Joe Lieberman: "Democrats and Our Enemies"

Yesterday, we shared with you the thoughts of Ed Koch, who challenged his fellow Democrats to remove partisanship from foreign policy. Today, it's Joe Liberman, who takes his party, including Obama, to task for putting partisanship ahead of national interests:

I felt strongly that Democrats should embrace the basic framework the president had advanced for the war on terror as our own, because it was our own. But that was not the choice most Democratic leaders made. When total victory did not come quickly in Iraq, the old voices of partisanship and peace at any price saw an opportunity to reassert themselves. By considering centrism to be collaboration with the enemy – not bin Laden, but Mr. Bush – activists have successfully pulled the Democratic Party further to the left than it has been at any point in the last 20 years.

Far too many Democratic leaders have kowtowed to these opinions rather than challenging them. That unfortunately includes Barack Obama, who, contrary to his rhetorical invocations of bipartisan change, has not been willing to stand up to his party's left wing on a single significant national security or international economic issue in this campaign.

In this, Sen. Obama stands in stark contrast to John McCain, who has shown the political courage throughout his career to do what he thinks is right – regardless of its popularity in his party or outside it.

John also understands something else that too many Democrats seem to have become confused about lately – the difference between America's friends and America's enemies.

Amen, Joe. We couldn't agree more. Go here to read the full op-ed.

Ed Koch: "History Will Redeem Bush"

We don't know what it is about prominent Jewish Democrats that makes them support the President, aside from maybe their ancestral connections to the Middle East, which make the threat of militant Islam far more real, and thus more relevant, to them.

We've often talked about "Fightin' Joe" Lieberman, but another well-known Northeastern Democratic icon, former NYC Mayor Ed Koch, sounds off in continued support of President Bush:

Today, with the passage of time, most historians and certainly the American people, see Truman in a different light, primarily for his willingness to stand firm against Soviet aggression, whether against Greece or South Korea, and proclaim the Truman Doctrine, effectively defending the free world from Soviet efforts to expand their hegemony. Like Truman, George W. Bush, in my view, will be seen as one of the few world leaders who recognized the danger of Islamic terrorism and was willing with Tony Blair to stand up to it and not capitulate.

The rest of the op-ed is well worth a read. Go check it out.

Iraq and Germany: David Stafford's post-war comparisons

In "Iraq is a mess. But Germany was, too.", an op-ed in yesterday’s Washington Post, David Stafford compares the current post-Saddaam occupation of Iraq to the post-WWII occupation and reconstruction of Germany:

It would be harder to think of two more different societies than Germany in 1945 and contemporary Iraq. The former -- despite Hitler and the Third Reich -- had a long tradition of law, order, constitutional government and civic society to draw on in rebuilding democracy. Nor was it riven by deep-rooted ethnic and sectarian religious tensions that erupted to the surface once the dictator's iron fist was removed. And although Germany certainly had hostile neighbors -- especially to the communist East -- the threat they posed served to create, not crack, political cohesion.

Yet in looking at Iraq over the past five years, it's hard not to find poignant echoes of the post-WWII experience and to wonder whether a better knowledge of that history might have helped prevent some basic errors. Or even -- because there may be some small crumb of comfort for optimists here -- that it's too soon to declare that the mission has failed. Sen. John McCain's 100-year horizon for a U.S. presence in Iraq may be stretching things. But let's not forget that the postwar occupation of Germany lasted for a full decade.

There is no doubt that mistakes were made early on, and Stafford is honest about those as well:

In 1945, the Allies had a carefully thought-out plan for what would follow victory. For two years before his forces crossed the German frontier, Eisenhower and his staff at Allied headquarters worked on detailed plans for the occupation. The lines of command were clearly drawn, and everyone agreed that the military would be in charge. Thousands of soldiers were trained in the tasks of military government. Compare that with the chaotically devised schemes for Iraq that were cobbled together at the last minute amid squabbling between the Pentagon and the State Department. Or with the confused and confusing mandate handed to the hapless Jay Garner, the first administrator of postwar Iraq, to devise a comprehensive plan for its administration in a matter of weeks.

