An Old War Dogs Satellite Site


Wednesday, 18 July 2007
 

2007.07.18 Long War // Dhimm Perfidy Roundup

After All-Night Debate, Senate Rejects
Measure to Bring Troops Home From Iraq

WASHINGTON  —  The Senate rejected a plan Wednesday to bring home U.S. troops from Iraq by early next year after spending an all-night session debating whether to demand President Bush change the mission.

The 52-47 vote fell short of the 60 votes needed to cut off debate and move toward passage. Four Republicans voted with the Democrats, ...

Connecticut independent Sen. Joe Lieberman voted against the troop withdrawal plan. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who strongly supports the withdrawal approach, voted no as a technical move that allows him, under Senate rules, to bring the troop withdrawal plan back to a vote at a later date. ...

Below the fold:

  • Senate Democrats Lack Support From G.O.P. on Pullout

See also:


Senate Democrats Lack Support From G.O.P. on Pullout
Carl Hulse

WASHINGTON, July 17 — A handful of Republicans who have distanced themselves from President Bush on the war in Iraq refused Tuesday to back a plan to withdraw American troops from the conflict, leaving Senate Democrats short of the support needed to force a vote on their proposal.

As the Senate headed into an all-night session complete with cots in Capitol meeting rooms and an antiwar vigil across the street, some Republicans who have gone public with their complaints about the war strategy also weighed in against the Democratic withdrawal plan as ill advised and driven mainly by partisan considerations. ...

Contributed by Bill Faith on July 18, 2007 at 12:33 AM in Dem Dumbness, Dem Perfidy, Iraq, Islamism Delenda Est | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack


Tuesday, 17 July 2007
 

2007.07.17 Long War // Dhimm Perfidy Roundup

Below the fold:

  • Mitch McConnell: Dark Night of the Senate
  • Pace: US Weighs Larger 'Surge' in Iraq

See also:


Dark Night of the Senate; Stunting debate growth.
Mitch McConnell

While Republicans focus on the dangers posed by al Qaeda in Iraq, our long-term national-security interests in the Persian Gulf, and the warnings that the United Nations and the Baker-Hamilton Commission are issuing on the potential consequences of withdrawal, Democrats will spend the next 24 hours acting out what their staffers have referred to as a “publicity stunt.” They are staging a modern-day version of Jimmy Stewart’s round-the-clock filibuster from Mr. Smith Goes to Washington to wear down opponents of a firm deadline for withdrawal. The only problem: They are, in effect, filibustering their own bill. ...

Pace: US Weighs Larger 'Surge' in Iraq
Robert Burns

BAGHDAD (AP) - The U.S. military is weighing new directions in Iraq, including an even bigger troop buildup if President Bush thinks his "surge" strategy needs a further boost, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said Monday.

Marine Gen. Peter Pace revealed that he and the chiefs of the Army, Marine Corps, Navy and Air Force are developing their own assessment of the situation in Iraq, to be presented to Bush in September. That will be separate from the highly anticipated report to Congress that month by Gen. David Petraeus, the top commander for Iraq.

The Joint Chiefs are considering a range of actions, including another troop buildup, Pace said without making any predictions. He called it prudent planning to enable the services to be ready for Bush's decision.

The military must "be prepared for whatever it's going to look like two months from now," Pace said in an interview with two reporters traveling with him to Iraq from Washington.

"That way, if we need to plus up or come down" in numbers of troops in Iraq, the details will have been studied, he said.   ...



