Combs Spouts Off

"It's my opinion and it's very true."

  • Calendar

    April 2024
    S M T W T F S
     123456
    78910111213
    14151617181920
    21222324252627
    282930  

  • Recent Posts

  • Tag Cloud

    al qaeda barbarism big government blogging colorado congress corruption culture democrats denver economics economy elections environmentalism firearms freedom global warming gop gun control guns health care human rights humor iraq islam islamofascism israel journalism leftists liberty media bias military moonbats msm music obama politics presidential candidates republicans socialism soldiers spending terrorism war weather

  • Archives

Posts Tagged ‘iraq’

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »

An exceptional young citizen

Posted by Richard on October 9, 2007

Every so often, I link to something I think is truly special and encourage you, dear reader, to go read it. Never have I done so with the intensity, urgency, and depth of feeling with which I ask you to please, please read Christopher Hitchens' November Vanity Fair article, "A Death in the Family":

I was having an oppressively normal morning a few months ago, flicking through the banality of quotidian e-mail traffic, when I idly clicked on a message from a friend headed "Seen This?" The attached item turned out to be a very well-written story by Teresa Watanabe of the Los Angeles Times. It described the death, in Mosul, Iraq, of a young soldier from Irvine, California, named Mark Jennings Daily, and the unusual degree of emotion that his community was undergoing as a consequence. The emotion derived from a very moving statement that the boy had left behind, stating his reasons for having become a volunteer and bravely facing the prospect that his words might have to be read posthumously. In a way, the story was almost too perfect: this handsome lad had been born on the Fourth of July, was a registered Democrat and self-described agnostic, a U.C.L.A. honors graduate, and during his college days had fairly decided reservations about the war in Iraq. I read on, and actually printed the story out, and was turning a page when I saw the following:

"Somewhere along the way, he changed his mind. His family says there was no epiphany. Writings by author and columnist Christopher Hitchens on the moral case for war deeply influenced him … "

I don't exaggerate by much when I say that I froze. I certainly felt a very deep pang of cold dismay. I had just returned from a visit to Iraq with my own son (who is 23, as was young Mr. Daily) and had found myself in a deeply pessimistic frame of mind about the war. Was it possible that I had helped persuade someone I had never met to place himself in the path of an I.E.D.? …
…

… I feverishly clicked on all the links from the article and found myself on Lieutenant Daily's MySpace site, where his statement "Why I Joined" was posted. The site also immediately kicked into a skirling noise of Irish revolutionary pugnacity: a song from the Dropkick Murphys album Warrior's Code. And there, at the top of the page, was a link to a passage from one of my articles, in which I poured scorn on those who were neutral about the battle for Iraq … I don't remember ever feeling, in every allowable sense of the word, quite so hollow.

I writhed around in my chair for a bit and decided that I ought to call Ms. Watanabe, who could not have been nicer. She anticipated the question I was too tongue-tied to ask: Would the Daily family-those whose "house lay wrecked"-be contactable? "They'd actually like to hear from you." She kindly gave me the e-mail address and the home number.

I don't intend to make a parade of my own feelings here, but I expect you will believe me when I tell you that I e-mailed first. For one thing, I didn't want to choose a bad time to ring. For another, and as I wrote to his parents, I was quite prepared for them to resent me. So let me introduce you to one of the most generous and decent families in the United States, and allow me to tell you something of their experience.

I promise you that reading the rest — both Hitchens' fine prose and the wonderful passages he quotes from Mark's statement and letters — will be well worth your time. Just have some tissues handy. It's both profoundly sad and joyously uplifting. I feel better just knowing that people like Mark Daily and his family exist.

I'll quote one more passage, this one from Hitchens' recounting of the day that Mark's ashes were scattered:

I became a trifle choked up after that, but everybody else also managed to speak, often reading poems of their own composition, and as the day ebbed in a blaze of glory over the ocean, I thought, Well, here we are to perform the last honors for a warrior and hero, and there are no hysterical ululations, no shrieks for revenge, no insults hurled at the enemy, no firing into the air or bogus hysterics. Instead, an honest, brave, modest family is doing its private best. I hope no fanatical fool could ever mistake this for weakness. It is, instead, a very particular kind of strength. If America can spontaneously produce young men like Mark, and occasions like this one, it has a real homeland security instead of a bureaucratic one. To borrow some words of George Orwell's when he first saw revolutionary Barcelona, "I recognized it immediately as a state of affairs worth fighting for." 

Amen.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Smearing Rush

Posted by Richard on September 28, 2007

The slanderous "General Betray Us" ad by the Soros-funded MoveOn.org backfired badly and was widely condemned, so the left went into damage-control mode. Yesterday, the Soros-funded Media Matters launched a counter-attack. According to this "media watchdog" organization, Rush Limbaugh, who criticized the MoveOn.org ad, was guilty of even worse slander:

During the September 26 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, Rush Limbaugh called service members who advocate U.S. withdrawal from Iraq "phony soldiers."

The media have been quick to parrot the Media Matters claim (without any attempt to verify it or contact Limbaugh, naturally). Members of Congress have denounced Limbaugh and demanded that Republicans and the President condemn his remarks just as they did the MoveOn.org ad. 

There's only one problem with this Soros counter-attack: it's false. Rush Limbaugh didn't call soldiers who criticized the war "phony," he called soldiers who are, well, phony "phony." Phony soldiers like Jesse MacBeth, who was just sentenced to prison for lying about his military service. Who, like the Winter Soldiers promoted by Sen. John Effin' Kerry in 1971, lied about atrocities and slandered the U.S. military for political purposes.