But the questionable decision to dismiss the military and political apparatus which governed Iraq, according to Stafford, was not without precedent:

Critics of the Bush administration's handling of Iraq point to the decisions by L. Paul Bremer, Garner's replacement, to dismiss Baathists from public office and to dissolve the Iraqi army as critical and disastrous turning points that created a vast legion of the unemployed and disaffected. Yet in 1945, the Allies implemented a similarly draconian policy in Germany. They dissolved the Nazi Party, carried out a thorough purge of Nazis in public office and even abolished the ancient state of Prussia, which they believed was at the root of German militarism. Millions of Wehrmacht soldiers languished in prisoner-of-war camps while their families struggled to survive.

It will be many years before a full assessment can be made of the invasion and post-war American (with its allies) efforts in Iraq. It is hard to imagine that these assessments won’t point out plenty of mistakes – especially in the first year or two. But is it fair to expect that mistakes would not be made? As Stafford points out, even in Germany, which was more advanced, educated, and where more planning was done beforehand and more forces committed during the occupation and reconstruction, these efforts were not easy.

There are signs of progress: growing reconciliation with the restive Sunni minority, the Kurds have opted not to separate from a post-war Iraq, and Maliki’s recent offensive in Basra forced Al-Sadr to back down and accept a cease-fire, in spite of early predictions of doom and gloom by the American media. Iraqi security forces are growing in number and ability. We see their economy growing, and their democratic institutions taking root.

Five Army brigades are being withdrawn, our forces handing over more territory and responsibility to the Iraqi military, as well as to armed Sunni citizens who have rejected radicalism for national unity, and overseas tours are being reduced from fifteen to twelve months. Those are signs of progress as well.

Progress in Iraq should continue to be measured in both terms – progress for Iraqis and progress towards our eventual disengagement. So long as we continue to see success by both measures, the next President should not arbitrarily pull the plug on finishing the job.

Upset looming in Zimbabwe?

The MDC opposition party leadership is claiming victory in the Zimbabwe presidential race, based upon projections from preliminary counts as well as those posted at voting locations (before the ballot boxes can be stuffed).

Other news has reported that a number of President Mugabe's ministers and allies have been ousted in their parliamentary re-election bids. This includes a virtual clean-sweep of seats in the capital and other major cities by the opposition.

The "This is Zimbabwe" blog of election watchdogs is reporting a number of reports of speculation that the Mugage regime is preparing either for defeat or the mother of all rigged elections.

Whatever the truth is, we'll soon know. But increasingly it looks like the size of this wave may have been too great for even vote-rigging to turn back.

What's at stake in Zimbabwe?

Many of us sit back and take things for granted when it comes to the freedoms we have. We trivialize our political process with intellectual cheap shots and petty personal attacks, and think we can afford to do so, because we're better than other nations.

That's why we try to stick to the high ground here in the Blogland. Just the issues - no divorce files, drug habit rumors, or any of that childish crap. We've stuck to the high ground, tried to be fair, and for the most part, so do most others ... but down in Zimbabwe, they're not so fortunate. For years, they've had rigged elections, intimidation of the opposition, and all sorts of sordid things from a government who can't offer results, so they cheat to get their way, and if they can't steal it, they'll take it by force.

Trade words for billy clubs, and you'll find that while this seems rather nasty, some of these thugs and their dirty deeds aren't so different from some people here. They're all out to steal and intimidate, to take what they can't earn, and to avoid accountability for their actions. Ethically speaking, they're about the same.

In Zimbabwe, the results of Mugabe's rule have been shocking and are well-documented, including this young victim of the destruction of that nation's economy, along with its once-prosperous agricultural system:


Shocking, isn't it? That's what's at stake in today's elections in Zimbabwe. You can find more pictures about the collapse of a nation online at http://zimbabwedemocracynow.com/toolkit/v/photographs.

In spite of the threats, the intimidation, and the probability that fraud will nullify their votes, the people of Zimbabwe are pouring out in droves today. We wish we could be there to stand with them. But we'll be sure to say a prayer for them - and thank God that while it's not perfect here, it could be worse.

