Andrew Sullivan supports Ron Paul for the Republican presidential nomination. That’s a good thing. But he spends a considerable amount of time talking about how the war in Iraq has been lost… Perhaps, trying to convince himself.
Let's be clear: we have lost this war. We have lost because the initial, central goals of the invasion have all failed: we have not secured WMDS from terrorists because those WMDs did not exist. We have not stymied Islamist terror - at best we have finally stymied some of the terror we helped create. We have not constructed a democratic model for the Middle East - we have instead destroyed a totalitarian government and a phony country, only to create a permanently unstable, fractious, chaotic failed state, where the mere avoidance of genocide is a cause for celebration. We have, moreover, helped solder a new truth in the Arab mind: that democracy means chaos, anarchy, mass-murder, national disintegration and sectarian warfare. And we have also empowered the Iranian regime and made a wider Sunni-Shiite regional war more likely than it was in 2003. Apart from that, Mr Bush, how did you enjoy your presidency?
McCain, for all his many virtues, still doesn't get this. Paul does.
First of all, the Left can neither stomach, nor afford, a victory in Iraq. Too much of the Left’s time, effort and momentum has been invested in our defeat in Iraq. Let’s be crystal-clear on that fact.
The stated goals of the invasion have largely been achieved. The biggest goal being the toppling of the Saddam Hussein regime.
It’s true that large stock piles of WMD’s were never found. But that makes no difference. Iraq is no longer able to produce WMD’s. So in that sense America was successful. The outcome would have been the same even if large WMD stock piles had been discovered.
Mr. Sullivan goes on to say we have not stymied Islamist terror, but rather stymied terror we helped create. Again, I’ll agree that the initial occupation of Iraq caused an increase in resentment of us, not less. But we have stymied Islamic terror in a very big way. Al Qaeda made Iraq its central front in its war against the West. And we’ve dealt them a mortal blow on two fronts: we’ve beaten them militarily, and American forces now occupy the moral high-ground. They’ve virtually given up on Iraq. An event that is well documented by bloggers and other journalists embedded with front-line troops for more than just a few days.
As for Iran, they are nearly surrounded on all sides by American forces. They obviously feel threatened, so I hope this President and the future President can resolve differences with that country without using military force. Besides, the men and women serving overseas need a well-deserved rest.
Our soldiers have done remarkable work in spite of poor post-invasion planning on account of the current administration, powder-keg politics in Iraq (and here), a biased media, troop-bashing liberals and blow hard politicians who put politics ahead of our national interest.
Read Mr. Sullivan’s entire piece: Ron Paul For The Republican Nomination.
Posted on:
December 17, 2007 , by
newyank • Trackback
Filed in:
Elections 2008, Iraqi Freedom, Liberalism, Media Bias . •
No Comments • .
Claims of Cover-Up by U.S., Halliburton and KBR
From ABC’s “The Blotter”:
A Houston, Texas woman says she was gang-raped by Halliburton/KBR coworkers in Baghdad, and the company and the U.S. government are covering up the incident.
Jamie Leigh Jones, now 22, says that after she was raped by multiple men at a KBR camp in the Green Zone, the company put her under guard in a shipping container with a bed and warned her that if she left Iraq for medical treatment, she’d be out of a job.
“Don’t plan on working back in Iraq. There won’t be a position here, and there won’t be a position in Houston,” Jones says she was told.
In a lawsuit filed in federal court against Halliburton and its then-subsidiary KBR, Jones says she was held in the shipping container for at least 24 hours without food or water by KBR, which posted armed security guards outside her door, who would not let her leave.
Read the entire story: Gang-Rape Cover-Up by U.S., Halliburton/KBR.
First of all, my thoughts go out to the victim, her family and everyone involved in trying to settle the many issues that need to be put to rest in a case like this. I’m going to watch this story and post updates as it develops. There are already a handful of bloggers questioning the story as reported by ABC. And of course, the Left is already bolstering the Bush – Cheney Inc. conspiracy.