Media Matters posted almost the whole transcript of the show segment during which Limbaugh and Mike in Olympia, WA, talked about "phony soldiers." But they omitted the relatively short portion following the line they misrepresented. Susan Duclos has the complete transcript (the public post at Rush's site will probably disappear after a few days). Here's the end of the segment (emphasis added): 

RUSH: … What's more important is all this is taking place now in the midst of the surge working, and all of these anti-war Democrats are getting even more hell-bent on pulling out of there, which means that success on the part of you and your colleagues over there is a great threat to them. It's frustrating and maddening, and why they must be kept in the minority. I want to thank you, Mike, for calling. I appreciate it very much.

Here is a Morning Update that we did recently, talking about fake soldiers. This is a story of who the left props up as heroes. They have their celebrities and one of them was Army Ranger Jesse Macbeth. Now, he was a "corporal." I say in quotes. Twenty-three years old. What made Jesse Macbeth a hero to the anti-war crowd wasn't his Purple Heart; it wasn't his being affiliated with post-traumatic stress disorder from tours in Afghanistan and Iraq. No. What made Jesse Macbeth, Army Ranger, a hero to the left was his courage, in their view, off the battlefield, without regard to consequences. He told the world the abuses he had witnessed in Iraq, American soldiers killing unarmed civilians, hundreds of men, women, even children. In one gruesome account, translated into Arabic and spread widely across the Internet, Army Ranger Jesse Macbeth describes the horrors this way: "We would burn their bodies. We would hang their bodies from the rafters in the mosque."

Now, recently, Jesse Macbeth, poster boy for the anti-war left, had his day in court. And you know what? He was sentenced to five months in jail and three years probation for falsifying a Department of Veterans Affairs claim and his Army discharge record. He was in the Army. Jesse Macbeth was in the Army, folks, briefly. Forty-four days before he washed out of boot camp. Jesse Macbeth isn't an Army Ranger, never was. He isn't a corporal, never was. He never won the Purple Heart, and he was never in combat to witness the horrors he claimed to have seen. You probably haven't even heard about this. And, if you have, you haven't heard much about it. This doesn't fit the narrative and the template in the Drive-By Media and the Democrat Party as to who is a genuine war hero. Don't look for any retractions, by the way. Not from the anti-war left, the anti-military Drive-By Media, or the Arabic websites that spread Jesse Macbeth's lies about our troops, because the truth for the left is fiction that serves their purpose. They have to lie about such atrocities because they can't find any that fit the template of the way they see the US military. In other words, for the American anti-war left, the greatest inconvenience they face is the truth.
END TRANSCRIPT

Jesse MacBeth was sentenced on the 21st, and Limbaugh has talked about the case several times since. So Limbaugh didn't attack "our troops in Iraq" — he attacked frauds and liars like Jesse MacBeth and "Scott Thomas" who smear our troops, falsely painting them as depraved monsters who routinely commit atrocities and behave "in a manner reminiscent of Jenn-Jiss Kaaaahn," to quote John Effin' Kerry.

But don't expect the media to offer corrections or outraged Democrats to retract their denunciations. You can expect to hear about how "that chicken hawk Rush insulted the troops" for a long time. Hell, I'm still waiting for John Murtha to apologize for calling the Haditha Marines "cold-blooded murderers." Maybe he'll be ordered to do so when Sgt. Frank Wuterich wins his defamation suit.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

Terror and the Arab “street”

Posted by Richard on September 19, 2007

A prominent Saudi cleric who in the past praised Osama bin Laden and whose teachings are said to have inspired terrorist attacks has now condemned al Qaeda for all the killing of "innocent Muslims and others." Iowahawk posed an interesting question about al Qaeda's recent tactics and proposed an interesting answer:

The question, of course, is why has al Qaeda turned to killing "innocent Muslims"? As Glenn and everybody else notices, Arab clerics did not bother to denounce terrorism when Americans were the prominent targets, but regard terrorism much differently when it produces Arab and Muslim victims. Al Qaeda turned to a policy that seemed calculated to alienate the Arab "street." Why?

The best answer, or at least the answer that will best withstand the scrutiny of history, is that the Anglo-American invasion of Iraq, wittingly or not, put al Qaeda in an almost impossible position. …

Naturally, you need to read the whole thing. 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Celebrating an assassination

Posted by Richard on September 14, 2007

Mike at The Monkey Tennis Centre bravely ventured into the fever swamps of the moonbat left to see how they reacted to the assassination of the pro-American Sunni sheik who met with President Bush in Ramadi:

They’re hanging out the bunting at the Daily Kos and HuffPo following the assassination of Abdul Sattar Abu Risha, one of leaders of the Anbar Awakening alliance of tribal leaders against Al Qaeda – and the fact that the sheikh was photographed shaking hands with President Bush when the President visited Iraq last week is only adding to their glee.

With the exception of this piece, the posters hadn’t piled on when I checked. But the comments boards, while including pertinent questions about why the sheikh wasn’t better protected, and observtions on the dangers of forging alliances with self-interested and arguably unsavoury characters, are filled with sentiments such as “you lie down with dogs, you get fleas” and “it's a 'small price to pay' for a photo op with our great president!” Another commenter refers to the Anbar Awakening as the “Anbar sellout”, apparently affronted that Abu Risha should have turned his back on Al Qaeda because they were murdering his people.

Mike went on to argue that nutroot celebrations were premature. Other Anbar sheiks have already pledged to continue Abu Risha's fight against al Qaeda. In fact, he maintained, the jihadis have hurt themselves with this assassination, reminding the Sunni population whose support they need why al Qaeda must be driven out.

