War On Terror: In both Iraq and Afghanistan, U.S. forces are making further impressive gains against terrorists. Don’t expect Democrats to let that stop them from claiming that we’re losing.
As part of the new surge strategy in Iraq, U.S. Marines and Iraqi army forces have arrested 250 terrorists in the large, once-unmanageable western province of Anbar, it was reported on Sunday. Operation Harris Ba’sil, or “Valiant Guardian,” reached completion after eight weeks of disrupting enemy routes and shelters outside cities.
“We uncovered more than 250 caches, arrested over 250 suspected insurgents and discovered over 100 improvised explosive devices,” Lt. Col. Michael Manning of Regimental Combat Team 2 reported.
“We clearly surprised them. The number of caches and detainees attest to that; but more importantly, we let the enemy know that they can’t hide from us,” he said.
Meanwhile, in southern Afghanistan on Sunday an ambush of U.S.-led coalition and Afghan forces led to a 14-hour battle and airstrikes of seven enemy compounds that killed 25 terrorists, including a Taliban commander named Mullah Younus. Last week, the feared Taliban military mastermind and “butcher of Kandahar” Mullah Dadullah was confirmed killed.
Are Democrats cheering these victories in the war on terror?
God Bless Marine Lance Cpl. Walter O'Haire, for your service and sacrifice to this country America. We will forever be in your debt and offer prayers to you and your family and fellow soldiers.
-J Steele A Marine honor guard carrying the casket of Marine Lance Cpl. Walter O'Haire is followed by his mother Maureen (top C) out of the church after his funeral in Rockland, Massachusetts, May 15, 2007. O'Haire was killed May 9 while on duty in Iraq.
The family of Marine Lance Cpl. Walter O'Haire, including his mother Maureen (C), uncle Jack Mansfield (top L) and brother Kevin (top R), follows his casket out of the church after his funeral in Rockland, Massachusetts, May 15, 2007. O'Haire was killed May 9 while on duty in Iraq. Friends and family offer a toast beside the casket of Marine Lance Cpl. Walter O'Haire at a cemetery in Duxbury, Massachusetts, May 15, 2007. O'Haire was killed May 9 while on duty in Iraq. Local residents line the street as the funeral procession for Marine Lance Cpl. Walter O'Haire passes in Rockland, Massachusetts, May 15, 2007. O'Haire was killed May 9 while on duty in Iraq.
A Marine Corps bugler plays taps during funeral services Marine Lance Cpl. Walter O'Haire at a cemetery in Duxbury, Massachusetts, May 15, 2007.
From the WSJ Opinion Journal Islamists always believed the U.S. was weak. Recent political trends won't change their view. BY BERNARD LEWIS Wednesday, May 16, 2007 12:01 a.m. EDT
During the Cold War, two things came to be known and generally recognized in the Middle East concerning the two rival superpowers. If you did anything to annoy the Russians, punishment would be swift and dire. If you said or did anything against the Americans, not only would there be no punishment; there might even be some possibility of reward, as the usual anxious procession of diplomats and politicians, journalists and scholars and miscellaneous others came with their usual pleading inquiries: "What have we done to offend you? What can we do to put it right?"
A few examples may suffice. During the troubles in Lebanon in the 1970s and '80s, there were many attacks on American installations and individuals--notably the attack on the Marine barracks in Beirut in 1983, followed by a prompt withdrawal, and a whole series of kidnappings of Americans, both official and private, as well as of Europeans. There was only one attack on Soviet citizens, when one diplomat was killed and several others kidnapped. The Soviet response through their local agents was swift, and directed against the family of the leader of the kidnappers. The kidnapped Russians were promptly released, and after that there were no attacks on Soviet citizens or installations throughout the period of the Lebanese troubles.
These different responses evoked different treatment. While American policies, institutions and individuals were subject to unremitting criticism and sometimes deadly attack, the Soviets were immune. Their retention of the vast, largely Muslim colonial empire accumulated by the czars in Asia passed unnoticed, as did their propaganda and sometimes action against Muslim beliefs and institutions.
Most remarkable of all was the response of the Arab and other Muslim countries to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in December 1979. Washington's handling of the Tehran hostage crisis assured the Soviets that they had nothing to fear from the U.S. They already knew that they need not worry about the Arab and other Muslim governments. The Soviets already ruled--or misruled--half a dozen Muslim countries in Asia, without arousing any opposition or criticism. Initially, their decision and action to invade and conquer Afghanistan and install a puppet regime in Kabul went almost unresisted. After weeks of debate, the U.N. General Assembly finally was persuaded to pass a resolution "strongly deploring the recent armed intervention in Afghanistan." The words "condemn" and "aggression" were not used, and the source of the "intervention" was not named. Even this anodyne resolution was too much for some of the Arab states. South Yemen voted no; Algeria and Syria abstained; Libya was absent; the nonvoting PLO observer to the Assembly even made a speech defending the Soviets.
One might have expected that the recently established Organization of the Islamic Conference would take a tougher line. It did not. After a month of negotiation and manipulation, the organization finally held a meeting in Pakistan to discuss the Afghan question. Two of the Arab states, South Yemen and Syria, boycotted the meeting. The representative of the PLO, a full member of this organization, was present, but abstained from voting on a resolution critical of the Soviet action; the Libyan delegate went further, and used this occasion to denounce the U.S.
The Muslim willingness to submit to Soviet authority, though widespread, was not unanimous. The Afghan people, who had successfully defied the British Empire in its prime, found a way to resist the Soviet invaders. An organization known as the Taliban (literally, "the students") began to organize resistance and even guerilla warfare against the Soviet occupiers and their puppets. For this, they were able to attract some support from the Muslim world--some grants of money, and growing numbers of volunteers to fight in the Holy War against the infidel conqueror. Notable among these was a group led by a Saudi of Yemeni origin called Osama bin Laden.
To accomplish their purpose, they did not disdain to turn to the U.S. for help, which they got. In the Muslim perception there has been, since the time of the Prophet, an ongoing struggle between the two world religions, Christendom and Islam, for the privilege and opportunity to bring salvation to the rest of humankind, removing whatever obstacles there might be in their path. For a long time, the main enemy was seen, with some plausibility, as being the West, and some Muslims were, naturally enough, willing to accept what help they could get against that enemy. This explains the widespread support in the Arab countries and in some other places first for the Third Reich and, after its collapse, for the Soviet Union. These were the main enemies of the West, and therefore natural allies.
