, and fingerprinted and photographed all of them before letting them go.

Last summer, however, senior administration officials decided that a more confrontational approach was necessary, as Iran’s regional influence grew and U.S. efforts to isolate Tehran appeared to be failing. The country’s nuclear work was advancing, U.S. allies were resisting robust sanctions against the Tehran government, and Iran was aggravating sectarian violence in Iraq.

This is great news. Coupled with the “surge” it proves that the administration is getting serious about this war, finally. The possibility of dead Iranian provacateurs makes me pleased. 

However, in this morning’s Washington Times, Bill Gertz and Rowan Scarborough in their Inside the Ring column report that a major obstacle to our troops effectively destroying the enemy and protecting themselves is military lawyers;

Defense officials tell us one of the rules of engagement for U.S. combat troops in Iraq is vague and written by lawyers with little or no battle experience. The result is that troops are at risk of getting killed in action because of military lawyers’ penchant for ambiguity.
    One troubling rule that is among several printed on the card given to troops going into combat is “use minimum force necessary to decisively eliminate the threat.” It is viewed by many in the military as ambiguous and confusing.
    “Does it mean you are obligated to wrestle with a threat rather than shoot him or her?” one defense official asked. “That is how a lot of police officers lose their lives each year, as the criminal gains control of the police officer’s firearm. How about approaching and/or wrestling a threat who, it turns out, is a homicide bomber?”

ROE is more important than body armor. Put a couple of these overeducated twits on point with a rifle and see how long they agree with their own restrictions on the troops.

We’re told that one of the first things Army Lt. Gen. David H. Petraeus, the next commander of forces in Iraq, needs to do is demand an overhaul of the rules of engagement by line officers, not lawyers, so that ambiguities will be eliminated and lives saved.

Let’s hope the good general releases our fighting men from the idiocy of folks who think too much.

I don’t usually put much stock in what relatives of politicians have to say about national policy, but today in the Washington Post, Liz Cheney has an excellent piece in which she lays out the case for the war against terrorists and the war in Iraq.

She begins by criticizing both sides;

In fairness, Clinton, with her proposal for arbitrary caps on troop levels and hemming and hawing about her vote for the war resolution, has company on both sides of the aisle. Sen. Joseph Lieberman is the only national Democrat showing any courage on this issue. We Republicans — with help from senators such as Chuck Hagel — seem ready to race the Democrats to the bottom.

She also includes the military bloggers in her case;

· Our soldiers will win if we let them. Read their blogs. Talk to them. They know that free people must fight to defend their freedom. No force on Earth — especially not an army of terrorists and insurgents — can defeat our soldiers militarily. American troops will win if we show even one-tenth the courage here at home that they show every day on the battlefield. And by the way, you cannot wish failure on our soldiers’ mission and claim, at the same time, to be supporting the troops. It just doesn’t compute.

It’s very readable, I just wish a politician would summon the testicular fortitude to say the same things.

According to an ABC News story, al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) planned (or is planning) an attack on the US using 20 operatives;

Mimicking the hijackers who executed the Sept. 11 attacks, insurgents reportedly tied to al Qaeda in Iraq considered using student visas to slip terrorists into the United States to orchestrate a new attack on American soil.

 

Lt. Gen. Michael D. Maples, head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, recently testified that documents captured by coalition forces during a raid of a safe house believed to house Iraqi members of al Qaeda six months ago “revealed [AQI] was planning terrorist operations in the U.S.”

That’s no real surprise to rational people, of course. Personally, I’m more surprised that there hasn’t been a successful attack in the last five years. But what got me, in the story, there is a poll in the middle of the story that asks

Related: Is Iraq’s Sucess Tied to Our Safety?

So just for chuckles, I decided to take the poll. The possible answers were;

Yes. Without a peaceful resolution in Iraq, more terrorists will find their way to U.S. shores.

No. Iraq never had any connection to the real enemy

No. Even if U.S. troops pull out, our homeland is an ocean away and will still be safe.

Now, I’m pretty sure that ABC’s audience is fairly center Left. At the time I took the poll, nearly 3/4 voted “Yes”, which seems reasonable, but the fact that 1/4 of the voters would vote “No” kinda has me worried. The larger portion of the “no” voters voted for the first “no” answer – despite the fact that the poll link is in the middle of the story about AQI attempting to attack the US.  The 116 voters who voted for the last selection must be in the hills of South Dakota or somewhere remote enough to not be aware that there are these new-fangled flying machines that cross our oceans in hours these days.

But I know people like that – people who might surprise you if I told you their background. They actually believe that if we pulled out of Iraq, aQ’s hatred for westerners would dissipate and they’d ignore us. Educated people, worldly people. I guess ignorance is indeed bliss.

I read a Joe “do my hair plugs look straight to you” Biden quote by Rob at Flopping Aces this morning;

I have reached the tentative conclusion that a significant portion of this administration, maybe even including the vice president, believes Iraq is lost,” Biden said. “They have no answer to deal with how badly they have screwed it up. I am not being facetious now. Therefore, the best thing to do is keep it from totally collapsing on your watch and hand it off to the next guy — literally, not figuratively.” Joseph Biden 

A Washington Post/ABC poll comes up with the conclusion that;

The poll also finds that the public trusts congressional Democrats over Bush to deal with the conflict by a margin of 60 percent to 33 percent.