The Monkey Tennis Centre looks like an interesting new blog. Check out Mike's masterful skewering of CNN. Whenever I get around to some long-overdue site maintenance, I'll add it to the blog roll.  

(HT: LGF) 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | 1 Comment »

The Anbar Awakening

Posted by Richard on September 13, 2007

Gen. Petraeus, in his report to Congress, repeatedly mentioned Anbar province and the dramatic improvements in the security situation there. If you're skeptical, or just want to know more about it, there are some excellent first-person reports available.

The best place to start is Michael Totten's Anbar Awakens Part 1: The Battle of Ramadi. Totten doesn't whitewash the current situation at all, but he makes it clear what a vast improvement it is from the truly grim situation last year. How and why things changed makes a fascinating read:

In October of last year the tribal leaders in the province, including some who previously were against the Americans, formed a movement to reject the savagery Al Qaeda had brought to their region. Some of them were supremely unhappy with the American presence since fighting exploded in the province's second largest city of Fallujah, but Al Qaeda proved to be even more sinister from their point of view. … The leaders of Anbar Province saw little choice but to openly declare them enemies and do whatever it took to expunge them. They called their new movement Sahawa al Anbar, or the Anbar Awakening.
…

"AQI announced the Islamic State of Iraq in a parade downtown on October 15, 2006," said Captain McGee. "This was their response to Sahawa al Anbar. They were threatened by the tribal movement so they accelerated their attacks against tribal leaders. They ramped up the murder and intimidation. It was basically a hostile fascist takeover of the city."
…

"Sheikh Jassim came to us after that," Colonel Holmes told me, "and said I need your help."

"One night," Lieutenant Markham said, "after several young people were beheaded by Al Qaeda, the mosques in the city went crazy. The imams screamed jihad from the loudspeakers. We went to the roof of the outpost and braced for a major assault. Our interpreter joined us. Hold on, he said. They aren't screaming jihad against us. They are screaming jihad against the insurgents."

"A massive anti-Al Qaeda convulsion ripped through the city," said Captain McGee. "The locals rose up and began killing the terrorists on their own. They reached the tipping point where they just could not take any more. They told us where the weapon caches were. They pointed out IEDs under the road."

"In mid-March," Lieutenant Hightower said, "a sniper operating out of a house was shooting Americans and Iraqis. Civilians broke into his house, beat the hell out of him, and turned him over to us."
…

"One day," Lieutenant Hightower said, "some Al Qaeda guys on a bike showed up and asked where they could plant an IED against Americans. They asked a random civilian because they just assumed the city was still friendly to them. They had no idea what was happening. The random civilian held him at gunpoint and called us to come get him."

Doesn't that just warm the cockles of your heart? Even better, Totten reports:

The tribes of Anbar are turning their Sahawa al Anbar movement into a formal political party that will run in elections. They also hope to spread it to the rest of Iraq under the name Sahawa al Iraq. It is already taking root in the provinces of Diyala and Salah a Din.

For confirmation of the current state of Ramadi from a mainstream journalist who's at best neutral, read Martin Fletcher's remarkable article from The Times of London. It also tells the story of the late Capt. Travis Patriquin, who helped bring about the Awakening and today has a Ramadi police station named after him:

The honour is well-deserved. Captain Patriquin played a little-known but crucial role in one of the few American success stories of the Iraq war.

He helped to convert Ramadi from one of Iraq’s deadliest cities into arguably the safest outside the semi-autonomous Kurdish north. This graveyard for hundreds of American soldiers, which a Marine Corps intelligence report wrote off as a lost cause just a year ago, is where the US military now takes visiting senators, and journalists such as myself, to show the progress it is making.
…

In Ramadi last weekend I did things unthinkable almost anywhere else in this violent country. I walked through the main souk without body armour, talking to ordinary Iraqis. Late one evening I strolled into the brightly lit Jamiah district of the city with Lieutenant-Colonel Roger Turner, the tobacco-chewing US marine in charge of central Ramadi, to buy kebabs from an outdoor restaurant – “It’s safer than London or New York,” Colonel Turner assured me.

Read the whole thing. Then, if you still want more, turn to the dispatches of Michael Yon. Ghosts of Anbar, Parts I-IV, are up close and personal views of what's going on elsewhere in the province, including Fallujah, with lots of terrific insights interspersed with appropriate quotes from the military's counterinsurgency manual. If you only have time for one, read Part IV, the most recent. Here's a taste: 

After we pulled back from the suspected bomb, SSG Lee wanted to go talk with the Police at the Falahat train/police station, so we left the small group of Marines. SSG Lee and I headed out alone with Iraqis.

SSG Lee stressed to the Police that we needed statements, so people from Falahat came in and gave written statements. Iraqis respond to a sense of justice. The importance of this fact cannot be overstated, and it is this sense of justice on an international scale that gets undermined when people are held in prisons without being charged with any crimes.

To many of the Iraqis I’ve spoken with, terrorists are fair game. Kill them. But if we kill justice while doing so, we will create terrorists out of farmers. Here the Marines are creating farmers, police officers, shepherds, and entrepreneurs out of insurgents. To do that, they have to be seen as men who respect and honor legitimate systems of government and justice.

From the counterinsurgency manual that every Marine and Soldier should read:

1-119. The presence of the rule of law is a major factor in assuring voluntary acceptance of a government’s authority and therefore its legitimacy. A government’s respect for preexisting and impersonal legal rules can provide the key to gaining it widespread, enduring societal support. Such government respect for rules—ideally ones recorded in a constitution and in laws adopted through a credible, democratic process—is the essence of the rule of law. As such, it is a powerful potential tool for counterinsurgents.