Now the situation had changed. The more immediate, more dangerous enemy was the Soviet Union, already ruling a number of Muslim countries, and daily increasing its influence and presence in others. It was therefore natural to seek and accept American help. As Osama bin Laden explained, in this final phase of the millennial struggle, the world of the unbelievers was divided between two superpowers. The first task was to deal with the more deadly and more dangerous of the two, the Soviet Union. After that, dealing with the pampered and degenerate Americans would be easy.
We in the Western world see the defeat and collapse of the Soviet Union as a Western, more specifically an American, victory in the Cold War. For Osama bin Laden and his followers, it was a Muslim victory in a jihad, and, given the circumstances, this perception does not lack plausibility.
From the writings and the speeches of Osama bin Laden and his colleagues, it is clear that they expected this second task, dealing with America, would be comparatively simple and easy. This perception was certainly encouraged and so it seemed, confirmed by the American response to a whole series of attacks--on the World Trade Center in New York and on U.S. troops in Mogadishu in 1993, on the U.S. military office in Riyadh in 1995, on the American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998, on the USS Cole in Yemen in 2000--all of which evoked only angry words, sometimes accompanied by the dispatch of expensive missiles to remote and uninhabited places.
Stage One of the jihad was to drive the infidels from the lands of Islam; Stage Two--to bring the war into the enemy camp, and the attacks of 9/11 were clearly intended to be the opening salvo of this stage. The response to 9/11, so completely out of accord with previous American practice, came as a shock, and it is noteworthy that there has been no successful attack on American soil since then. The U.S. actions in Afghanistan and in Iraq indicated that there had been a major change in the U.S., and that some revision of their assessment, and of the policies based on that assessment, was necessary.
More recent developments, and notably the public discourse inside the U.S., are persuading increasing numbers of Islamist radicals that their first assessment was correct after all, and that they need only to press a little harder to achieve final victory. It is not yet clear whether they are right or wrong in this view. If they are right, the consequences--both for Islam and for America--will be deep, wide and lasting.
Mr. Lewis, professor emeritus at Princeton, is the author, most recently, of "From Babel to Dragomans: Interpreting the Middle East" (Oxford University Press, 2004).
We hear so much about the success of the enemy, rarely about our own in this war of attrition in Iraq. Yet the military knows exactly what the struggle has come down to: to what degree can the elected Shiite majority curb their own militias, overlook 30 years of past oppression, resist Iranian infiltration, invite in moderate Sunnis, and do that all soon enough to sway Sunnis so that the latter start turning on al Qaeda, accept their colossal mistake in boycotting the elections and rejoin the government.
And the American role-far from the caricatured one of a deer in the headlights amid a civil war-is critical: Take out both the al Qaeda terrorists and extremist Shiites, in such a fashion to reassure the average Iraqis to trust in their government.
In this war of attrition, victory hinges on who tires first, and at what point average beaten-down Iraqis step forward and began opposing anyone who keeps killing innocents and destroying their own sources of power, water, transportation, and civil services.
In terms of our own military, after four years of this, it seems a question of how quickly and how well we can promote veteran Lt. Colonels, Colonels, and one-stars who have extensive experience into positions of real authority-accepting that in war everything about the status quo, from promotion to recognition, must change and depend only on proven performance on the battlefield.
In every war, almost all successful generals were unheard of before the war, while those that were, were not at its end. So let us hope there is a lot of skipping of rank, as Gen. Petraeus gets the best of his Iraqi veteran Lt. Colonels and Colonels fast-tracked and into positions where they can really use their expertise and experience.
We hear only that the army is broken. It surely is stretched and hurting-but also, for good or evil, has an entire cadre of officers who have seen almost everything imaginable in counterinsurgency warfare, both effective and stupid, and are quite literally now the most experienced combat officers in the world-and should rightfully be promoted into generalships in Iraq where they can do the most good.
The Pentagon should understand this sense of necessary urgency. Yes, counterinsurgency takes years, but politically the time left is finite-and will end not when the Democrats (who cannot stop filibusters or override vetoes quite yet) say so, but when moderate Republicans in fear of the 2008 elections, order the war to stop. And that could be sooner that we think.
What ended Vietnam was not just the anti-war movement, and the Peace Democrats, but the combination of southern conservatives and post-Watergate disgusted Republicans that either voted for the cut-offs between 1973-5 or in passive resignation accepted their inevitability.
So, as is true in most long wars (cf. 1864 or 1918), armies seem not to be fully effective until they digest and learn from their horrific mistakes, and so enter a race to apply their wisdom before an exasperated public gives up.
In late summer 1864 the work of Sheridan and Sherman and the 1918 summer offensive uplifted public opinion enough to stick it out; in 1970-3 post-Tet, radical improvement in American tactics, weaponry, and know-how came too little too late to deflate the public sense of defeatism and doom.
To use an overused phrase: Once again, all eyes turn on Petraeus and the autumn.
One of the reasons I trust General Petraeus is he just comes right out and says what needs to be said. The letter which he sent to our forces serving in Iraq (posted below) is a case in point. The letter is more important than it might appear on first glance.
There is great stress in combat, and this particular type of combat can be very frustrating. Stress in combat increases the potential for something bad to happen. Strong commanders are the only thing standing between us and another Abu Grahaib or Haditha. If something like that were to happen now, it would be a terrible setback in a war that we can still win. I am in Fallujah now, and those who have closely followed the war will need little reminder about what happened here in April 2004, and how our reprisal to barbarism caused an esclation in the war. (Fallujah is much quieter these days, and there has been great progress in the Anbar region. Enough progress to actually get media coverage.)
The progress is very real. But the potential for a disaster is also real.