Somehow, it’s become a foregone conclusion in discussing the war in Iraq that we’ve lost it and Democrats will somehow save us.

How did that happen? We’ve been killing these numbnut jihadists in droves for years. Yeah, it’s cost a few thousand Americans in doing so, but that’s the cost of doing the business of fighting chickenshit cowards.

Speaking of chickenshit cowards, who was it that moaned that we needed to stop killing Iraqis on the “Highway of Death” (known to rational people as Highway 1) back in 1991? When we had Hussein’s Army on the run and bottlenecked on Highway 1 scurrying their their famished thread-worn asses back to Basra, the media and the Left put up a hue and cry that our aircraft were making the highway slick with the blood of surrendering, unarmed Iraqi soldiers (who, by the way, had, until recently, been raping and pillaging a surrendering and unarmed Kuwaiti population).

So the Republican administration surrendered to the Democrat Congress’ protests and ceased the destruction.

But I can attest (along with Crotchety Old Bastard who was on my flank the day the Gulf War ended and we both ended up alongside Highway 1) Highway 1 was no “Highway of Death”. There were very few dead. The US aviators had taken out the the first few vehicles on the highway and the last few vehicles, effectively stopping traffic. Then as the Iraqis fled the highway on foot, the aircraft destroyed the parked vehicles. So many vehicles it took days for US engineers to make the highway passable again. But the Iraqis fled on foot to Basra. Not dead.

But because the media took a few grisly pictures of some mangled corpses, Highway 1 became the “Highway of Death” and our aviators became inhuman killing machines who were stopped from their grim task of murdering unarmed soldiers by the courageous Democrats and the media.

Total Bullshit (note the capital B).

And those Iraqi soldiers who escaped to Basra were re-armed, turned around and turned loose on the Shi’ite civilian population. Crotchety Old Bastard and I saw the results of that, too, when we were sent deep into Iraq to shield the Shi’ites from the marauding Iraqi Army in March and April.

So why did I recount all of that? To remind people that Democrats don’t know shit from shinola when it comes to warfare. I don’t think Democrats even know how to say the word “victory” let alone define victory. Look at the back-clapping they’ve done for “their” wars – Haiti, Bosnia, Kosovo, East Timor, etc.

They take great pleasure in the US military’s failures – most of which they’ve caused with their infantile, political tantrums and their incessant meddling in the business of real men – merely for political gain and their personal wealth.

I guaren-damn-tee that if the Democrats sat quietly for just one year, we’d wipe out terrorism in our time, but their hand-wringing apologies, their finger-pointing, their rush to surrender is what’s getting our troops killed in Iraq. If they has just kept their criticism to themselves until after the war was over, it’d be over.

But they support the troops.

Pffft!

Greyhawk at Mudville Gazette asks and then answers;

What exactly is this plan that most Americans “want to work“?

In the meantime, I’d like to know what the Democrats plan since they can’t seem to drag their sorry-asses into line for the “surge”. If Americans think the Democrats can do better, what are Americans basing this on?  What have the Democrats presented as an alternative? Besides cutting and running, of course.

And from the Guardian, via Hot Air;

One of the things that I have found hard to deal with is the people who have called me to pass their condolences then gone on to tell me that the war in Iraq is wrong and that we should pull the troops out.

Of course war is wrong, but they are also wrong: we should not pull the troops out. If we had pulled the troops out last week, my son would still be alive but that is not the right thing to do.

If you want to take them out, fine, no British soldiers will be killed, but who will go in? It’s as if the British public are saying ‘We know there are going to be deaths in that country to restore democracy but we don’t want our boys dying – send somebody else’s.’

But what do you do? Sit and watch our high definition televisions and not give a shit? If you say that, then what was my son’s life for. Then you are saying he died in vain.

As I predicted, AP reports that Sadr’s army is feeling the “surge” while US troops are still preparing to leave the US;

Two Shiite militia commanders said Thursday that Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has stopped protecting radical cleric Muqtada al-Sadr’s Madhi Army under pressure from Washington, while the fighters described themselves as under seige in their Sadr City stronghold.

Their account of an organization now fighting for its very existence could represent a tactical and propaganda feint, but there was mounting evidence the militia is increasingly off balance and has ordered its gunmen to melt back into the population. To avoid capture, commanders report no longer using cell phones and fighters are removing their black uniforms and hiding their weapons during the day.

From Curt at Flopping Aces, we’ve read that a top Sadr aide has been captured;

Sheik Abdul-Hadi al-Darraji, al-Sadr’s media director in Baghdad, was captured in the eastern neighborhood of Baladiyat, the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity because of security concerns.

This is significant, as Captain Ed at Captain’s Quarters points out;

Another interesting point about Darraji’s arrest is where it took place. The troops raided a mosque in Baghdad to get him, which may show that initial reluctance to enter the worship sites has faded. This might be the best indicator of how seriously the Americans and Iraqis take this mission. They’re not out to win hearts and minds with this phase of the new strategy, but to find and destroy the enemy. This is reminiscent of the action taken in 2004 against the Mahdis, before Sadr wisely capitulated in return for his freedom.

So, the new strategy in Iraq no only includes the famous “surge”, but also a common sense change of tactics. Maybe we’ll turn those brave warriors of ours loose for and change and let them break stuff kill people like they’re trained to do.

Expect more yipping and yapping from terrorist huggers like Murtha, Durbin and Kerry.