SSG Lee made sure the Iraqis treated them well during transport, and when we returned to the tiny base, Captain Koury told the Marines not to leave any of the prisoners alone with the Iraqis. The Iraqis can be rough on prisoners—the culture can be rough—but mentoring seems to be working where it occurs.

There's much, much more, and if you're like me, you'll be sucked in.

Another independent journalist reporting from Fallujah is Bill Ardolino, who recently described an afternoon chatting with the locals:

Through a local interpreter, we talked about their changing opinion of Americans, Iraq's prospects, the misery of living under al Qaeda, the joys of kabob and favorite soccer teams. Their open and friendly nature is hard to reconcile with the violent history of American-Iraqi interaction in Fallujah, and many of them charitably chalk it up to a "misunderstanding."

Towards the end of a long conversation with one group, I said, "Well, I wish you luck. And I want you to know, besides the marines and soldiers that you meet here in the city, there are many civilians back in America who hope for Fallujah's success."

The afternoon's joking died down as the interpreter translated and each of them earnestly told me "shukran" ("thank you"). And one young guy blurted out in halting English, "We like you!"

Backatcha, buddy. Now I'm off to hit that kabob.

Mmm. I like kabob. 

If you appreciate the detailed, on-the-ground reporting and analysis these independent journalists have been providing at great personal risk and expense — and which mainstream journalists like Martin Fletcher do only rarely — please join me in financially supporting the work of Michael Totten, Michael Yon, and Bill Ardolino. Consider, too, supporting the new Iraq embed just begun by Bill Roggio and David Tate.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Petraeus Report

Posted by Richard on September 11, 2007

Are you interested in more than a 20-second sound bite from Gen. Petraeus and some "interpretation" of his remarks by a talking head? Investors Business Daily has the complete text of his report to Congress.

Democrat after Democrat, in smarmy semi-polite terms, has called Petraeus a liar and a stooge of the Bush Administration. Read what he said and see if he sounds like a liar and stooge to you. 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Slandering the general

Posted by Richard on September 10, 2007

Remember when the left's mantra was "listen to the generals"? That was when Abizaid and Casey were pursuing a failing strategy, blaming it on a "civil war," and saying that more troops wouldn't help. Now that Gen. Petraeus (who was confirmed unanimously by the Senate, remember) has implemented a successful strategy, put the lie to the "civil war" meme, and shown that a few more troops, if effectively used, make all the difference in the world, the left doesn't want to listen to the generals anymore. It doesn't even want to accord them any courtesy or respect.

In the run-up to Petraeus' testimony before Congress, Democrats have finally embraced the idea of pre-emptive strikes — against our troops. Sen. Durbin accused the general of "manipulating statistics" before hearing what the general had to say. Sen. Feinstein, who praised Petraeus lavishly when confirming him, dismissed what he had to say because "I don't think General Petraeus has an independent view in that sense. General Petraeus is there to succeed." 

And this morning's New York Times features a full-page ad paid for by George Soros and MoveOn.org headlined "General Petraeus or General Betray us? Cooking the books for the White House." As Pete Hegseth of Vets for Freedom put it:

Let's be clear: MoveOn.org is suggesting that General Petraeus has 'betrayed' his country. This is disgusting. To attack as a traitor an American general commanding forces in war because his 'on the ground' experience does not align with MoveOn.org's political objectives is utterly shameful. It shows contempt for America's military leadership, as well as for the troops who have confidence in him, as our fellow soldiers in Iraq certainly do.
…

MoveOn.org has been working closely with the Democratic congressional leadership –as an article in today's Sunday New York Times Magazine makes clear. And consider this comment by a Democratic senator from Friday's Politico: "'No one wants to call [Petraeus] a liar on national TV,' noted one Democratic senator, who spoke on the condition on anonymity. 'The expectation is that the outside groups will do this for us.'

So, veterans who served in Iraq ask the Democratic leaders in Congress: Does MoveOn.org speak for you? Do you agree with MoveOn.org? Or do you repudiate this despicable charge?

None of this is surprising, really, and not just because of differences over the war. Consider Feinstein's remark, because it illustrates a key characteristic of today's left. Petraeus is determined to succeed, and to Feinstein that's an unforgivable flaw.

The left doesn't like successful, achievement-oriented people, and generally works to punish success and pull down high achievers. They liked the generals who just muddled along, keeping their heads down and accomplishing little. They supported the troops as long as the troops weren't killing too many of the enemy and weren't making too much progress. They deny success is happening because they don't want it to be possible, and they'll work to undermine it. 

Isn't that just what they do regarding economic policy, taxes, regulation, education, and so on? The left's resentment of achievement applies to the military just as it does to business and other aspects of life. It's losers and failures that they're eager to embrace, elevate, and reward.

UPDATE: A Democrat has denounced the Soros/MoveOn ad as "an outrageous and despicable act of slander that every member of the Congress – Democrat and Republican – has a solemn responsibility to condemn." No surprise — it's Sen. Joe Lieberman. 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Schumer slanders Marines

Posted by Richard on September 6, 2007

The Democrats have long insisted that they really do support the troops, that they have nothing but respect and admiration for the troops. Oh, yeah? Wednesday on the Senate floor, Sen. Charles Schumer labeled the Marines in Anbar province incompetent and said they're part of the problem, not the solution. And he insulted Iraqis, too, dubbing the tribal sheiks who are cooperating with us — the men President Bush met with on Labor Day — "warlords."