From General Petraeus:
Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, and Coast Guardsmen serving in Multi-National Force-Iraq:
Our values and the laws governing warfare teach us to respect human dignity, maintain our integrity, and do what is right. Adherence to our values distinguishes us from our enemy. This fight depends on securing the population, which must understand that we—not our enemies—occupy the moral high ground. This strategy has shown results in recent months. Al Qaeda’s indiscriminate attacks, for example, have finally started to turn a substantial proportion ofthe Iraqi population against it.
In view of this, I was concerned by the results of a recently released survey conducted last fall in Iraq that revealed an apparent unwillingness on the part of some US personnel to report illegal actions taken by fellow members of their units. The study also indicated that a small percentage of those surveyed may have mistreated noncombatants. This survey should spur reflection on our conduct in combat.
I fully appreciate the emotions that one experiences in Iraq. I also know first hand the bonds between members of the ” brotherhood of the close fight. ” Seeing a fellow trooper killed by a barbaric enemy can spark frustration, anger, and a desire for immediate revenge. As hard as it might be, however, we must not let these emotions lead us—or our comrades in arrns—to commit hasty, illegal actions. In the event that we witness or hear of such actions, we must not let our bonds prevent us from speaking up.
Some may argue that we would be more effective if we sanctioned torture or other expedient methods to obtain information from the enemy. They would be wrong. Beyond the basic fact that such actions are illegal, history shows that they also are frequently neither useful nor necessary. Certainly, extreme physical action can make someone “talk;” however, what the individual says may be of questionable value. In fact, our experience in applying the interrogation standards laid out in the Army Field Manual (2-22.3) on Human Intelligence Collector Operations that was published last year shows that the techniques in the manual work effectively and humanely in eliciting information from detainees.
We are, indeed, warriors. We train to kill our enemies. We are engaged in combat, we must pursue the enemy relentlessly, and we must be violent at times. What sets us apart from our enemies in this fight, however, is how we behave. In everything we do, we must observe the standards and values that dictate that we treat noncombatants and detainees with dignity and respect. While we are warriors, we are also all human beings. Stress caused by lengthy deployments and combat is not a sign of weakness; it is a sign that we are human. If you feel such stress, do not hesitate to talk to your chain of command, your chaplain, or a medical expert.
We should use the survey results to renew our commitment to the values and standards that make us who we are and to spur re-examinat ion of these issues. Leaders, in part icular, need to discuss these issues with their troopers—and, as always, they need to set the right example and strive to ensure proper conduct. We should never underestimate the importance of good leadership and the difference it can make.
Thanks for what you continue to do. It is an honor to serve with each of you.
Ever wonder what constant hyperbole, years of willful distortion, a chronic lack of proportion, and ongoing inflated one-sided outrage in the mainstream media/Democrat Party looks like? Wonder no more.
Look at the graph below, and then look at any major daily newspaper or newscast.
The MEMRI blog has an interesting document from Iraq, a letter dated September 2002 referring to a recent decision by the Iraqi Council of Ministers under Saddam Hussein to make monthly payments of 50,000 Euros to ... Al Jazeera Television.
A RADICAL plan by Al-Qaeda to take over the Sunni heartland of Iraq and turn it into a militant Islamic state once American troops have withdrawn is causing alarm among US intelligence officials.
A power struggle has emerged between the self-styled Islamic State of Iraq, an organisation with ambitions to become a state which has been set up by Al-Qaeda, and more moderate Sunni groups. They are battling for the long-term control of central and western areas which they believe could break away from Kurdish and Shi’ite-dominated provinces once the coalition forces depart.
According to an analysis compiled by US intelligence agencies, the Islamic State has ambitions to create a terrorist enclave in the Iraqi provinces of Baghdad, Anbar, Diyala, Salah al-Din, Nineveh and parts of Babil.
“Al-Qaeda are on the way to establish their first stronghold in the Middle East,” warned an American official. “If they succeed, it will be a catastrophe and an imminent danger to Saudi Arabia and Jordan.”
The US conviction that the Islamic State could seize power is based on its use of classic Al-Qaeda tactics and its adoption last October of a draft constitution. This was entitled Notifying Mankind of the Birth of the Islamic State and was posted on a website based in Britain. The group named 10 ministers under its emir, Abu Amer Al-Baghdadi. They included a war minister, Abu Hamza Al-Muhajer who is also known as Abu Ayub al-Masri and is Al-Qaeda’s commander in Iraq.
Dr Jack Wheeler Behind The Lines To the Point News (PAID Only)
From his years of psychological counseling, Dr. Joel Wade can tell you all about what horrific consequences a temper tantrum can have. A temper tantrum can cause the loss of friends, a career, a marriage, even a life.
Nations can have temper tantrums too, and the consequences can be equally disastrous.
Last November, American voters had a collective temper tantrum. They lost their temper at Republicans and voted against them. They didn't vote for any positive reasons, they went strictly negative.
The voters lost their temper at George Bush, at the war in Iraq, at bridges to nowhere in Alaska and no fences along our southern border, at... it was a long, long list of complaints.
What voters did not do last November is vote for surrender and defeat in Iraq, higher taxes, more government spending, and national security imperiled. Yet that's what they got with the Democrats.
And our country is in grave risk because of it. The risk is growing by the day. Read more ...
Mohamad al-Janabi, a reputed al-Qaeda member in the nearby city of Salman Pak, said in a interview that he was unable to contact his comrades in Mahmudiyah to determine whether they were responsible for the attack.
But he added: "I can assure you that we will start pressuring Bush in a new way at the same time he is facing pressures from the Democrats and the American people. And there will be no problem to sacrifice 10 soldiers in order to abduct a single American soldier and get him on television screens begging for us to release him."
Notice Al Qaeda is not pressuring us to stay, which is odd, because I keep being told that Al Qaeda loves having American troops in Iraq and Bush is "playing right into their hands."
I don't think this is going to have the effect Al Qaeda seeks. It's getting harder and harder for the media to pretend that Al Qaeda isn't the major source of violence and terrorism in Iraq -- and the biggest cause of US troop deaths -- and they're going to have a hard time avoiding using the words "Al Qaeda" when they run these tapes.
Question: Would these tapes be considered a "coordinated" media buy for the Democrats under McCain-Feingold? Will the FEC investigate?