Please join us in our prayers for Zimbabwe.

The thugs of Tibet

Two generations ago, China's revolutionary goons stormed into Tibet and took it over, ironically renaming it an "autonomous region". Back in 1989, Chinese thugs swarmed into Tianenmen Square to crush democratic protests.

With the Beijing Olympics soon to begin in their nation, the Chinese government is trying to put on a kinder, gentler facade for the world to see, hoping the world will forget their past record. But those pesky troublemakers in Tibet had to rise up and start protesting. When pushed by the government, who declared a "People's War" against the protestors, they started rioting.

We support restoring independence to Tibet, so of course, we support those standing up to the government thugs who've taken over their nation.

Fight the power. We're with you all the way.

Saddam’s fatal bluff

On Sunday, 60 Minutes will be sharing an interview with an FBI agent assigned to interrogate Saddam Hussein, the late tryrant of Iraq, while he was in the custody of American military forces prior to his execution:

Former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein kept up the illusion that he had weapons of mass destruction before 2003 because he did not think the United States would invade, an FBI agent who questioned him said.

In an interview with CBS' "60 Minutes" to be broadcast on Sunday, FBI agent George Piro describes conversations with Saddam in the months after his capture in December 2003.

Piro said Saddam, who was hanged from crimes against humanity in December 2006, wanted to maintain the image of a strong Iraq to deter Iran, its historic enemy, from hostile action.

"He told me he initially miscalculated ... President (George W.) Bush's intentions. He thought the United States would retaliate with the same type of attack as we did in 1998... a four-day aerial attack," Piro said.

Given the poor state of Iraq’s military, which was effectively wiped out in less than two weeks of combat engagement with five divisions of American and British forces, it is hard to envision them withstanding an brute-force invasion by two or three hundred thousand Iranians, no matter how poorly trained or equipped they might be.

With options like these, it is understandable that Saddam would want to bluff his neighbors into overestimating the combat effectiveness of Iraq’s military. Otherwise, the noose around his neck may well would have been wielded by Iranians, instead of fellow Iraqis. He just never figured that President Bush was the kind of man who would actually mean what he/she said - until it was too late.

Piro’s narrative in the interview bears warning that while Iraq’s WMD program had not been restarted, it was not for the lack of willpower, or future intentions:

The Iraqi leader had also intended to restart the weapons program and had the means to do it.

"He still had the engineers. The folks that he needed to reconstitute his program are still there," Piro said. "He wanted ... to reconstitute his entire WMD program."

This confirms the essential argument that prompted the invasion – the threat posed by Hussein’s regime was real. It was just a question of when.

There is no small irony in how Saddam, in an effort to avoid his downfall, brought it about. Those who criticize the intelligence shortcomings that led to the United States invasion should have the intellectual honesty to recognize the impact that Saddam’s deception had over the decision to invade in 2003.

But that’s not likely, because the real agenda of many of Bush’s critics is not to objectively question the war effort, but rather to use whatever tools and issues they can to criticize him.

Even if the truth, and our troops, get in their way.

Benazir Bhutto, Martyr for Democracy

Our thoughts and prayers are with the people of Pakistan, especially with the friends, family, and supporters of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto.

Given the rash of bombings and attempted attacks, Bhutto had to know death stalked her every move since she returned to Pakistan, yet she never wavered or backed down. The rise of a free and democratic Pakistan, safe from both military coups and Islamic extremism, would be a fitting tribute by which to honor her legacy and her sacrifice

This savage act was intended to deter reformers and send a message of fear to silence those who worked to bring democracy to this region. We hope that the people of Pakistan will reject their threats and send an even stronger message to the terrorists by going to the polls in the upcoming elections.

Vladimir Putin: "a K and a G and a B"

A really good op-ed in yesterday's Post and Courier cautions of the steps by Vladimir Putin to hang onto power after his tenure as President ends, warning readers that:

The hopes for a democratic future that were inspired when Boris Yeltsin climbed on a tank in 1991 to resist a Stalinist coup are fading as KGB-style rule returns.

This is not the first time we've heard these warnings.

Putin has done much to right the Russian ship of state, by restoring order and clamping down on the widespread corruption that had followed the collapse of the exhausted Soviet Union, combatting a malaise that had some similarites to what was experienced by post-imperial Great Britain between the 1950s and the Thatcher years. But in many ways, Putin's efforts couldn't be more different, as well as the outcomes.

Unlike Britain, where Thatcher's reforms led to revitalized national pride and a blossoming of freedom and opportunity, Putin's moves replaced chaos and malaise with a dull grey blanket. Weighing that blanket down is the gradual erosion of Yeltsin-led democratic reforms, growing consolidation of industry in the hands of the state and state-allied oligarchs, a remilitarization and a growing effort to reach out and build alliances with non-democratic nations.

Those of us who were teens and in our twenties in the late 1980s had great hope when the Soviet Empire collapsed. Suddenly, the prospect of war - anywhere between a massive land war in central Europe to a global nuclear conflict - had ended and our generation faced a much brighter future. We had hoped that whatever rose from the ashes of the fallen Soviet Empire would be a new partner for peace and progress, but this dream would only be half-fulfilled.

While much progress was made when freedom moved east and many of the former client states embraced the West, Russia and its neighboring states first struggled through chaos and corruption, then moved away from the democratic reforms that had prevailed in central Europe. Today, Putin with one hand in the Russian electoral process and another closely meddling in the affairs of his neighbors, makes plans to install a figurehead ruler while retaining his real power.

John McCain's warning about Putin seems rather prophetic: "I looked into Mr. Putin's eyes and I saw three things — a K and a G and a B." For those generations who remember the KGB as the sword and shield of Soviet-era tyranny, and see Putin's manueverings, both at home and abroad, McCain's comparison presents an ominous warning.

Too hot for NBC?

Since NBC didn't want to air these videos, then the day after Pearl Harbor Day, we're gonna run them, in appreciation of the brave men and women who are doing their best to make sure we'll never get sucker-punched like that ever again:





THANK YOU!!! THANK YOU!!! THANK YOU!!!

(... and may Jane Fonda and Cindy Sheehan both rot in hell)

Iraq: Popular resistance and lower casualties continue

During the American Revolutionary War, history notes that the fight for the southern colonies was a see-sawing affair between Continentials and Royal forces. When pushed by heavy-handed British regulars and brutal Tory militias following the destruction of the entire southern Continential Army at Camden and Charleston, local Americans realized they could not remain neutral and took the lead in fighting for their safety and their independence.

While militia forces would wage a brushfire rebellion across the South, at Kings Mountain and Cowpens they dealt heavy and irreparable blows directly to British regular forces. Where regular Continental forces had taken four years to lose the southern colonies, militia forces, with very little outside help, were able to drive the British out in less than two following those two battles.

A similar pattern is continuing to develop in Iraq, where the Iraqi people, fed up with continued terrorism, are taking sides and taking up arms alongside American troops, with notable results:

The commander of the battle zone — Lt. Col. Val Keaveny, 3rd Battalion, 509th Infantry (Airborne) — said his unit has lost only one soldier in the past four months despite intensified operations against both Shiite and Sunni extremists, including powerful al-Qaida in Iraq cells.

Keaveny attributes the startling decline to a decrease in attacks by militants who are being rounded up in big numbers on information provided by the citizen force — which has literally doubled the number of eyes and ears available to the military.

The efforts to recruit local partners began taking shape earlier this year in the western province of Anbar, which had become the virtual heartland for Sunni insurgents and al-Qaida bands. The early successes in Anbar — coming alongside a boost of 30,000 U.S. forces into the Baghdad area — led to similar alliances in other parts of Iraq.

"People are fed up with fear, intimidation and being brutalized. Once they hit that tipping point, they're fed up, they come to realized we truly do provide them better hope for the future. What we're seeing now is the beginning of a snowball," said Keaveny, whose forces operate out of Forward Operating Base Kalsu, about 35 miles south of Baghdad.