Duane Patterson has a 5-minute clip from Schumer's speech, but here's the money quote (emphasis added):

And let me be clear, the violence in Anbar has gone down despite the surge, not because of the surge. The inability of American soldiers to protect these tribes from al Qaeda said to these tribes we have to fight al Qaeda ourselves. It wasn't that the surge brought peace here. It was that the warlords took peace here, created a temporary peace here. And that is because there was no one else there protecting.

Patterson observed that "Not only is Schumer calling the American military incompetent, he's calling them liars, as well," and offered relevant quotes from Generals Petraeus and Simmons.

But you don't have to take the generals' word for it. Over at the Outside the Wire blog, JD Johannes has a short clip of LTC Valery Keaveny, one of those inept Marines in Anbar who actually talks with and fights alongside the tribesmen Schumer claims we couldn't protect. Johannes, a former Marine, director of the Iraq war documentary Outside the Wire, and independent war correspondent, added his own observations:

I've been on missions with tribal fighters. I've broken bread with them. I've asked them why they started standing up against Al Qaida and the insurgents.

The answer always involves the brutality of Al Qaida. Never once have I heard an Iraqi say they turned on Al Qaida because the coalition could not protect them from Al Qaida.

Which brings us back to LTC Keaveny's point. If a former insurgent is now working with the coalition–how is it possible the joined he joined the Awakening for protection from Al Qaida.

The second major error in Schumer's revisionist history is that he is trying to rewrite a claim no one should be making–that the surge caused the Anbar Awakening.

The Awakening started around this time last year–way before the surge was ever announced. …

Schumer isn't just lying about Anbar and the Marines, though. He claimed that we've just been "pushing on a balloon" and that the improvement in Anbar was offset by a worsening situation in "many other provinces." Bunk. Check out the metrics at The Victory Caucus, especially the map showing attacks per day per province. One, Baghdad, has 51. Three others are in the low 20s and one averages 15. Another six range from 1 to 7. The remaining seven provinces average zero (0) attacks. So Baghdad accounts for a third of the violence, and four of the eighteen provinces account for fully three-quarters of it.

While you're at TVC, check out the Info and News links for more stuff you won't hear on the evening news. Then sign the Stand by the Mission petition.

UPDATE: There is no coherent theme underlying Schumer's opposition to the mission, it's just gainsaying — throwing out whatever comes to mind and hoping some of it sticks. The U.S. failed to protect the Sunni tribes from al Qaeda, he now claims. But until very recently, he and his pals insisted strenuously that al Qaeda wasn't present or was an insignificant factor in Iraq, an administration fiction to divert attention from the "civil war" between Sunni and Shia. And since these Sunni tribesmen were previously fighting us, not al Qaeda, the idea that we let them down is just nonsense. 

UPDATE 2: Rush made a good point today (Thurs.): Since forever, Schumer and other Democrats have argued that the Iraqis need to step forward and take responsibility for their own security. So when the Iraqis in Anbar successfully do that, Schumer sees it as a bad thing. This nonsense on stilts.  

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Working vacation

Posted by Richard on September 5, 2007

On Labor Day, President Bush paid a surprise visit to Iraq. Not just any part of Iraq, but Anbar province, which a few months ago, critics of the war held up as the poster child of U.S. failure in Iraq. Now it's safe enough for a presidential visit, complete with a meeting with local Sunni tribal leaders.

I first learned of the visit when I heard an NBC reporterette describing it as a "working vacation." A friend of mine was taken aback, and noted that Bush's trip to Iraq and then to Australia for an APAC summit is more properly described as a "business trip." There is nothing about it that approximates a "vacation."

Of course, the mainstream media routinely describe every visit to the Crawford ranch as a "vacation," regardless of what he does while there, so calling this business trip a "working vacation" is actually a concession of sorts. At least they used the adjective "working."

Bush was joined by Lieutenant General Raymond Odierno, Commanding General, Multi-National Corps, General David Petraeus, Commander, Multi-National Force Iraq, Admiral William Fallon, Commander US Central Command, General Peter Pace, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, and Secretary State Condoleezza Rice. Wow.

Since what I've stated above plus a 10-second sound bite is probably all that (or more than) you've learned from the mainstream media, I thought I'd provide the text of his address to the troops (at least, most of it), from the White House site: 

As you know, today is Labor Day back home — (hooah) — so I thought I'd come by to thank you for all your hard work. (Hooah.) Every day — every day — you show bravery under incredibly difficult circumstances. Every day you're doing work on the sands of Anbar that is making it safer in the streets of America. And every day the United States of America is grateful for what you're doing. I want you to tell your families the Commander-in-Chief stopped by to say hello, and he said, I'm incredibly proud to be the Commander-in-Chief of such a great group of men and women. (Applause.)

I'm keeping pretty good company, as you can see. I brought out the A Team so they could be with the folks who are making a significant difference in this war against these radicals and extremists. In Anbar you're seeing firsthand the dramatic differences that can come when the Iraqis are more secure. In other words, you're seeing success.

You see Sunnis who once fought side by side with al Qaeda against coalition troops now fighting side by side with coalition troops against al Qaeda. Anbar is a huge province. It was once written off as lost. It is now one of the safest places in Iraq. (Hooah.) …

The surge of operations that began in June is improving security throughout Iraq. The military successes are paving the way for the political reconciliation and economic progress the Iraqis need to transform their country. When Iraqis feel safe in their own homes and neighborhoods, they can focus their efforts on building a stable, civil society with functioning government structures at the local and provincial and national levels. …

Earlier today I met with some of the tribal sheiks here in Anbar. It was a really interesting meeting. And at the table were the leaders of the central government, as well. They told me that the kind of bottom-up progress that your efforts are bringing to Anbar is vital to the success and stability of a free Iraq. See, Iraqis need this stability to build a more peaceful future. And America needs this stability to prevent the chaos that allows the terrorists to set up bases from which they can plot and plan attacks on our homeland.