Maybe that's the way to get the media remotely perturbed at Al Qaeda -- we can sell them on the idea that "Al Qaeda is swift-boating Iraq." They really do seem to despise "swift-boating."
It's terrible. How they got captured, exactly, the article doesn't say.
housands of U.S. soldiers searched Sunday for three Americans who were missing after their patrol came under attack in an explosion that killed four of their comrades and an Iraqi army translator....
The Islamic State in Iraq, an al-Qaida front group, said it had captured several soldiers in the attack, but offered no proof to back up its claim, posted on an Islamic Web site.
The search for the missing Americans began after insurgents attacked a patrol of seven U.S. soldiers and an Iraqi interpreter before dawn Saturday near Mahmoudiya.
The U.S. military said Saturday that five people were dead and three were missing.
On Sunday, U.S. spokesman Maj. Gen. William Caldwell confirmed that the Iraqi interpreter was among the dead - and that all the missing were Americans. He said about 4,000 U.S. troops were involved in the search.
...
Mahmoudiya is about 20 miles south of Baghdad in an al-Qaida-dominated area known as the "triangle of death." Two U.S. soldiers were massacred there last year after they disappeared at a checkpoint.
Here’s recently deceased Taliban leader Mullah Dadullah in an appearance on Al Jazeera (the media arm of the global jihad), boasting about how he’s going to wipe out the Jews and the Americans in his fearsome “spring offensive.” (Courtesy of MEMRI TV.)
This is the "Taliban Zarqawi" that was reported surrounded by Afghan troops a few weeks ago, along with a group of his fighters. Including his brother, it seems -- who's also reported dead.
Check out this amazing catch by Allah:
The Taliban however denied that its notorious one-legged commander was dead, promising to produce a fresh recording of his voice to prove that he was alive.
Allah comments:
Can anyone else think of a major Al Qaeda figure once known for his videos but lately only making sporadic "fresh voice recordings"?
Did the Taliban just give away a standard operating procedure it would have been better to keep secret?
For one thing, it doesn't include jihadist casualties from botched bomb-making, inter-terrorist cell squabbles, and diseases from goat humping.
Thursday, May 10, 2007
Whose War Is It Anyway? By Victor Davis Hanson
The Democrats’ excuse-making just doesn’t cut it.
“This war is lost,” Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid recently proclaimed.
That pessimism about Iraq is now widely shared by his Democratic colleagues. But many of these converted doves aren’t being quite honest about why they’ve radically changed their views of the war.
Most of the serious Democratic presidential candidates — Sens. Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, and Christopher Dodd and former Sen. John Edwards — once voted, along with Reid, to authorize the war. Sen. Barack Obama didn’t. But, then, he wasn’t in the Senate at the time.
Now these former supporters of Iraq find themselves under assault by a Democratic base that demands apologies. Only Edwards has said he is sorry for his vote of support.
But if the Democratic party is now almost uniformly antiwar, it is also understandable why it can’t field a single major presidential candidate who was in Congress when it counted and tried to stop the invasion.
After all, responsible Democrats in national office had been convinced by Bill Clinton for eight years and then George W. Bush for two that Saddam’s Iraq was both a conventional and terrorist threat to the United States and its regional allies.
Most in Congress accepted that Saddam was a genocidal mass murderer. They knew he used his petrodollars to acquire dangerous weapons. And they felt his savagery was intolerable in a post-9/11 world. There was no debate that Saddam gave money to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers or offered sanctuary to terrorists like Abu Abbas and Abu Nidal. And few Democrats questioned whether the al Qaeda-affiliated terrorist group Ansar al-Islam was in Kurdistan.
In other words, Democrats, like most others, wanted Saddam taken out for a variety of reasons beyond fears of WMDs. Moreover, it was the Clinton-appointed CIA director George Tenet who supplied both Democrats and Republicans in Congress with much of the intelligence they would later cite in deciding to attack Saddam.
Below is a message (2 days old) from a Soldier in Iraq training Iraqi forces in Baghdad. Just keep in mind two things (1) more violence - increased violence - is sure to come as we increase our presence and squeeze the enemy out of his safe havens, and (2) when we create a safer area like western al Anbar, Al Qaeda will want to strike there to prove that it is not safe. So, when George Soros sends/pays people to come here and marginalize what the troops are saying about the war, remember what this good Soldier has said:
...I do apologize for my lack of emails lately. It has been difficult for me to sit down and rationally discuss the situation here in Baghdad without losing my professional bearing as I begin to think about the absolute and utter nonsense that is pouring out of our Congressional leaders. My Mother always told me if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all. Oh well.
I was absolutely disgusted by the comments made by Sen Reid (D). When I read his comments in the Stars and Stripes newspaper, I was enraged. How can someone with his position and power openly undermine the war efforts and what I am doing. For many in the states, it may be a simple little issue of him saying we have already lost. Unfortunately, the insurgency took this as a HUGE propaganda victory. Simply look at the latest news reports from Al-Qaida's number 2, al-Zawahri. To think Al-Qaida wasn't ecstatic to hear this kind of rubbish coming out of our Congress is absolutely absurd.
As I hear continuing news reports about how support for this war is continuing to slide, I am amazed at what our country has become. I look back through history at everything that we as Americans have been able to accomplish. The hardship and difficulties were great but through individual and collective sacrifice we were able to pull through together and face the world as a stronger nation. Sure, I have had to make some sacrifices about being over here. My family has had to adjust to me being gone. More importantly though, what has America sacrificed? The only ones who have TRULY sacrificed are my brothers and sisters in arms who have been killed or wounded and their families that live with that pain everyday. For the rest of America what has been given up? I saw in the news that the stock market is at record levels. The Wachovia Championship golf tournament is in full swing, with Tiger Woods and Michael Jordan getting great press during the ProAm. I guess the NBA finals are rolling right along. Spider Man 3 just opened with a record day. I think you are beginning to see my point. There are so many Americans that move about their daily lives not knowing or CARING about what is going on around them. They just want to stop all of the bad news stories that they hear. They don't want to hear anything else about Iraq. I mean come on, it has been going on for 4 years now, can't we find a new story? Americans have expanded their waist line, increased their individual debt and have plugged into cyberspace. Completely losing focus of what is going to happen if we don't sacrifice, if we don't stand up and if we don't WIN this war.