Contributed by Bill Faith on July 17, 2007 at 12:35 AM in Dem Dumbness, Dem Perfidy, Iraq, Islamism Delenda Est | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack


Saturday, 14 July 2007
 

2007.07.14 Long War // Dhimm Perfidy Roundup

A Crossroads For The Surge
Ed Morrissey

The Times of London reports on a crossroads in Jabour that demonstrates the successes and the dangers of the surge in Iraq. While the soldiers would prefer to be elsewhere, the efforts to close down lines of communication for al-Qaeda and other terrorists has created an "Iraqi surge" in the area -- the creation of a new police unit from tribal volunteers who want the momentum to stay against the terrorists. The tribal leaders remain cautious about cooperating too much with the Americans, however, because they are afraid we're leaving:

Below the fold:

  • Bush beats back another mutiny over Iraq

See also:

Bush beats back another mutiny over Iraq
By: John Bresnahan

For all the hearings and dramatic speeches, for all the votes and news conferences by House and Senate Democrats -- and some anti-war Republicans -- President Bush is still getting his way on the war in Iraq and will likely continue to, at least until September.

Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl, the third-ranking Republican in the Senate, summed up the stalemate in Congress over Iraq this way at a news conference Thursday:

“The story is that after all of the bluff and bluster and after all of the political machinations and the efforts to use the [2008] defense authorization bill for the political purposes that have been described here and the purpose of undermining the mission of our troops, at the end of the week, we're left where we were at the beginning – namely, we support the president's policy, we support [Army] Gen. [David] Petraeus' mission and we support the efforts of our troops.”

Contributed by Bill Faith on July 14, 2007 at 03:04 AM in Dem Dumbness, Dem Perfidy, Islamism Delenda Est | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack


Thursday, 14 June 2007
 

2007.06.14 Iraq/Iran Roundup
-- Special "Incompetence they name is Harry" editon

Harry Reid Calls Military Commanders Incompetent
Ed Morrissey

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid showed his support for the American military by calling two of its top leaders "incompetent". Pandering to liberal bloggers, Reid made the comments in explaining his strategy to make Republican Senators sick of voting on the Iraq war and bludgeoning them into declaring defeat:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid called Marine Gen. Peter Pace, the outgoing chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, "incompetent" during an interview Tuesday with a group of liberal bloggers, a comment that was never reported.

Reid made similar disparaging remarks about Army Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, said several sources familiar with the interview. ...

So Harry Reid, the man who couldn't get a supplemental spending bill completed in less than 108 days, is calling Pace and Petraeus incompetent.

That's the same Harry Reid who couldn't get the Democrats' "100 Hours" pledges to fruition in over 120 days and counting. In fact, this is the same Majority Leader that has led the least-accomplished session of Congress in a generation. ...

Scott Johnson: What label for Harry Reid?

Bill Frist: More Solutions, Less Name Calling

Don Surber: Perspective

Uncle Jimbo: Harry Reid, real men, and last nerves


Sabotage in Samarra 
Michelle Malkin

Bill Roggio rounds up news and analysis of the twin bombings of the al-Askaria mosque's remaining minarets this morning in Samarra. John Burns at the NYTimes reports on efforts to avert sectarian reprisals:

[A]fter Wednesday’s renewed attack on the shrine at Samarra, 75 miles north of Baghdad, appeals for calm by Shiite political and religious leaders, as well as by moderate Sunni politicians and the top two American officials in Iraq, appeared to have headed off the risk of a new sectarian convulsion, at least for now.

By nightfall, with emergency curfews in Baghdad and several other cities, and Iraqi forces moving in to protect mosques across the country, there were only scattered reports of reprisal attacks.

Roggio warns aptly: ...

Contributed by Bill Faith on June 14, 2007 at 03:42 PM in Dem Dumbness, Dem Perfidy, Iran, Iraq, Islamism Delenda Est | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack


Wednesday, 16 May 2007
 

2007.05.16 Dem Perfidy // Islamism Delenda Est Roundup

See previous: 2007.05.15 Dem Perfidy // Islamism Delenda Est Roundup

Below the fold, newest items at the top:

  • LTG Doug Lute Appointed War Czar
  • Getting the War Wrong... Again
  • Iraq withdrawal move thwarted in Senate
  • Obama and Clinton: Cut Off Funds for the Troops

*** *** Fold (but please don't spindle or mutilate) *** ***

LTG Doug Lute Appointed War Czar
By James Joyner

After a long search in which he was reportedly turned down by several four star generals, President Bush has found his war czar in the J3’s office: Army LTG Douglas E. Lute. Presuming he is confirmed by the Senate, “Lute would have the rank of assistant to the president and deputy national security adviser, and would report directly to the president. His job, which is part of a broader reorganization of the National Security Council staff responsible for Iraq and Afghanistan, would be to brief Mr. Bush every day on the two conflicts, and work with other government agencies — including the Pentagon and the State Department — to carry out policy.”

I expressed dubiousness about the whole idea of a war czar when it was first floated and the appointment of a 3-star who is currently running operations for the Joint Staff doesn’t win me over. ...

Jules Crittenden: Assume the Position

Phillip Carter: Doug Lute: Dream The Impossible Dream 

***

Getting the War Wrong... Again
Confederate Yankee

A chronic problem of news agencies reporting from Iraq is their apparent inability to separate sectarian violence--violence committed by one sect on another, typically Sunni to Shia, or Shia to Sunni--with the terrorist attacks instigated by al Qaeda and aligned groups.

al Qaeda will attack against anyone and everyone else, including their Sunni co-religionists. It is this propensity towards terrorism for terrorism's sake that has spurred both the Anbar and Diyala Awakening movements.

AFP today provides a prime example of the media mislabeling an act of violence, turning a terrorist attack into a sectarian attack, even when their own report indicates they got it wrong: ...

***

Iraq withdrawal move thwarted in Senate

WASHINGTON - The Senate on Wednesday rejected legislation that would cut off money for combat operations in Iraq after March 31, 2008.

The vote was a loss for Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis., and other Democrats who want to end the war. But the effort picked up support from members, including presidential hopefuls previously reluctant to limit war funding — an indication of the conflict's unpopularity among voters.

The proposal lost 29-67 on a procedural vote, falling 31 votes short of the necessary votes to advance.

The Senate also narrowly rejected a proposal by Republican moderates intended to restrict U.S. aid for Iraq, after Democratic leaders lashed out against the proposal as too weak. The 52-44 vote was widely supported by Republicans, but fell eight votes shy of the required 60.

The Senate agreed only on a nonbinding resolution expressing the need to pass a war spending bill by Memorial Day. That proposal passed by an 87-9 vote. ...

***

Obama and Clinton: Cut Off Funds for the Troops
Kim Priestap

I can't think of anything that undermines or disheartens our troops in harms way more than to hear two presidential candidates stand up and publicly declare that all funds that support the troops in Iraq should be cut off:

Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton separately declared their support Tuesday for a March 31, 2008, cutoff in funds for the Iraq war, two Democratic presidential front-runners abruptly shifting positions on a key issue.

The twin announcements came on the eve of the largely symbolic Senate vote on the cutoff and as Obama and Clinton compete for the support of anti-war activists.

Obama and Clinton are selling out our troops in exchange for support from anti-war activists. ...

That was yesterday. Today Clinton & Obama Vote To Cut Off Funds For Troops In Iraq (H/T: MM)

Contributed by Bill Faith on May 16, 2007 at 12:37 AM in Dem Dumbness, Dem Perfidy, Iraq, Islamism Delenda Est | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack


Wednesday, 09 May 2007
 

2007.05.09 Dem Perfidy // Islamism Delenda Est Roundup

See previous: 2007.05.08 Dem Perfidy // Islamism Delenda Est Roundup

Halfway down the road to hell,
In a shady meadow green,
Are the souls of all dead troopers camped
Near a good old-time canteen.
And this eternal resting place
Is known as Fiddler’s Green.
-Author Unknown (via Sgt Hook)

And there shall our warriors rejoice at the sight as the Dhimmicrats parade by in chains on the way to their eternal reward.

Pelosi threat to sue Bush over Iraq bill 

Below the fold, newest items at the top: 

  • US Embassy Attacked During Cheney Visit
  • How did they get here?
    Answer: Three came across the Mexican border
  • Tenet’s Tim Time
  • Bush Would Veto Democrats' New Iraq Bill
  • Does the LA Times know about the Fort Dix Six?
  • The John Doe at Circuit City
  • Jersey Jihadists, open borders, and the thanks we get
  • A Little Competence Would Be Nice
  • Democrats Move Closer To De-Funding
  • Some other good early morning reads
  • The political tornado in Greensburg
  • KS Gov tries her hand at disaster chasing
    Video added: Dingy Harry joins in after gov is debunked

*** ***     *** ***     *** ***     *** ***     *** ***     *** ***

US Embassy Attacked During Cheney Visit
Kim Priestap

The rocket attack did nothing to interrupt the vice president's activities in the embassy.

A rocket exploded near the US embassy in Baghdad on Wednesday, an Iraqi defence official said, during a visit by US Vice President Dick Cheney to the heavily fortified mission.

Smoke could be seen rising near the US compound shortly after the blast, which was heard at around 6:15 pm (1415 GMT). The Iraqi official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, could not say if there were any casualties.

Cheney's movements during his visit are being kept secret for security reasons, but the vice president later confirmed at at a press conference that "I spent today here basically in our embassy and military headquarters." ...

***

How did they get here?
Answer: Three came across the Mexican border

Michelle Malkin

So, what about the three illegal alien Jersey Jihadist suspects--the Duka brothers? Were they smuggled across the border or stowaways? That's what the feds are checking out now.

They're also checking to see if the three other accused jihadi plotters--one a naturalized US citizen, the other two green card holders--lied on their applications.

Yeah, that would be a shocker.

***

Update: Shocked, shocked...

Three brothers charged in the alleged Fort Dix terror plot have been living illegally in the U.S. for more than 23 years and were accepted as Americans by neighbors and friends who had no idea they would scheme to attack military bases and slaughter GIs. ...

***

Tenet’s Tim Time
By Fred Thompson

I watched George Tenet’s interview with Tim Russert on Meet the Press Sunday. Tenet’s new book gives his version of history leading up to September 11. It’s almost obligatory nowadays; after you have been in the inner circles of an administration, you write a “tell all” book, including private conversations with even the president himself.

I haven’t read the book, but I have followed the media accounts. My attention was drawn to Tenet’s statements that al Qaeda is here and waiting and that they wish nothing more than to be able to see a mushroom cloud above the United States.

Naturally, the media emphasis is not on that.  ...

***

Bush Would Veto Democrats' New Iraq Bill 
By Anne Flaherty and Lolita C. Baldor (H/T: Lorie Byrd)

WASHINGTON (AP) - The White House threatened on Wednesday to veto a proposed House bill that would pay for the war only through July—a limit Defense Secretary Robert Gates warned would be disastrous.

The warnings came as Democratic leaders wrestled with how to support the troops but still challenge President Bush on the war. Bush has requested more than $90 billion to sustain the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan through September.  ...

Lorie has more here.

***

***

Does the LA Times know about the Fort Dix Six?
Don Surber

Timing is everything in journalism and comedy. The day after the FBI prevents the biggest terrorism threat since 9/11, the LA Times ran an editorial smacking President Bush for “eavesdropping” on Americans:

When the Bush White House proposes changing a law that protects Americans from unchecked electronic surveillance, civil libertarian knees begin to jerk. And understandably so. ...

Blah, blah, blah. The Washington Post, New York Times and the rest also ignored the Fort Dix Six. Readers read this for what it is: A failure to credit the FBI with an obvious success.

***

The John Doe at Circuit City
Michelle Malkin

I said it yesterday. I repeat it today: Thank you, whistleblower. Now, we know a bit more. He works at Circuit City:

A male employee who works at Circuit City behind the Moorestown Mall is the unsung hero that first enabled authorities to foil the Fort Dix terror plot.

Circuit City corporate spokesman Jim Babb confirmed this morning that a current employee was asked by one of the alleged terrorists to dub a Jihadist training VHS cassette into a DVD...