The very people that you helped the Iraqis defeat in Anbar swore allegiance to the man that ordered the attack on the United States of America. What happens here in Anbar matters to the security of the United States.

And so I thank you for your sacrifice. I thank you for volunteering in the face of danger. I thank you for your courage and your bravery. Every day you are successful here in Iraq draws nearer to the day when America can begin calling you and your fellow servicemen and women home.

But I want to tell you this about the decision — about my decision about troop levels. Those decisions will be based on a calm assessment by our military commanders on the conditions on the ground — not a nervous reaction by Washington politicians to poll results in the media. (Hooah.) In other words, when we begin to draw down troops from Iraq, it will be from a position of strength and success, not from a position of fear and failure. To do otherwise would embolden our enemies and make it more likely that they would attack us at home. If we let our enemies back us out of Iraq, we will more likely face them in America. If we don't want to hear their footsteps back home, we have to keep them on their heels over here. And that's exactly what you're doing, and America is safer for it.

In Anbar you're doing this hard work every day. We've all come to say thank you. We've come to tell you the American people are standing with you. They're grateful for your sacrifice. As Commander-in-Chief, I'm proud to be in your presence on this Labor Day. I ask for God's blessings on you and your family, and may God continue to bless America. Thank you. (Applause.)

In case the "hooah" and "applause" notations in the transcript above don't make it clear, the troops loved him. And if you routinely rely on the mainstream media for your news about what's happening in Iraq, this may be news to you, too: Troops in Iraq exceeded their reenlistment goals for the year last month.

Screw Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. The people who know best what's happening on the ground and how important it is are backing this effort in the most important way possible — they're committing their lives and their honor. Dammit, treat their commitment with respect.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Instant glory

Posted by Richard on August 24, 2007

If you want to achieve instant glory these days, all you have to do is undermine the war effort and/or the Bush administration. The media are falling all over themselves to bow down before the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) and Sen. John Warner.

The thing to remember about the NIE is that it isn't new information, it's just "analysis" — that is, the intelligence community leadership looked at what we already know (or think we know) and offered up some opinions about it. Mind you, these are the same people who've been consistently wrong about almost everything for many years, who blew it regarding al Qaeda and 9/11, and who, the media keep reminding us, "lied" about Iraq. Now, they're exalted in the media and their opinions are taken as gospel. 

The thing to remember about John Warner is there's nothing that you remember about John Warner. Before his idiotic call for withdrawing 5,000 troops as a "gesture," when was the last time you saw or heard a news story that began, "Sen. John Warner said today…"? On the few occasions this century when I heard his name, my reaction was always, "Is he still there?"

But suddenly, in the last 24 hours, every anchor, analyst, and political reporter in the country has spoken of Sen. Warner with reverence and awe. He's the most respected voice in the Senate, they all say (so how come they never listened to him before?). The most important Republican at the Capitol. The ultimate authority on all things military (sorry, Sen. McCain, you're not their darling anymore).

Sen. Warner will be the guest on Meet the Depressed this weekend, and appearances on Face the Nation, This Week, Anderson Cooper, and all the rest will surely follow. He'll no doubt get fawning, respectful, softball questions and lots of smiles and admiration. He's going to be invited to all the good parties. 

I predict that by October, Sen. Warner will have his own reality TV show. Maybe they'll team him up with Ozzy Osbourne — they're about equally coherent.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Democrats “recalibrate”

Posted by Richard on August 22, 2007

When the Iraqi people were risking their lives voting for an interim government, and then for a constitution, and finally, made Iraq the first constitutional republic in the Arab world, the Democrats dismissed or belittled those achievements. Look at all the violence and bloodshed, they said. Political progress means nothing in the face of the ongoing security nightmare, they said. Look at the factional fighting at the neighborhood level, they said.

Now that even Democrats visiting Iraq have to concede that the security situation has greatly improved, violence and bloodshed have all but disappeared in some of the formerly most problematic areas, and we're seeing more and more grassroots cooperation among factions, the Democrats have tweaked their message just a bit. Forget that stuff about political gains being irrelevant due to lack of military progress; now, military gains are irrelevant due to lack of political progress. The Washington Post tried its best to help them spin this shift (emphasis added):

Democratic leaders in Congress had planned to use August recess to raise the heat on Republicans to break with President Bush on the Iraq war. Instead, Democrats have been forced to recalibrate their own message in the face of recent positive signs on the security front, increasingly focusing their criticisms on what those military gains have not achieved: reconciliation among Iraq's diverse political factions.
…

GOP leaders have latched on to positive comments from Democrats — often out of context — to portray the congressional majority as splintering. Rep. Ellen O. Tauscher (D-Calif.), an Armed Services Committee member who is close to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), said many of her colleagues learned a hard lesson from the Republican campaign.

"I don't know of anybody who isn't desperately supportive of the military," she said. "People want to say positive things. But it's difficult to say positive things in this environment and not have some snarky apologist for the White House turn it into some clipped phraseology that looks like support for the president's policies."

The Democrats are going to focus on the Maliki government's failure to meet congressional "benchmarks" for political progress — benchmarks, BTW, written by congressional Democrats to be as unreachable as they could make them. When you're listening to carping about the Iraqi political situation, try to keep two things in mind:

  • The Iraqi parliament has accomplished far more legislatively this year than the U.S. Congress (not that I'm complaining about our "do-nothing" Congress; I'm greatly relieved that Pelosi and Reid have fulfilled almost none of their promises). And they're sharing oil revenue with all the provinces, even though the oil revenue legislation hasn't been finalized.
  • Slow political progress at the national level in Iraq has spurred progress at the provincial, local, and grassroots level. Formerly irreconcilable tribal and ethnic/religious factions are sitting down and reaching agreements. Town councils are springing up and working with coalition troops to solve local infrastructure and security problems.