As everyone reads the terrible reports about how we are losing and how this war is slipping from our grasp, I have to ask how many stories have been reported about progress?
When was the last time you heard ANY news about the fighting on Haifa Street? Come on, this is one of the worst sections of Baghdad. It is right near the Green Zone and the fighting has to be terrible.
Well no.
4-9 Cavalry "the Buffalo Soldiers" have gone in and almost completely secured that area of Baghdad. There has not been a single significant activity on or around Haifa street in almost a month. Don't worry, I won't claim that as progress because we are losing. If we look at what elements of 2nd Brigade, 1st Cavalry "Black Jack" are doing in Diwaniya province. This use to be a terrible area for insurgent activity. Now, things are fairly quiet and the soldiers are conducting many more dismounted patrols and capturing insurgents from intelligence that the populous walks up and provides. An area that is near and dear to my heart, the Al Doura area of southern Baghdad. This is, without question the worst area to be in within the country right now. Al-Qaida in Iraq has made it publicly know that they intend on turning Al Doura into their regional headquarters. So obviously there is still significant fighting going on as this is a major flash point. In the midst of this fighting, we continue to see the Al Doura market expand and reopen. More vendors are reopening shops everyday and the market is staying open later as each week passes.
So you see, there is progress being made by the fantastic efforts of our soldiers and service members that are over here. Obviously the American people aren't provided this information as it will give too optimistic of an outlook on things. Seriously, how much do American's really care if another Joint Security Station was opened up to provide better protection and response to the people of Al Rasheed? This type of progress is a critical steping stone to the overall success of our effort. It is this success and progress that is happening every single day. Apparently it is all for nothing because we have already lost.
It is not reported that on any given night, American patrols will capture 50 - 60 insurgents all over Baghdad. It is not reported about how many IEDs are actually found and destroyed prior to their implementation. It is not reported how bravely and heroically our soldiers are fighting everyday, in a war that we believe we can win, only if the American people are behind us and understand the sacrifice.
It is emotionally draining to see day in and day out the news coming out of Washington. When we read reports about how many Americans DON'T support the war and think we should pull out now, it makes me physically sick. Did we as Americans not learn anything from Vietnam? The Vietnamese NEVER beat us in a conventional battle. All they had to do was out last the American will to fight. That is exactly what happened. The American people lost the will to fight. They lost the will to support the military action. We lost. Our military was not accepted back home. The Vietnam Veterans are fighting to this day to regain the respect and dignity they so rightfully deserve. Now as I look at what is happening over here and back in the states, I realize that we as Americans are so spoiled and selfish that we no longer have the will or backbone to stand up to what is right. I fear that as I return back to the states, I will see my country repeat history and hand the war over to the terrorists.
I know that the terrorists can never beat us. I know Al Qaida can never win this fight on their own. I know we still have the most capable military in the world. I have to say that the most significant weapon the enemy has at their disposal right now, is not an IED or suicide bomber, it is the will of the American people. We have allowed the terrorists to brake our collective will to fight. It is not the insurgency that will win this war, it is the American people who will lose it.
As so many people claim to support the troops, I ask that they prove it. I ask America to make a sacrifice. Take a stand against the "popular Hollywood" view point and support a victory. It's not enough to say I support our troops by wanting them home. Hell, I want to come home too. But I support a unilateral victory.
I support kicking the hell out of the insurgency and sending them to meet Allah.
I support building walls around Baghdad neighborhoods because it provides better security.
I support executing major artillery barrages on portions of the city that foster terrorists that launch rockets and mortars at me and my team.
The American people need to realize that if we are going to maintain a signifcant presence in the world, we must at times revert back to a John Wayne persona in which we don't concern ourselves with polls and opinions but rather take care of business because it is the right thing to do.
As I approach my return to the states, I simply pray that we as Americans don't let this period of history effect the security and safety of my children years from now...
The Colonel from Kandahar. Can I vote for this guy?
1. The continued fear by the enemy of the Afghan people having a future based upon education, which leads to opportunity and advancement. Again, these Mad Mullahs will lose power, no different than in 1517 when Luther empowered us and threatened the stranglehold of the Catholic church.
2. Last night, I read a Congressional blog from Democrat freshman Representative who addressed casualties as a reason to disengage from Iraq. We all know that we have lost 3000 of our Comrades and some 22,000 wounded. Yesterday the media was touting the number of US servicemembers killed in Iraq in April at 100. However, if you look at the enemy losses in Herat, est 120 in one engagement, should we not do a fair analysis and comparison, that is if deaths and casualties are a criteria for measuring success? I feel we should publiciize enemy deaths, wounded, and detained, this serves to level the comparison playing field as well, may even dissuade enemy recruiting efforts.
In the same blog this Congressman bemoaned the expenditures in this endeavor. Yesterday some of us did some research, WWII (45% of GDP), Korea (15% of GDP), Vietnam (topped at 10% of GDP), Iraq and Afghanistan? (less than 2% of GDP) has been spent. And currently we are only spending less than 5% of GDP on our defense budget. There was a pretty interesting jpg that went around for a while which stated, "Marines are at War, America is at the Mall".....and with a Dow Jones of over 13,000 that is probably a good assertion.
3. Here is the bottom line, we are in the "Best" strategic position to affect this current conflagration, there is only one problem. We are like a Bull that goes after the "pretty red thing" and not the Matador, until we are worn down and the fatal blow is given. The Matadors are in Pakistan, Syria, and Iran and until we begin to seriously take note of that and disrupt these external influencers we are just charging the red cape, and in turn getting worn down. If we want to do this right? Execute cross border strike operations, enemy oriented to deny terrorist sanctuary and training bases, disrupt external support, and interdict infiltrations into Iraq and Afghanistan. Musharref, Asaad, and Ahmadinejad are laughing at us.
Al Qaeda in Iraq (Sunni) purposefully began the sectarian violence by bombing the Shrine mosque in Samarra. Iran responded by backing Shiites. Both have created a situation of misdirection, due to support from Syria and Iran. Taliban has found reenergized possibilities thanks due to being able to have a "hands off" area in Waziristan, and of course they get upset with Pakistan govt when we hit them.....not our concern.