As in our own war for independence, the Iraqi people, not American forces will decide the fate of the conflict. We can train them, support them, and fight alongside them, but this is their nation and their war to win.

Let us hope this is yet another sign that the conflict is finally turning the corner so our troops will be able to start coming home, with their heads held high and able to say "mission accomplished".

Civilian and military casualties down in Iraq

More good news from the Middle East:

BAGHDAD - Deaths among American forces and Iraqi civilians fell dramatically last month to their lowest levels in more than a year, according to figures compiled by the U.S. military, the Iraqi government and The Associated Press.

The decline signaled a U.S. success in bringing down violence in Baghdad and surrounding regions since Washington completed its infusion of 30,000 more troops on June 15.

A total of 64 American forces died in September — the lowest monthly toll since July 2006.

The decline in Iraqi civilian deaths was even more dramatic, falling from 1,975 in August to 922 last month, a decline of 53.3 percent. The breakdown in September was 844 civilians and 78 police and Iraqi soldiers, according to Iraq's ministries of Health, Interior and Defense.

While one month's statistics is hardly something to base long-term predictions upon, it's certainly welcome news and something we hope to see more of .

While the terrorists in Iraq are changing tactics and approaches in order to remain a force to be reckoned with, our troops, the best in the world, are just as good, if not better, at adapting to this evolving combat environment. The aggressive and innovative tactics shown since the troop surge began certainly suggest our forces are doing just that, and hopefully these efforts will continue to bear fruit.

Bloggers work on U.S. image in the Middle East

The New York Times discusses how the State Department is using bloggers to improve the image of the United States and promote discussion of democratic values among Arabs in the Middle East:

WASHINGTON — Walid Jawad was tired of all the chatter on Middle Eastern blogs and Internet forums in praise of gory attacks carried out by the “noble resistance” in Iraq.

A page from the Web site Arabs Gate, one of the sites where a State Department blog team has contributed to the debate.

So Mr. Jawad, one of two Arabic-speaking members of what the State Department called its Digital Outreach Team, posted his own question: Why was it that many in the Arab world quickly condemned civilian Palestinian deaths but were mute about the endless killing of women and children by suicide bombers in Iraq?

Among those who responded was a man named Radad, evidently a Sunni Muslim, who wrote that many of the dead in Iraq were just Shiites and describing them in derogatory terms. But others who answered Mr. Jawad said that they, too, wondered why only Palestinian dead were “martyrs.”

The discussion tacked back and forth for four days, one of many such conversations prompted by scores of postings the State Department has made on about 70 Web sites since it put its two Arab-American Web monitors to work last November.

The postings, are an effort to take a more casual, varied approach to improving America’s image in the Muslim world.

- "At State Dept., Blog Team Joins Muslim Debate", New York Times (9/22/07)

This is certainly an interesting approach, and hopefully one that will bear fruit.

Media crackdown in Venezuela

A day after Memorial Day comes photos from Venezuela that remind us of one of the reasons why the United States IS a better nation than others.

Apparently, not everyone in Chavez' Venezuela was too happy with the takeover of RCTV. Word is that other major news media outlets that don't toe the government line will be next, including Globovision.

Obviously, these words would mean little to Chavez:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, andto petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Remember this next time you pull up at a station that sells Citgo gas (Citgo is owned by the Chavez regime).

Since most gas stations make pennies on the gallon from gas sales, and rely on inside merchandise sales to make their money, they'll lose very little if you buy your gas elsewhere. I shop the inside of the local Citgo retailer several times a week, usually for 32 ounce fountain Pepsis.

Special thanks to Publius Pundit for the photo links.

Iraq update

If the media can bring us graphic images of civilian and military casualties and the latest speeches by opposition Democrats, it ought to at least be fair and present some alternative views. Since they won't, here are some alternative views, courtesy of Mike over at New Wars:

Hoshyar Zebari, the Iraqi foreign minister asks "Don't Abandon Us":

Last weekend a traffic jam several miles long snaked out of the Mansour district in western Baghdad. The delay stemmed not from a car bomb closing the road but from a queue to enter the city's central amusement park. The line became so long some families left their cars and walked to enjoy picnics, fairground rides and soccer, the Iraqi national obsession.

Across the city, restaurants are slowly filling and shops are reopening. The streets are busy. Iraqis are not cowering indoors. The appalling death tolls from suicide attacks are often high because of crowding at markets. These days you are as likely to hear complaints about traffic congestion as about the security situation. Across Baghdad there is a cacophony of sirens from ambulances, firefighters and police providing public services. You cannot even escape the curse of traffic wardens ticketing illegally parked cars.

U.S. Cavalry On Point in al-Anbar, Part One:

Tonight, the lights are back on in Ramadi.

One year ago, in a report that received national attention, the Administration, Pentagon, and Coalition General Staff had unofficially declared Al Anbar Province and Ramadi to be “lost.” Incidents in Ramadi, Fallujah, and Al-Qaim were measured in how many per hour. Stories of fighting in Ramadi’s “Snake Pit,” or the tragic August 2005 report of fifteen Marine reservists of Lima Company, 3/25, killed in Haditha splashed across the news each night. This was the Sunni and Al-Qaeda in Iraq insurgency at its worst.

But Ramadi is a far different town than when I visited in October 2006 and Jan-Feb 2007. And it’s decidedly different than a year ago.

U.S. Cavalry On Point in al-Anbar, Part Two:

Sheik Sattar al-Rishawi: We are proving that AQI can be defeated by joint Marine and Iraqi efforts.

We [the Sunnis] want to participate in the national government. We are an important part of this land, and we need to be heard. We are talking to our brothers in Fallujah, Taji, Zorba, and northeast Baghdad.

General Zilmer [the former commanding general in al-Anbar] was my friend. General Gaskin is my friend. We want the Marines to stay.

There is much to do here, but to write this nation off now, and to leave these people who are fighting for their country to fend for themselves, contrary to the opinions of on-the-ground military commanders (not the politicians on either side of the debate back home), would be a grave mistake.

Boris Yeltsin, we thank you

Yesterday, the news broke that Boris Yeltsin, first President of the Russian Federation, and the first Russian head of state since the murder of Czar Nicholas, died.

As we look back on his legacy, we find a checkered history and a Russia that to this day, remains torn between its authoritarian past and a Western future. But were it not for Yeltsin's defiance against the communist old guard, things would be far worse, and freedom less certain in Russia. Indeed, it is likely that without his bold stand upon the tank in 1991, a Soviet Empire would have continued on for a number of years, in the hands of the old generals who had attempted to ousted then-Premier Mikhail Gorbachev.

It would have been likely an empire under siege, continuing to rot from within and without, and losing client states to creeping popular resistance and democratic risings that had started to set in by the early 1990s. Those desperate enough to oust their leader and make a show of force in their own nation may well have responded to dissent with force elsewhere, and may even have challenged the West in a much larger conflict.

While much that has been learned about Soviet military capabilities suggested the threats may have been overrated, and that NATO may have prevailed in a land war in Europe, the conflict would have been so devastating as to be unthinkable. Even worse, such a conflict could have gone global, perhaps even nuclear. In such a world, the only wars that are truly won are those which are never fought.

Thanks to Yeltsin and his supporters, who had the courage to tear the rotting Soviet structure down before its collapse could imperil the West, as well as the rest of the world, we'll never know how bad it could have gotten. While freedom still faces great challenges in Russia, at least it is now a possibility - without Yeltsin, it is likely Russia, or the Soviet Union, would only face the certainty of tyranny, and the world an uncertain peace, or worse yet, certain war.

This one accomplishment for his people, as well as all of humanity, towers far above anything else he did, or did not, accomplish. For that, I am grateful.

May his memory be eternal.

Thomas Friedman: The Power of Green

In the Sunday edition of the New York Times, Thomas Friedman, always the deep thinker, offers some counsel on how the United States can shift it's global leadership focus in a post-Iraq environment:

One day Iraq, our post-9/11 trauma and the divisiveness of the Bush years will all be behind us — and America will need, and want, to get its groove back. We will need to find a way to reknit America at home, reconnect America abroad and restore America to its natural place in the global order — as the beacon of progress, hope and inspiration. I have an idea how. It’s called “green.”

Well, I want to rename “green.” I want to rename it geostrategic, geoeconomic, capitalistic and patriotic. I want to do that because I think that living, working, designing, manufacturing and projecting America in a green way can be the basis of a new unifying political movement for the 21st century. A redefined, broader and more muscular green ideology is not meant to trump the traditional Republican and Democratic agendas but rather to bridge them when it comes to addressing the three major issues facing every American today: jobs, temperature and terrorism.

There is a lot more to this, and well worth taking a look at, so go read what he has to say.

Google Earth and Darfur

Please take a moment to check this site out:

The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum has joined with Google in an unprecedented online mapping initiative. Crisis in Darfur enables more than 200 million Google Earth users worldwide to visualize and better understand the genocide currently unfolding in Darfur, Sudan. The Museum has assembled content—photographs, data, and eyewitness testimony—from a number of sources that are brought together for the first time in Google Earth.

Crisis in Darfur is the first project of the Museum’s Genocide Prevention Mapping Initiative that will over time include information on potential genocides allowing citizens, governments, and institutions to access information on atrocities in their nascent stages and respond.

Progress in Iraq? The McCaffrey Report

A report by retired General Barry McCaffrey, following a trip to Iraq in March, takes an honest look at the situation on the ground in Iraq, offering some assessments as to where things stand and what lies ahead. The report is honest about what is being faced, and suggest that while there is still much to be done, there are optimistic signs that our military forces are indeed making progress.

Anti-war activists who attack President Bush should consider that while he is the Commander-in-Chief, acting with the support of Congressional resoutions authorizing the use of military force in Iraq, the soldiers they claim to support are just as responsible for the decisions related to the ongoing military effort. Our soldiers are not robots, run by remote control, and this report indicates they are doing well at adapting and innovating to help the Iraqi Security Forces confront these threats. They can either criticize both, or support both, but criticism of one and not the other is intellectually dishonest.

I've excerpted McCaffrey's report, but you can click here to read it in full.

The Present Crisis:

We are at the "knee of the curve." Two million+ troops of the smallest active Army force since WWII have served in the war zone. Some active units have served three, four, or even five combat deployments. We are now routinely extending nearly all combat units in both Iraq and Afghanistan. These combat units are being returned to action in some cases with only 7-12 months of stateside time to re-train and re-equip. The current deployment requirement of 20+ brigades to Iraq and 2+ brigades in Afghanistan is not sustainable.

Iraq’s neighbors are a problem--- not part of the solution (with the exception of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait). They provide little positive political or economic support to the Maliki government.

Our allies are leaving to include the courageous and well equipped Brit’s—by January 2008 we will be largely on our own.

In summary, the US Armed Forces are in a position of strategic peril. A disaster in Iraq will in all likelihood result in awidened regional struggle which will endanger America’s strategic interests (oil) in the Mid-east for a generation. We will also produce another generation of soldiers who lack confidence in their American politicians, the media, and theirown senior military leadership.

Promising Developments:

Since the arrival of General David Petraeus in command of Multi-National Force Iraq--- the situation on the ground has clearly and measurably improved.

1st: The Maliki government has given the green light to prune out elements of the renegade Sadr organization in Baghdad. More than 600+ rogue leaders have been harvested by US and Iraqi special operations forces with the explicit or tacit consent of the government.

2nd: The US and Iraqi Forces have now dramatically changed their operational scheme ... The pre-operation planning and rehearsals were superb ... The Iraqi people are encouraged ---life is almost immediately springing back in many parts of the city. The murder rate has plummeted. IED attacks on US forces during their formerly vulnerable daily transits from huge US bases on the periphery of Baghdad are down.

3rd: The Iraqis have finally committed credible numbers of integrated Police and Army units to the battle of Baghdad ... The ISF formations are showing increased willingness to aggressively operate against insurgent/militia forces.

4th: There is a real and growing ground swell of Sunni tribal opposition to the Al Qaeda-in-Iraq terror formations. (90% Iraqi.) This counter-Al Qaeda movement in Anbar Province was fostered by brilliant US Marine leadership. There is now unmistakable evidence that the western Sunni tribes are increasingly convinced that they blundered badly by sitting out the political process.

5th: The equipment and resources for the Iraqi Security Forces has increased dramatically. The ISF has planned 2007 expenditures of more than $7.3 billion.

6th: There is a very sophisticated and carefully integrated approach by the Iraqi government and Coalition actors to defuse the armed violence from internal enemies and bring people into the political process. There are encouraging signs that the peace and participation message does resonate with many of the more moderate Sunni and Shia warring factions.

7th: US Combat forces are simply superb ... The joint integration of combat power is extremely effective ... These Marine and Army combat units rapidly employ synchronized air and ground combat power, use enormous fire discipline, are compassionate with vulnerable civilians, and move with explosive energy and courage when they pin a target.

8th: The US Tier One special operations capability is simply magic ... Some of these assault elements have done 200-300 takedown operations at platoon level ... We need to rethink how we view these forces. They are a national strategic system akin to a B1 bomber.

9th: The US Armed Forces logistic system is successfully providing 100% of required supplies, services, maintenance, medical support, and material for battle. Never in the history of warfare has a military force been more generously and effectively supported than in Iraq.

"The Way Ahead":

In my judgment, we can still achieve our objective of: a stable Iraq, at peace with its neighbors, not producing weapons of mass destruction, and fully committed to a law-based government. The courage and strength of the US Armed Forces still gives us latitude and time to build the economic and political conditions that might defuse the ongoing civil war. Our central purpose is to allow the nation to re-establish governance based on some loose federal consensus among the three major ethnic-factional actors. (Shia, Sunni, Kurd.)

We have very little time left. This President will have the remainder of his months in office beleaguered by his political opponents to the war. The democratic control of Congress and its vocal opposition can actually provide a helpful framework within which our brilliant new Ambassador Ryan Crocker can maneuver the Maliki administration to understand their diminishing options. It is very unlikely that the US political opposition can constitutionally force the President into retreat. However, our next President will only have 12 months or less to get Iraq straight before he/she is forced to pull the plug. Therefore, our planning horizons should assume that there are less than 36 months remaining of substantial US troop presence in Iraq.

News from Afghanistan & Iraq

Mike Burleson brings us thoughtful discussion of news and issues in Afghanistan and Iraq:

... growing cultural, economic and political progress in Afghanistan.

"The Afghan economy is booming at 12 percent growth rate a year. Fourteen billion [dollars] has been spent on aid since 2001. Six TV channels and a hundred free, uncensored publications are available to the people. Literacy is increasing rapidly. The ring road is now two-thirds complete. The 40,000 soldiers of the [Afghan National Army] are growing rapidly in numbers and capability. There are 45,000 NATO and U.S. troops in country. There is a functioning democracy with an elected Parliament, and a serious, dedicated Afghan president in office. Afghanistan can be a strategic victory in the struggle against terrorism. We are now on the right path."

... criticism by the Washington Post of the return of "business as usual" pork barrel politics by the House Democratic leadership to win a close vote on their anti-war budget resolution:

Altogether the House Democratic leadership has come up with more than $20 billion in new spending, much of it wasteful subsidies to agriculture or pork barrel projects aimed at individual members of Congress ... The legislation pays more heed to a handful of peanut farmers than to the 24 million Iraqis who are living through a maelstrom initiated by the United States, the outcome of which could shape the future of the Middle East for decades .... House Democrats are pressing a bill that has the endorsement of MoveOn.org but excludes the judgment of the U.S. commanders who would have to execute the retreat the bill mandates.

All good points, and well worth a read. Go check out Mike's blogsite.