The slow pace at the national level may actually redound to the long-term benefit of the young Iraqi democracy — it's much better for Iraqi political solutions to grow from the grassroots up than to be imposed from the top down. 

Someone should try to explain that to the arrogant Sen. Levin, who seems to think Iraq's prime minister serves at the pleasure of the U.S. Congress. 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

al Qaeda’s Tet offensive

Posted by Richard on August 16, 2007

Commentators and pundits have been pondering the meaning of al Qaeda's horrific truck bomb attacks in far northern, peaceful, Iraqi Kurdistan. What prompted them to attack a small, isolated ethnic group, far from U.S. troops, the surge, and disputed territory? Most missed the point.

This attack wasn't aimed at the Yazidis, or at the Kurdistan region, or even at the government of Iraq. It was aimed squarely at NBC, ABC, CBS, and the United States Congress. The Yazidi villages were just a convenient, low-risk target on which to unleash the maximum possible carnage. The reason for killing hundreds of Yazidis is to shock and dismay Americans. Expect more such "media events" between now and September 15.

Today's column by Ralph Peters addresses the issue well (emphasis added):

The victims were ethnic Kurd Yazidis, members of a minor sect with pre-Islamic roots. Muslim extremists condemn them (wrongly) as devil worshippers. The Yazidis live on the fringes of society.

That's one of the two reasons al Qaeda targeted those settlements: The terrorist leaders realize now that the carnage they wrought on fellow Muslims backfired, turning once-sympathetic Sunni Arabs against them. The fanatics calculated that Iraqis wouldn't care much about the Yazidis.
…

But the second reason for those dramatic bombings was that al Qaeda needs to portray Iraq as a continuing failure of U.S. policy. Those dead and maimed Yazidis were just props: The intended audience was Congress.

Al Qaeda has been badly battered. It's lost top leaders and thousands of cadres. Even more painful for the Islamists, they've lost ground among the people of Iraq, including former allies. Iraqis got a good taste of al Qaeda. Now they're spitting it out.

The foreign terrorists slaughtering the innocent recognize that their only remaining hope of pulling off a come-from-way-behind win is to convince your senator and your congressman or -woman that it's politically expedient to hand a default victory to a defeated al Qaeda.

Peters goes on to explain that, barring the triumph of the "peace at any price" crowd here at home, and despite the likelihood of more massive bloodshed in the near term, the Petraeus plan is working well and the longer-term outlook in Iraq is pretty good. Read the whole thing.

The Islamofascists in general and al Qaeda in particular are masters of media manipulation and propaganda (the founders of the movement learned at the side of the Nazis). They're also keen students of history, and they know all about the 1968 Tet offensive, in which Viet Cong forces were defeated and decimated at every turn, but won a huge victory on the public relations front, leading Walter Cronkite to declare Vietnam a failure and destroying public support for the conflict.

Will al Qaeda be able to replicate Tet? I don't think so. For one thing, the media environment has changed, and we no longer rely on a Walter Cronkite to tell us "that's the way it is." Hardly anyone watches the Katie Courics and Keith Olbermans today. And in any case, if they try to paint an al Qaeda Tet as a tremendous defeat for the U.S., the new media will quickly counter with evidence to the contrary.

But they will no doubt try, and it will get ugly. 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Call for Victory

Posted by Richard on August 16, 2007

Today, MoveOn.org members are pressuring members of Congress to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory and order an immediate retreat from Iraq. Vets for Freedom and Families United for Our Troops and Their Mission are urging people to call or fax their Senators and Representative to counter the defeatists' efforts:

Veterans of the Iraq war have joined with families of those serving and sacrificing in Iraq to focus on the cost of a U.S. defeat in Iraq. On Thursday, August 16, they will fight back against efforts by MoveOn.org to bully the American people into ending the mission just as it is showing significant signs of progress.

"As families of those who are serving or have made the ultimate sacrifice, we must educate our fellow Americans about the need to continue the mission and the terrible price we will pay if we retreat now," said Merrilee Carlson, the president of Families United for Our Troops and Their Mission.

Added Pete Hegseth, executive director of Vets for Freedom: "Moveon.org will talk a lot about the money we are spending. But what they won't discuss – and what in truth they just don't care about – is the overwhelming cost of U.S. and Iraqi lives and security if we give up too soon and lose this war. As veterans of Iraq who have served on the ground, we understand the progress that is being made and we know the terrible price that America will pay if we were to pack up and leave without defeating al-Qaeda."

They noted that possible outcomes of defeat include:

  • A bloodbath in Iraq, costing hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi lives and possibly destabilize the entire Middle East region.

  • A failed state in Iraq and a safe haven for Al Qaeda to plan future attacks against America and her allies.

  • An emboldened Iran in pursuit of nuclear weapons and a victorious Al Qaeda in pursuit of new ways to kill Americans at home and around the world.

Both organizations are urging their members, and all Americans who support the mission, to use August 16, 2007 to educate their members of Congress about the cost of defeat, to write to their local newspapers explaining the consequences of a precipitous withdrawal, and to engage their fellow citizens to discuss the issues at stake. Vets for Freedom will encourage all of its members to call their members of Congress on August 16.

For all the info you need to contact your congresscritters, go to this Victory Caucus page and enter your ZIP code.