Battle Bots: Iraq, Afghanistan Unprecedented In Widespread Use of Warbots
—Ace
And more are coming, including centipede-like crawlers that weave their way through minefields detonating one mine per leg.
The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have become an unprecedented field study in human relationships with intelligent machines. These conflicts are the first in history to see widespread deployment of thousands of battle bots. Flying bots range in size from Learjets to eagles. Some ground bots are like small tanks. Others are the size of two-pound dumbbells, designed to be thrown through a window to scope out the inside of a room. Bots search caves for bad guys, clear roads of improvised explosive devices, scoot under cars to look for bombs, spy on the enemy and, sometimes, kill humans.
Even more startling than these machines' capabilities, however, are the effects they have on their friendly keepers who, for example, award their bots "battlefield promotions" and "purple hearts." "Ours was called Sgt. Talon," says Sgt. Michael Maxson of the 737th Ordnance Company (EOD). "We always wanted him as our main robot. Every time he was working, nothing bad ever happened. He always got the job done. He took a couple of detonations in front of his face and didn't stop working. One time, he actually did break down in a mission, and we sent another robot in and it got blown to pieces. It's like he shut down because he knew something bad would happen." The troops promoted the robot to staff sergeant -- a high honor, since that usually means a squad leader. They also awarded it three "purple hearts."
...
Ted Bogosh recalls one day in Camp Victory, near Baghdad, when he was a Marine master sergeant running the robot repair shop.
That day, an explosive ordnance disposal technician walked through his door. The EODs, as they are known, are the people who -- with their robots -- are charged with disabling Iraq's most virulent scourge, the roadside improvised explosive device. In this fellow's hands was a small box. It contained the remains of his robot. He had named it Scooby-Doo.
Staff Sgt. James Craven (background) and Sgt. Domonic Amaral run tests on two Talon 3Bs at a base in Tikrit, Iraq. The Talon 3B is one of several robots used by explosive ordnance disposal units in search of improvised explosive devices.
"There wasn't a whole lot left of Scooby," Bogosh says. The biggest piece was its 3-by-3-by-4-inch head, containing its video camera. On the side had been painted "its battle list, its track record. This had been a really great robot."
The veteran explosives technician looming over Bogosh was visibly upset. He insisted he did not want a new robot. He wanted Scooby-Doo back.
"Sometimes they get a little emotional over it," Bogosh says. "Like having a pet dog. It attacks the IEDs, comes back, and attacks again. It becomes part of the team, gets a name. They get upset when anything happens to one of the team. They identify with the little robot quickly. They count on it a lot in a mission."
The bots even show elements of "personality," Bogosh says. "Every robot has its own little quirks. You sort of get used to them. Sometimes you get a robot that comes in and it does a little dance, or a karate chop, instead of doing what it's supposed to do." The operators "talk about them a lot, about the robot doing its mission and getting everything accomplished." He remembers the time "one of the robots happened to get its tracks destroyed while doing a mission." The operators "duct-taped them back on, finished the mission and then brought the robot back" to a hero's welcome.
Near the Tigris River, operators even have been known to take their bot fishing. They put a fishing rod in its claw and retire back to the shade, leaving the robot in the sun.
Of the fish, Bogosh says, "Not sure if we ever caught one or not."
I guess all 50 of the Senate Democrats (did Tim Johnson actually sign this?) are supporters of Ari Fleisher's oft-quoted-out-of-context statement that in these troubling times, public figures must "watch what they say."
Veteran political columnist David Broder set off a firestorm recently when he called Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid an "embarrassment'' for declaring the Iraq War "lost.''
From the assault subsequently directed at Broder -- from other journalists, political operatives, left-wing bloggers and even the entire 50-member Senate Democratic Caucus -- you'd have thought Broder had had an intimate encounter with an intern.
...
In a letter to The Washington Post that had the unmistakable whiff of a powder room manifesto, otherwise known as a hissy fit -- as opposed to a "bed-wetting tantrum,'' as Paul Begala described Broder's column -- the senators asserted that their leader is a "good listener,'' who has an "amazing ability to synthesize views and bring people together,'' and who also demonstrates a "mastery of procedure.''
It is perhaps admirable, and certainly reassuring to Reid, that his fellow senators came to his defense. But this kind of overreaction to a columnist is rare, if not unprecedented, and betrays a disturbing hostility to legitimate criticism.
...
Outrage has become such a predictable response to any difference of opinion that it's lost its heat. When everything is outrageous, nothing is.
...
Part of this devolution in discourse has been brought about, no doubt, by the volcanic explosion of the blogosphere, which has democratized free speech in a way that is not always positive or pretty. Everybody can type, but not everyone can write. Everyone has an opinion, but not everyone comes equipped with the same skills and experience.
The disinhibiting effect of anonymity, meanwhile, has unleashed something dark in the human spirit that seems to have infected the broader culture. It isn't enough to say that Broder is all wet; instead he's "foaming at the mouth,'' a "gasbag" and a "venomous'' bloviator, borrowing again from Begala.
The absence of fairness and respectful dissension -- and the decline of civility wrought by our nation's unhinged narcissism -- now there's something worthy of outrage.
The translator depicted in these images is an like us all: Hopeful, idealistic and ambitious. He's never been to America, but he's the most "american" Iraqi I met.
He shared the day to day risks of life in a rifle company, but with one big difference: he could've quit anytime. It's been four years now and he's assisted hundreds of U.S. Army soldiers in accomplishing their missions. Whether it's gaining the trust of locals to ask about IEDs or using his local knowledge to reveal the deceit of foreign fighters determined to derail democracy, he never faltered.
In the year I worked with him we were attacked, ambushed and blown up several times. Every time I or one of my men were wounded, he was there. Always.
Now, I need your help. Please view this quick movie or the longer Discovery Channel version on My War Diary and decide whether this young man deserves to have a chance to become an American. Ask yourself "Has he earned the chance?" If you answer yes, please write his visa packet sponsor kenneth.miller@us.army.mil and tell him that you support Alaa's dream to come to America.
By TODD PITMAN, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 51 minutes ago
BAQOUBA, Iraq - Across the walls of the villas they seized in the name of their shadow government, black-masked al-Qaida militants spray-painted the words: "Property of the Islamic State of Iraq
They manned checkpoints and buried an elaborate network of bombs in the streets. They issued austere edicts ordering women not to work. They filmed themselves attacking Americans and slaughtered those who did not believe in their cause.
For months, al-Qaida turned a part of one Baqouba neighborhood into an insurgent fiefdom that American and Iraqi forces were too undermanned to tackle — a startling example of the terror group's ability to thrive openly in some places outside Baghdad even as U.S.-led forces struggle to regain control in the capital.
U.S. forces took back the entire Tahrir neighborhood during a weeklong operation that wrapped up Sunday in Baqouba, a city 35 miles northeast of Baghdad that al-Qaida declared last year the capital of its self-styled Islamic caliphate.
Though the operation was a success — it forced the guerrillas to either flee or melt into the population — soldiers say the extremists are likely to pop up anywhere else that's short on American firepower.
Indeed, even as the Tahrir operation took place, insurgents stepped up attacks on a new police post in the adjacent Old Baqouba district — which was also cleared recently — pounding it daily and killing Baqouba's police chief in a suicide car bombing.
Insurgent teams, meanwhile, have tried to infiltrate back into Tahrir, U.S. Capt. Huber Parsons said Tuesday.
When U.S. forces began pouring into the embattled district last week, residents said it was the first time they'd seen significant numbers of coalition troops since last fall. U.S. troops set up a combat outpost in northern Tahrir several months ago.
But to the south, residents recounted watching helplessly as masked fighters came and went freely in past months, piling weapons into the back of vehicles and taking over the homes of Shiites who had either fled or been killed.
"We were terrorized," said one man. "We wondered, Where is the government? Why have they forgotten us? Why does nobody come here to help?"
Baqouba has been wracked by violence for years. But insecurity has skyrocketed since late last year, partly because Sunni militants fleeing Baghdad's security crackdown have sought refuge here.
An estimated 60,000 people have fled the city of 300,000, most of them Shiites driven out by Sunni hit squads. Meanwhile, vital government subsidized food and fuel shipments, which normally flow in from Baghdad, ceased arriving because of political corruption in the capital, said Col. David W. Sutherland, whose 3rd Heavy Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division, is responsible for security in Diyala province.
"In an insurgency, if you don't have faith in the government or security forces ... you turn to those who will offer you a better way," Sutherland said. "The terrorists were able to drive a wedge between the government and the people. But we're reversing that."
The battle for Baqouba picked up in mid-March.
U.S. commanders rushed in Stryker infantry battalion which helped clear, and eventually calm, the southern district of Buhriz, once the city's most violent area. While American forces fought there and in Old Baqouba, they watched neighboring Tahrir spin out of control.
Parsons said video from an unmanned aerial drone last month showed suspected al-Qaida militants searching vehicles at a checkpoint. They held back from destroying it, choosing to "track them to see where they were going, where they lived," Parsons said.
Then, for eight days in early April, al-Qaida battled fellow insurgents from the nationalist 1920 Revolution Brigades, who residents said were trying to resist the terror group's bid for control. The nationalist fighters ran out of ammunition and fled.
With the district firmly in al-Qaida's hands, local leaders and sheiks called on American and Iraqi soldiers for help.
U.S. forces first sent road-clearing teams into southern Tahrir April 22. Insurgents fired mortars and popped out of windows with rocket launchers, destroying three de-mining robots. Tanks and infantry blasted surrounding buildings, killing more than a dozen attackers.
The next day, Parsons moved three of his platoons into central Tahrir on foot. All three came under fire. The day ended with a 30-minute firefight at dusk in which rounds ripped through palm groves. Apache helicopters shot Hellfire missiles at a house insurgents had fled to, lighting the sky in thunderous blasts.
Fighting eased afterward. Soon, previously empty streets were teeming with crowds of people who shook soldiers' hands as they passed.
Residents recounted watching groups of masked men dig into roads with jackhammers in recent weeks, planting bombs and stringing copper wire to trigger them from houses and schools.
The militants mostly kept to themselves, but they distributed puritanical leaflets commanding women to cover themselves in black from head to toe, and stay home from work. They ordered tea shops shut and warned men not to smoke water-pipes.
"No one dared ask them why," said one father. Those who did drew unwanted scrutiny — and a possible death sentence, he said.
Families told of Shiites who went shopping and never returned. One man said his brother had been kept and beaten in a makeshift prison with two dozen others.
At night, masked men stormed homes, robbing and carrying out extra-judicial killings. "Nobody knew whether they were al-Qaida or the police or just common criminals," said a baker named Ali. "It was total lawlessness."
Like other residents interviewed, Ali declined to give his full name in fear of reprisals from insurgents.
Insurgents blocked roads with concrete barriers taken from coalition forces. One checkpoint was so permanent that U.S. troops found a schedule naming those who manned it daily.
In some empty homes, guerrillas knocked small holes in the walls to use them as sniper positions. Below some, bullet casings littered the floor.
Half a dozen of houses containing weapon stashes, as well as one booby-trapped villa with a 155mm artillery shell rigged to blow behind its front door, were leveled. Many stashes were pointed out by residents.
One cache of rocket launchers and Kalashnikovs was found simply leaning against a wall in the back room of an abandoned home, along with handcuffs, ski masks, radio handsets and a video camera. A tape inside it showed a "Husky" American bomb disposal vehicle trying to de-mine a road in Baqouba.
Parsons eyes widened when he saw it: the driver and the vehicle work with his Stryker unit.
On the video, machine-gun fire erupted amid cries of "Allahu Akbar," God is Great, targeting the vehicle and a de-mining robot.
The footage cut abruptly to an unrelated, final scene: A closeup of a blood-splattered corpse whose blindfold had been pulled from his face. The man looked Iraqi and appeared to have been tortured.
Soldiers said they believed al-Qaida operatives had lived in Tahrir, using homes there as a kind of rear base. In the living room of one home residents said served as a medical aid station for wounded fighters were empty beds, neck braces and x-rays scattered across the floor.