But I’m not going to question the reported facts just yet. Having said that, there’s something about this story that doesn’t quite add up; we’ll see…
Posted on:
December 10, 2007 , by
newyank • Trackback
Filed in:
Iraqi Freedom, Miscellaneous . •
No Comments • .
Ed Koch, Democrat and former mayor of New York City has it about right in his take on recent mid east geopolitics.
From World Tribune:
The Israel-Palestine peace meeting in Annapolis, Maryland was a success in at least one respect. It brought together every Arab state involved, including Saudi Arabia and Syria.
According to many Middle East experts, the coming together of Arab nations at the request of President Bush indicates that Arabs are in such fear of Iran and its efforts to dominate the region that they are willing to cooperate with the United States more than ever before.
And this…
In a New York Times op-ed article, author Michael B. Oren writes: “…participants in the conference were above all motivated by their fear of a radical and relentlessly aggressive Iran.” He went on to point to “the success of the Iranian proxies, Hezbollah and Hamas in Lebanon and Gaza, as well as the expansion of Iranian influence westward into the Iraqi vacuum.”
That analysis reinforces my belief that the United States could get these same Arab states to recognize that they must help us in Iraq or suffer the consequences of an ultimate Iranian victory when we leave. “Helping us” means sending troops, spending money and apprehending and deterring terrorists in their countries who are seeking jihad – holy war – against the U.S. in Iraq and elsewhere. The U.S. has refused to make the threat of leaving Iraq dependent on the offers of help from these Arab countries in the region who have more to lose than we do by our withdrawal of military forces from Iraq. This is the moment for President Bush to deliver such an ultimatum to our Arab regional allies.
I agree with this idea so long as a threat to withdraw troops is predicated on the basis of achieving victory in Iraq, not defeat. Which is what the Democrats and their handlers on the Left advocate.
Read the rest: Guess who’s afraid of Iran?
Posted on:
December 4, 2007 , by
newyank • Trackback
Filed in:
International, Iran Watch, Iraqi Freedom, Middle East . •
No Comments • .
From yesterday’s Pittsburgh Post-Gazette:
Murtha finds military progress in trip to Iraq
Warns that Iraqis must do more for their own security
WASHINGTON - U.S. Rep. John Murtha today said he saw signs of military progress during a brief trip to Iraq last week, but he warned that Iraqis need to play a larger role in providing their own security and the Bush administration still must develop an exit strategy.
“I think the ’surge’ is working,” the Democrat said in a video conference from his Johnstown office, describing the president’s decision to commit more than 20,000 additional combat troops this year. But the Iraqis “have got to take care of themselves.”
This is glimpse of how the democrats plan to adjust their party’s position on the war in Iraq.
Up until now, they’ve been advocating for, and are vested in, the defeat of U.S. forces in Iraq. The key to their strategy will be to shift the blame away from the Bush administration to Iraqi’s and the Iraqi Government while acknowledging the military progress. (This is largely because Bush is not on the ballot in 2008 and the Iraq war will not be one of the election’s defining issues.)
The democrats may also attempt to claim some of the credit for the progress in Iraq by suggesting their constant pressure on the Bush administration forced a change in tactics. It’s no surprise Representative Murtha is publicly admitting the surge has made progress since he had previously lead the charge that the war was lost.
UPDATE: Allahpundit is all over this at HotAir.com.
Posted on:
November 30, 2007 , by
newyank • Trackback
Filed in:
Domestic Politics, Iraqi Freedom . •
No Comments • .
h/t: Jawa Report.
Sunday night Trackpost to Stop the ACLU, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Posted on:
November 18, 2007 , by
newyank • Trackback
Filed in:
Afghanistan, Iraqi Freedom, Videos . •
No Comments • .
As a follow up to House Passes 50 Billion Dollar Iraq Withdrawal Bill and Democrats Slam Iraqi Government Again, I found this story on Reuters:
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democrats who lead Congress likened President George W. Bush on Thursday to a bully on Iraq war policy and vowed to spend no more on combat without a deadline for bringing U.S. troops home.
“He damn sure is not entitled to having this money given to him just with a blank check,” Sen. Harry Reid, the Democrats’ Senate leader, told reporters. “Americans need someone fighting for them taking on this bully we have in the White House.”
Reid’s tough tone came toward the end of a year in which Democrats, despite slim majorities in both houses, have failed repeatedly to garner the votes to change Bush’s open-ended military commitment to the Iraq war.
White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said in response to Reid: “The president does not engage in personal attacks. He’s interested in getting things done on behalf of the American people, and he’s looking for a willing partner in Congress.”
Story link: Democrats vow not to be bullied by Bush on Iraq.
Typical liberal move, if they can’t get their way or things get touch, just play the victim.
Posted on:
November 16, 2007 , by
newyank • Trackback
Filed in:
Domestic Politics, Iraqi Freedom, Liberalism . •
No Comments • .
Get this from AFP:
Democratic leaders on Thursday warned the Iraqi government was locked in a stalemate, as they jockeyed for position ahead of another Senate showdown over Iraq war funding.
They also threatened Republicans with a rare weekend vote, after the start of the scheduled break for the Thanksgiving holiday, on a bill including troop withdrawal dates which cleared the House of Representatives Wednesday.
“Every place you go you hear about no progress being made in Iraq,” said Senate Democratic majority leader Harry Reid.
“The government is stalemated today, as it was six months ago, as it was two years ago,” Reid told reporters, warning US soldiers were caught in the middle of a civil war.
“It is not getting better, it is getting worse,” he said.
Democrats are using perceived lack of reconciliation and political development by the Iraqi government to refute claims by Republicans that President George W. Bush’s troop surge strategy has yielded concrete results.
The Senate was expected to start work on the 50 billion dollar emergency war funding bill by Friday, though the measure is considered dead on arrival due to Republican opposition.
President George W. Bush, who has repeatedly outmuscled Democrats attempting to tie his hands on the war, has threatened to veto the measure in the unlikely event it reaches his desk.
Story link: US Democrats slam Iraqi government.
I wrote about the 50 billion dollar spending bill earlier. What bothers me is the democrats know full well that Iraq has improved drastically within the last year. This political party is so committed to defeat, they’ve embarked on their own campaign to lie to the American public.
Iraq: The Dome Under the Cross. Local
Muslim and Christian leaders had prepared
the church for his arrival.
Photo courtesy Michael Yon.
Evidence that Iraq is improving is easy to find
Check out some of the following sources:
Blackfive also has several posts relating to the magnificent progress being made in Iraq.
Posted on:
November 16, 2007 , by
newyank • Trackback
Filed in:
Domestic Politics, Iraqi Freedom, Leftwing Watch . •
No Comments • .
From AP:
WASHINGTON (AP) - House Democrats pushed through a $50 billion bill for the Iraq war Wednesday night that would require President Bush to start bringing troops home in coming weeks with a goal of ending combat by December 2008.
The legislation, passed 218-203, was largely a symbolic jab at Bush, who already has begun reducing force levels but opposes a congressionally mandated timetable on the war. And while the measure was unlikely to pass in the Senate—let alone overcome a presidential veto—Democrats said they wanted voters to know they weren't giving up.
"The fact is, we can no longer sustain the military deployment in Iraq," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. "Staying there in the manner that we are there is no longer an option."
The White House pledged to veto the bill, and Republicans said they would back the president.
"These votes, like the dozens of previous failed votes, put the interests of radical interest groups ahead of the needs of our military and their mission," an administration statement said.
The bill represents about a quarter of the $196 billion Bush requested for combat operations in the 2008 budget year, which began Oct 1.
Read all: House Passes $50B Iraq Withdrawal Bill.
Can you say veto? When are the democrats going to get it? The 2006 congressional election wasn’t about getting out of Iraq. It was about corruption and the fact that republicans weren’t being true to conservative values.
Posted on:
November 15, 2007 , by
newyank • Trackback
Filed in:
Domestic Politics, Iraqi Freedom, Leftwing Watch . •
No Comments • .
More Posts »