I've been remiss, BTW, in not raving about the new Victory Caucus site. It's become an indispensable portal for news of the Iraq campaign. If you want links to the latest reports from official U.S. sources, blogs, new media, and MSM, along with up-to-date metrics on Iraq (imagine that — actual empirical data!) and reports/commentary from troops on the ground, this is the place. Visit the Victory Caucus regularly to stay informed about Iraq (better informed than CNN, which relies on the "narrative" of Michael Ware). I'll help by adding them to the sidebar shortly. 

Vets for Freedom is another great place for war updates, especially information by and about the troops. And if you're an Iraq or Afghanistan veteran, sign up now for their September 17-18 Vets on the Hill project.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Magic bullets

Posted by Richard on August 16, 2007

The editors at The New Republic aren't the only journalist who are woefully ignorant regarding firearms ("square-backed" cartridges, indeed). From The Autonomist:

What follows is a caption from the AFP, and below that, the picture that accompanies it:

" An elderly Iraqi woman shows two bullets which she says hit her
house [emphasis added] following an early coalition forces raid in the
predominantly Shiite Baghdad suburb of Sadr City."

Lying Iraqi with magic bullets

The only way those bullets hit her house was if someone threw them at her house.

You see, they've never been fired. For those of you unfamiliar with firearms, only the little copper-looking tip is the actual bullet. The larger, cylindrical casing below it holds the primer and the gunpowder that propels the bullet out of the firearm.

Nice going, AFP! Proof again, that members of the MSM are often dupes for terrorist propagandists, and know very little about things military. 

Well, it proves they know very little about firearms. It doesn't prove they're dupes for terrorist propagandists — there are other possible explanations for the frequently recurring instances of fraudulent or staged photos. Instead of dupes, they could be willing accomplices. 

Confederate Yankee noted that the same "photojournalist," Wissam al-Okaili, published a similar "magic bullet" picture featuring what appears to be the same woman in early July. So he tracked down a few other photos by al-Okaili. IMO, they suggest that this guy's "news photos" are manipulative, stage managed, and posed — and that he lacks creativity and imagination. But check them out for yourself. I'll let Confederate Yankee have the last word: 

Time and again, al-Okaili returns to the same type of picture, and in the case of the female bullet magnet, the same people.

I'd say that that is troubling, and perhaps something AFP needs to discuss with him, as it makes his work appear to be more contrived than captured. While they're having this discussion, perhaps they can pull in AFP photo editors and explain how bullets and firearms function.

UPDATE: They're having Photoshop fun with Magic Bullet Lady at Ace of Spades. 

UPDATE 2: Jeff Goldstein nailed it (emphasis added)(oops, forgot the link; sorry, Jeff!):

Of note: those most likely to believe these kinds of stories are those in the West who have little experience with firearms, but a whole lot of experience decrying their evils. Which is precisely at whom propaganda pieces like this are aimed — western elites who show an infinite capacity to over-value their own intelligence.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Winter Soldier update

Posted by Richard on August 15, 2007

I hope you've been keeping up with the story of Scott Beauchamp, who wrote under the pseudonym "Scott Thomas." On July 20, I wrote about his article in The New Republic, "Shock Troops," in which he painted himself and his comrades as callous, brutal, and depraved. I wasn't persuaded:

I'm no expert on military mess halls, children's skulls, or Bradley Fighting Vehicles, but the stories told by "Scott Thomas" in the New Republic article strike me as not even remotely credible. …

Since then, we've learned his true identity and that he's an aspiring novelist who admitted to joining the military for Kerryesque resumé enhancement purposes, a former Howard Dean campaign worker, and the husband of a TNR staffer. The army investigated his claims and interviewed every soldier with whom he served, and they concluded categorically that there is no basis in fact for his allegations. He recanted in writing and faces administrative discipline. And he now refuses to speak with any journalists, including his employers/abettors at TNR.

Various bloggers looked into his other TNR stories and found them just as obviously bogus as "Shock Troops." In one, he wrote of soldiers stopping to change a flat in a "river of sewage" — their vehicles have run-flat tires. In another, he claimed some "square-backed" cartridges prove that Iraqi police committed murder — in the known universe, there's no such thing as a "square-backed" cartridge.

Despite all this, TNR stands by the fraudulent articles and claims they've "fact-checked" and corroborated them. Of course, they won't name any of the "experts" they've consulted (to confirm the "plausibility" of Beauchamp's claims) or the one person who purportedly corroborates the events in "Shock Troops."

In the face of overwhelming evidence and testimony discrediting the story of how he publicly ridiculed a disfigured woman, TNR claimed their careful "fact-checking" uncovered only one "minor" error: the incident didn't happen at a forward operating base in Iraq, it happened in Kuwait before Beauchamp ever got to Iraq. Never mind that there's no evidence (beyond their anonymous source) of it happening there either. And never mind that this "minor correction" destroys the primary thesis of "Shock Troops," that the brutality of war dehumanized Beauchamp and his buddies. Apparently the flight from Germany to Kuwait dehumanized him.

Lots of bloggers have done yeoman work on this story, including Michael Goldfarb (who got the ball rolling), Confederate Yankee, Ace of Spades, and Michelle Malkin . Just run through their posts of the past couple of weeks if you want all the fascinating details. If you just want a one-stop executive summary that will bring you up to speed,  with a special emphasis on TNR's continuing fraud, read this Confederate Yankee post. And in a fascinating post last week, Michelle Malkin mirrored my recollection of the Vietnam Winter Soldier fraud and recounted other instances of Winter Soldier Syndrome.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »