Category Archives: War On Terror

What New Direction, What Plan B?

Hardly perceptible over the noise of the day, here is the ‘Plan B’ Democrats have been asking for. Of course they won’t like it either. Of course they haven’t given us their Plan A yet, let alone Plan B. Karen Hanretty on The Hill’s Pundit Blog sums it up like this . . .

Democrats who’ve been demanding a ‘Plan B’ from the administration just got it. Watching them whine about it will be interesting.

So what will the liberals denounce first?

Put to the test, it won’t be a new direction unless Democrats say it is. Yeah, that’ll happen.

When Good News Is Bad News Politically

How would you like to be in the position that when good progress is made in the war, that it hurts your political party? Back in the old days, Americans of both parties would welcome good news and would celebrate a win together. But that’s not going to be the case where the war in Iraq is concerned. It must be tough to be a Democrat in Washington nowadays. Speaking of the Blue Dog Caucus in the House, House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) said that if progress continues . . .

“I think there would be enough support in that group to want to stay the course and if the Republicans were to stay united as they have been, then it would be a problem for us,” Clyburn said. “We, by and large, would be wise to wait on the report.”

WaPo link: Clyburn: Positive Report by Petraeus Could Split House Democrats on War

Progress In Iraq? Oh No.

From the New York Times to liberals’ eyes. I don’t know how this got past the filter but it did.

Yet now the administration’s critics, in part as a result, seem unaware of the significant changes taking place.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.

NYT link: A War We Just Might Win

Just Who’s War Is It?

Received a thought provoking email from a reader in the U.K who is of the opinion that the war on terror is Bush’s war. I think it was al-Qaeda and bin Laden who declared war on the US and western civilization over ten years ago but that might be called nit-picking by some. May as well call it al-Qaeda’s war. Bush, and America’s allies are just responding. Anyway, my response is below.

I’d just like to say that I think its America’s blind self-righteosness and utter denial of any responsibility for the problems of the world that keeps the cycle of violence going.
Instead of trying to sort out everyone else’s problems for them (at a cost) Bush could do more good by admitting that America (and, to be fair, all of us in the west) are probably responsible for those problems. Also I’d like to say I find it morbidly amusing that Mr. Bush and many others think that they can win their ‘War on Terror’ with military power.

We weren’t in Iraq in 2001 when 9/11 happened. Dittos for the other dozen attacks going back to their first attempt at taking down the twin towers in the early 90’s. But your line of thinking suggests that the terrorists will leave us alone if we do something nice. Like what? When they want us dead, and we want to live, where is there any room for negotiation?The cycle of violence is being broken in Iraq. It’s military power first, then (as we are now seeing) it is the people of Iraq, and not our military, that will finish the job. By them turning against al-Qaeda and similarly minded Islamofascists, they will be either eliminated or reduced to an ineffective level in Iraq. Iran is supplying all of this and the stick needs to be used there as well. No carrots for terrorists.

I would have hoped that, if being beaten in Vietnam had taught them anything, it is that fighting an enemy on their own territory is not that easy. Do they really think that one day they’ll kill the single last terrorist and the war will be over? If so, I think they have a lot to learn. How can one learn from the mistakes of their past if one cannot admit to having made any?

Very few wars are easy. People die and things get broken. That’s war. The Vietnam war was not lost militarily. It was lost politically in Washington. The same liberals that lost the war then are now trying to lose this one.   They’re not learning from history, they’re trying to repeat it.  They are the ones that think that defending our country against this threat is a mistake. In fact, some of our so-called leaders in Washington (most of the democrats) don’t believe we’re in a war. (heads in the sand) They think, even after the Muslim doctors’ terrorist attack in your country a few weeks ago, that these attacks are just a rag-tag bunch of hoodlums, and, that we should just wait to be hit again and then we’ll go get them. After they’ve blown up themselves, how does one do that?

This is an ideological war for us. For the enemy it is a religious war. They aren’t known for compromising on their radical view of Islam. Did you believe them when they declared war on us? Do you think we’re in a war now?

If you’re from the UK like your IP address suggests, do you think that sweeping up the debris and burying your citizens is all you need to do to appease these animals? Sending the cops after them AFTER they blow up some more Brits, is that your solution? I prefer taking the fight to them. Fight it in Iraq, Afghanistan, and wherever else these barbarians gather.

Broad Support For Homeland Security Bill, Without Big Labor

With the House voting 371 to 40 and the Senate 85 to 8, Congress approves the Homeland Security Bill. It is good that Congress actually passed something worthwhile, and all in one day. The reason it passed is for what was taken out of it. The unionizing of federal airport screeners.

At the threat of a veto from Bush, a provision by Democrats that would have extended union protection to 45,000 federal airport screeners was taken out. Whether or not airport screeners are union is of no concern to our security. It is just Democrats doing quid pro quo for their largest donor, big labor. Pretty much just politicizing an important bill.

Muslim Doctor Speaks Up

A ‘viewpoint‘ piece in today’s Pensacola News Journal is from a Muslim doctor practicing in the area. Dr. Mohammad Yunus has taken the lead in speaking out against the terrorists that murder to advance their version of Islam. The same Islamofascists we are at war with.

I am experiencing the emotions I often do in hearing that people associated with my faith are involved: incredulity, anger and outrage that once again these heinous acts are associated with people professing to be Muslims. Such people can never represent Islam, which stands for peace and justice for all.

Finally! It is good news that needs to be seen. Question is, will it?

Al-Qaeda Having Problems In Iraq

Eh, it’s just evidence of progress in the war directly related to the ‘surge’ strategy. The Iraqis helping al-Qaeda are now turning on them in the face of the surge and their barbarity.

“They are turning. We are talking to people who we believe have worked for al-Qaeda in Iraq and want to reconcile and have peace,” said Colonel Ricky Gibbs, commander of the 4th Brigade, 1st Infantry Division, which oversees the area.

he reporter on the ground in Doura, Iraq, characterizes it as a rebellion in the ranks. It’s a good thing. It is the kind of progress that leads to security, that leads to the kind of political solutions we’re all looking for.

It’s all good news for the country, Democrats excepted. It’s not good news for them, which is the reason they declared the surge a failure two weeks ago and just two weeks into the mission. They don’t want to even give it a chance to succeed. In this war, the Democrats are invested in defeat. Don’t hold your breath expecting to see this on your network news or major newspapers.  Does not fit the template.  And worse, it will contradict what the left is saying.

More Evidence Of Progress In Iraq

But you’d never know it if you depend on CBS, ABS, NBS, MSNBS, and CNNBS. H/T GOP Bloggers.

If you haven’t started questioning the media’s coverage of Iraq, you have to start seriously questioning them now. I’ll bet you didn’t read that reconciliation talks were held in Taji in the NY Times lately.

Sunni and Shia tribal sheiks from the Iraqi villages of Aqar Qaf, Bassam, Salamiyat and Fira Shia moved closer to reconciliation July 16 here during a meeting facilitated by the 1st Battalion, 37th Field Artillery Regiment.

Democrat Leaders Indifferent To Life, Freedom

For the party that claims the human rights mantle, and are just consumed with concern over what the world thinks of us, “Our reputation around the world” has become the preamble to stump speeches by Democrats. So in that context it is astonishing how little concern these same Democrats in Washington have for the Iraqi people who hear them talk about leaving Iraq on a daily basis.

The millions of Iraqis that were glad to be rid of Saddam and voted for the first time to govern themselves and live in freedom, are still living in a war zone. Their army and security forces are not yet able to protect themselves against Iran and al-Qaeda. The Iraqi people are seeing their hopes and dreams for freedom be doused by impatient politicians in Washington. So the Americans (if you listen to the Dems) are now willing to leave them for al-Qaeda to deal with.

What kind of human being will go in to a country (remember ‘you go in there and you own it’?) and tear it apart, tell the people there that we’re going to help you get setup as a free people, and then leave before fulfilling that promise?

Is this what they mean when they say that Bush has hurt the reputation of the United States around the world? Do they really believe that leaving Iraq to become a terrorist haven while setting up its population for slaughter will improve our image?

All allies who want to join us in our next military challenge, please raise your hands.

When Shortsightedness Shines

One almost has to characterize people like Hillary Clinton of being totally short-sighted when talking about the war in Iraq on or off the campaign trail. I say short-sighted, giving her the benefit of the doubt (undeservedly so) because the alternative is simply stupid or treasonous. There are numerous examples of Democrats providing propaganda material for our sworn enemy. The most recent example being the sleepover in the Senate last week.

After Sen. Hillary Clinton, Mrs. Bill Clinton if you prefer, again spoke publicly about strategy and tactics, Undersecretary of Defense Eric Edelman spoke up about Hillary Clinton’s actions like this . .

“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.”

Hillary’s response is just too predictable. She says, and the media listens, accusing the Pentagon of impugning her patriotism like this . . .

Clinton said she and Kerry were “shocked by the timeworn tactic of once again impugning the patriotism of any of us who raise serious questions” about the Iraq war. Kerry accused the Bush administration of making “planning a dirty word and an alien concept.”

This is the same lie these two used in the last election, and the media did its best to support it. Never questioning not only the absence of the word but ignoring the gazillion explanations of “no it’s your judgment, not your patriotism,” idiot. The media stuck with the template. But I digress, patriotism, or her alleged patriotism, was not mentioned by Edelman or the Pentagon. The words were exactly this “premature and public discussion,” emphasis added for the mainstream media.

The Democrats, both running for office and in leadership positions in Washington, are laying themselves out there now for all to see just how they support our troops and the objectives of our involvement in Iraq. They despise the mission, could care less of the welfare of the Iraqi people, and dismiss the troops and their families purely for political gain. And last but not least, they show us what lousy a Commander in Chief they or she would make in front of a microphone and camera. In a Hillary Clinton administration there would have to be a draft (another of their goals) because no one would sign up to fight for someone who lives and breathes by polls and special interest (wacko left) organizations.

Whether it blows up in their face depends on how well the mainstream media can gloss over the fact that they are helping the enemy.

related: Overnighter Not A Total Loss

Belly up to the counter. Politics are on the menu and Ross is on the grill.