Although insurgents claimed many houses in the name of the Islamic State of Iraq, they tried to erase their work with splotches of white paint two months ago — realizing the proclamations might be too conspicuous. On some gates and walls, the paint was too thin to cover the black Arabic lettering.
The Islamic State is a coalition of eight insurgent groups. Late last month, it named a 10-member "Cabinet" complete with a "war minister," an apparent attempt to present the Sunni coalition as an alternative to the U.S.-backed, Shiite-led administration of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.
Parsons assured each family that U.S. troops and police would stay behind to keep insurgents out after he left, and establish a new police station.
Al-Qaida "had months and months to run rampant because we didn't have the forces available to come in here until now," Parsons said. "They controlled this neighborhood, but they don't anymore."
By THOMAS WAGNER, Associated Press Writer 39 minutes ago
BAGHDAD - U.S.-led forces killed a senior al-Qaida in
Iraq operative believed responsible for the kidnappings of Westerners, including a Christian Science Monitor reporter and a slain peace worker from Virginia, a military spokesman said Thursday.
The U.S. Embassy, meanwhile, said a rocket attack on Iraq's Green Zone on Wednesday killed four foreign contractors _one from the Philippines, one from Nepal and two from India — who were working for a U.S. government contractor. It was the third straight day that extremists used rockets or mortars to hit the area where Iraq's parliament meets.
U.S. Maj. Gen. William Caldwell said the killing of Muharib Abdul-Latif al-Jubouri, described as al-Qaida's information minister, had apparently led to confused reports that al-Qaida's top leader or the head of an umbrella group of Sunni insurgents had been killed.
Caldwell said the military had conducted numerous operations against al-Qaida in Iraq in the last six days but does not have the bodies of Abu Omar al-Baghdadi and Abu Ayyub al-Masri and did not know "of anybody that does."
U.S. and Iraqi forces have stepped up operations against the terrorist network following a series of car bombings and suicide attacks that have killed hundreds in recent weeks despite a security crackdown in Baghdad and surrounding areas.
Al-Jubouri was killed while trying to resist detention in an operation about four miles west of the Taji, a town near an air base north of Baghdad early Tuesday, and the body was initially identified by photos, then confirmed by DNA testing Wednesday, he said.
Al-Jubouri was believed to have been deeply involved with the kidnapping of Jill Carroll, the Christian Science Monitor reporter who was released unharmed, and Tom Fox of Clear Brook, Va., one of four men from the Chicago-based peace group Christian Peacemaker Teams who was found shot to death in Baghdad on March 10, 2006, he said. He was also involved in the kidnapping of two Germans in January 2006, Caldwell said.
In a statement, Christian Science Monitor Editor Richard Bergenheim said the development "reminds us of the enormous efforts made by everyone over 82 days to secure Jill's safe release."
"While much remains to be done to improve conditions in Iraq, we appreciate the continuing efforts by the U.S. military and the Iraqi government to make the country a safer place for journalists and citizens alike," Bergenheim said.
On Thursday, mourners gathered at al-Jubouri's house in Duluiyah, 45 miles north of Baghdad, as a huge funeral tent went up in the street, police said.
The Interior Ministry said earlier that al-Baghdadi, the head of the Islamic State of Iraq, had been killed and released photos of what it said was the body of the leader of the umbrella group, which includes al-Qaida.
But Caldwell said al-Baghdadi's death could not be confirmed.
"If that person even exists, again, we have nobody in our possession or know of anybody that does, alive or dead, that is going through any kind of testing or analysis at this point with respect to those two individuals," he said.
On Tuesday, officials said al-Masri, the head of al-Qaida in Iraq, had been killed by rivals north of Baghdad, but the body had not been recovered.
Regarding al-Masri, Caldwell said "we in fact do not have in our possession nor do we know of anybody that has anybody or person at this time that we think is him."
"His overall status whether he is dead or alive is actually unknown to us at this point," he added.
The U.S. Embassy statement gave no other details about Wednesday's attack that killed the four contractors in the Green Zone, which is home to the U.S. and British embassies and thousands of American troops as well as key Iraqi government offices.
Insurgents routinely fire rockets and mortar rounds into the sprawling Green Zone.
The attacks seldom cause casualties or damage because they are poorly aimed and there is a lot of open space in the zone, but two Americans — a contractor and a soldier — were killed in March in a rocket attack on the area and two suicide vests were found unexploded less than a week after that.
The adequacy of security in the area also came into question after the April 12 suicide bombing in the parliament building's dining hall. One lawmaker was killed in the blast, which was claimed by an al-Qaida-led amalgam of Sunni insurgents.
On Wednesday, Rear Adm. Mark Fox, a U.S. military spokesman, said the latest round of Green Zone attacks appears to be part of a strategy by extremists "to score a spectacular hit or try to obtain some sort of a headline-grabbing direct hit."
___
Associated Press writers Sinan Salaheddin and Sameer N. Yacoub in Baghdad contributed to this report.
“The threat from radical Islamic terrorists will not vanish when President Bush leaves office, or if funds for the Iraq war are cut off in 2008.” —Victor Davis Hanson
THe Bobblehead exploding ALlah does not approve of Jerry Steele
".... 9 out of 10 Jihadies agree to issue fatwah on Jerry...
UNITED STATES CENTRAL COMMAND
Frontline News From the Real Source and Not Commander Piglosi, Kommandant Traitor Harry Reid nor Blue Helmet Chickie Schumer" http://www.centcom.mil/sites/uscentcom2/default.aspx
To accomplish their purpose, they did not disdain to turn to the U.S. for help, which they got. In the Muslim perception there has been, since the time of the Prophet, an ongoing struggle between the two world religions, Christendom and Islam, for the privilege and opportunity to bring salvation to the rest of humankind, removing whatever obstacles there might be in their path. For a long time, the main enemy was seen, with some plausibility, as being the West, and some Muslims were, naturally enough, willing to accept what help they could get against that enemy. This explains the widespread support in the Arab countries and in some other places first for the Third Reich and, after its collapse, for the Soviet Union. These were the main enemies of the West, and therefore natural allies. 