***

Jersey Jihadists, open borders, and the thanks we get
Michelle Malkin

Yesterday morning, I noted early on that Fort Dix had been a refuge for ethnic Albanians from Kosovo. As I suspected, Agron Abdullahu, one of the Jersey Jihadist suspects, was indeed one of the thousands of ethnic Albanian refugees from Kosovo whom we welcomed there in 1999 (hat tip: Allah):

A trained sniper during the war in Kosovo, Abdullahu and his family were among thousands given safe haven in the U.S. under the Clinton administration to protect them from the Serbs. For months, they would be housed in refugee camps at Ft. Dix, a circumstance which now points to a terribly ironic twist.

Terribly ironic? Or sadly predictable?

WPVI interviewed one of Abdullahu's co-workers:

"He never really came out and said he had a hatred towards Americans and I told him many times, 'look, you would have been left there if it wasn't for us helping you out.' If Clinton didn't bring them in, he never would have had the chance that he had. This is how he repays us," [Bob] Watts said.

Indeed. That's the theme of my syndicated column today. Here you go: ...

***

A Little Competence Would Be Nice
Confederate Yankee

It should probably come as no small wonder that the majority of the American people are against the War in Iraq; getting faulty misleading or inaccurate or even purposefully biased information does that.

Time and again and again, our soldiers and Marines tell us that the war they are fighting in Iraq is not the one being reported in the professional media.

Karin Brulliard's article in today's Washington Post is a prime example, starting with the headline, "Bombs Kill 20 in Sunni Insurgent Stronghold."

It may come as a bit of a shock to both Brulliard and her WaPo editors, but Ramadi has not been an insurgent "stronghold" by any practical definition for months.

***

Democrats Move Closer To De-Funding
Ed Morrissey

The Democrats have moved closer to using their actual Constitutional power to defund the Iraq war in a compromise bill being floated in the House. In the new supplemental, funding for the troops in Iraq would only be unconditional for two months. After that, it would cease entirely unless the Iraqis passed an oil revenue sharing plan and other restructuring bills that have not progressed as planned:

A House Democratic proposal introduced yesterday that would give President Bush half of the money he has requested for the war effort, with a vote in July on whether to approve the rest, hinges on progress in meeting political benchmarks that Iraq has thus far found difficult to achieve....

One concession has to be made, which is that the Democrats have finally started to work within their Constitutional authority. Prior plans used elaborate ruses to force the President to end the war by juggling troop requirements and the like, all of which infringed on his authority as commander-in-chief of the armed forces. Hillary Clinton has begun to pursue an equally noxious violation of the Constitution by attempting to revoke the original authorization for the war, which she and other Democrats claim the President could not veto. It would amount to a diktat by the legislative branch, one about which the Supreme Court would have to squelch its laughter before throwing it out with great force. ...

I hope when the mushroom clouds eventually start rising above the U.S. Reid, Pelosi and Murtha are together so they have a couple of minutes to congratulate each other on how well they handled the war just before they die. Three would be OK. Anything longer is more than they deserve.

(Update) Don't miss Ed's follow-up post here.

***

Some other good early morning reads (I might or might not find time for excerpts later):

***

The political tornado in Greensburg
Michelle Malkin

President Bush heads to Greensburg, Kansas tomorrow to tour the devastation from the recent tornado.

Meanwhile, the political hurricane is still swirling in the wake of Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius' smackdown over a claimed National Guard shortage that she blames on the Iraq war. ...

See also:

Contributed by Bill Faith on May 9, 2007 at 01:24 AM in Caring about our troops, Dem Dumbness, Dem Perfidy, Iraq, Islamism Delenda Est | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack


Tuesday, 08 May 2007
 

2007.05.08 Dem Perfidy // Islamism Delenda Est Roundup

See previous: 2007.05.07 Dem Perfidy // Islamism Delenda Est Roundup

Justice: Islamist Plot To Attack Fort Dix
Ed Morrissey

The US Attorney's office in New Jersey says that a raid yesterday netted six radical Islamists in the Garden State before they had a chance to conduct a terrorist attack. Their target -- Fort Dix (via Hot Air):

Six people were arrested on Monday in connection with an alleged plot to murder soldiers at Fort Dix, the U.S. attorney's office said.

Michael Drewniak, a spokesman for the U.S. Attorney's Office in New Jersey, said the men are from the former Yugoslavia and were planning to "kill as many soldiers as possible." Five of them lived in Cherry Hill, he said. ...

Michelle Malkin has more here, Allahpundit's tracking the case here, PJM has coverage here.  Unsurprisingly, Bob Owens has some of the best coverage you're going to find here. Kim Priestap also has good coverage. Dan Riehl: Duka, Duka, Duka, Mohamad Jihad.

***

Jules Crittenden points out:

Another good reason to round up and deport all illegals, “immigrant” and otherwise, wherever we find them.  An illegal immigrant who has been detained and/or deported is one who won’t be driving drunk, committing sexual assaults, murders and burglaries, or planning jihad here.

***

Michelle has lots more here. Don't miss Dan's Riehl's update here.   

Below the fold, newest items at the top:

  • Should We Deal With the (Lesser) Devil?
  • Iranian Weapons. American Lives.
  • House Democrats Unveil New Iraq Proposal
  • Ditch The Accordion
  • White House, Kansas governor argue over storm response
  • Signed, signed, everything is signed...
  • Kansas Governor: Iraq War Slowed Response to Tornado
  • Kathleen Sebelius' Political Disaster

*** ***     *** ***     *** ***     *** ***     *** ***     *** ***

Should We Deal With the (Lesser) Devil?
Hatched by Dafydd ab Hugh

AP raises a fascinating question: Should we allow members of the Mahdi Militia to guard a very important Shiite mosque from al-Qaeda attack? (They overtly phrase it as a "dilemma," turning a question into a covert attack on the counterinsurgency strategy, in my opinion.)

In Kazimiyah, a densely packed [northern Baghdad] neighborhood of wooden shops and cheap hotels for Shiite pilgrims, the Americans and their Iraqi partners have opted for militia help to protect the shimmering, blue-domed shrine [of "the mosque of Imam Kadhim"].

With tacit American approval, plainclothes militiamen loyal to anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr set up impromptu checkpoints and patrol alleys day and night near the mosque.

The Americans believe that tolerating a discreet role for the Mahdi Army, which U.S. officers refer to by its Arabic acronym JAM [for Jaish al Mahdi, army of the rightly-guided one, or of the 12th Imam -- probably the latter], is better than either picking a fight with the militia or taking the blame if Sunni extremists manage a repeat of the February 2006 bombing of another Shiite shrine in Samarra.

Note that in areas like Kazimiyah and Sadr City, it's virtually impossible to wield any community influence without joining either the Mahdi Militia or the Badr Organization... just as in Germany in the 1930s, there were many civilians who joined the Nazi Party because it was the only way to get ahead (think Oskar Schindler).

Thus we must carefully distinguish between militia members who are actually bloody assassins -- and those who are just "go along to get along" businessmen with no overarching violent agenda.

That caveat accepted, I say it's a very close call... but in these particuar circumstances, with the horrific response that the destruction of that mosque would generate, I must side with the commanders on the ground and say Yes.

Let me convince you...

***

Iranian Weapons. American Lives.
By Richard Miniter

BAGHDAD—Maj. Martin Weber, an explosives expert, is trying to walk through a political mine field with me.

As with an ordinary mine field, you have to be very careful where you put your emphasis. Stress the wrong truth and either the left or the right wants to blow you up.

Here at Camp Victory, a sprawling concrete and razor wire American base that wraps around Baghdad International Airport, Maj. Weber was trying to explain how to negotiate that mine field. On the one side he wanted me to know me that the captured weapons on the table before us were — definitely, no doubt about it, absolutely — from Iran. On the other hand, he avoided drawing the obvious conclusion that Iran is supplying America’s enemies inside Iraq.

That simple and obvious conclusion would anger the Democratic leadership in Congress, much of the press corp, and a large swarth of the antiwar set.

Bear this is mind, when you watch this exclusive Pajamas Media video shot in Iraq. The video offers startling new evidence of Iran’s involvement in the insurgency. It is the first up-close, online video showing captured Iranian weapons. These particular weapons have not been shown to the public before. ...

***

House Democrats Unveil New Iraq Proposal 

WASHINGTON (AP) - House Democratic leaders planned to brief party members Tuesday on new legislation that would fund the Iraq war through July, then give Congress the option of cutting off money after that if conditions do not improve.

If members agree to back the plan as expected, a vote on the new war spending bill could come as early as this week. The proposal, pitched last week by Rep. David Obey, D-Wis., was first disclosed Thursday by The Associated Press.

Republicans immediately dismissed the Democratic proposal as unfairly rationing funds needed in combat and said their members would not support it.

Democrats "should not treat our men and women in uniform like they are children who are getting a monthly allowance," said Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio, his party's leader.

Added Rep. Adam Putnam, R-Fla., after a GOP caucus meeting Tuesday: "It's a irresponsible approach. You do not fund wars 60 days at a time." ...

The new version is likely to meet resistance in the Senate. Several Senate Democrats said they would oppose a short-term funding bill because it leaves open the question of whether troops will get the resources they need after July.

"There's the question of why it wasn't fully funded," said Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb. ...

***

Kinda sorta related to this post if you consider how big a part of Sarko's time is going to have to be invested in trying to pacify Paristan. Jules also raises some good questions about whether France will finally step up to the plat in the global war on islamism:

Ditch The Accordion 
A word of unsolicited advice to Nicolas Sarkozy.
Jules Crittenden (H/T: JC)

There’s a great deal of justified excitement about your election, Mr. Sarkozy.

For starters, the French people have shown themselves not to be completely enamored by flash and false promises by rejecting Ségolène Royal, and they’ve chosen by a comfortable margin to elect you, someone who’s being called a French Thatcher, a French Reagan, who wants to reassert France in the world and restore a reality-based economy.

I don’t particularly give a damn about your economy. But it is an important issue for us, for Europe and for the world. France’s deeply entrenched socialism and its fearfulness about alienating the Muslim immigrant masses risk making it a third-world nation, ultimately a failed state we may need invade (again) someday. You have shown you are interested in taking on French labor and willing to stand up against extremism in France’s Muslim immigrant community. ...

***

White House, Kansas governor argue over storm response

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The White House fought back Tuesday against criticism from Kansas' governor that National Guard deployments to Iraq are slowing the response to last week's devastating tornado.

White House press secretary Tony Snow said the fault was Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius'.

In a spat reminiscent of White House finger-pointing at Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco after the federal government's botched response to Hurricane Katrina, Snow rapped Sebelius for not following procedure to find gaps and then asking the federal government to fill them.

"If you don't request it, you're not going to get it," he said. ...

Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback also disputed Sebelius after visiting the destroyed town on Monday. Brownback, a Republican candidate for president, said local officials and the Kansas National Guard commander all told him they have the resources needed to respond.

"That's what really got me, is her saying that," Brownback said of Sebelius. ...

***

Signed, signed, everything is signed...
By Jay Tea

Yesterday Captain Ed discussed the possibility of Congress repealing its Authorization for Use of Military Force in Iraq, essentially un-declaring the war and forcing an end to our involvement. The question the good captain brings up is an interesting one: can Congress do this on its own, or must it submit it to President Bush for his approval (or, more realistically, his veto)?

This sort of thing was the crux of a couple of technothrillers I read a few years ago, "Balance Of Power" and "The Price Of Power." I know it's an odd place to get information, but several very fascinating Constitutional issues were raised and explored -- including the issue of declaring war.

The Constitution is very clear: Congress has the sole power to declare war. Since it is an exclusive power of Congress, like impeachment, it can be argued that it does not need presidential approval.

That argument falls on two points, however. The first is Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution: ...

Seems to me we should all be writing our congresscritters encouraging them to vote for deauthorization. Then in the months or years it take the courts to sort things out W can go ahead and run the war however he pleases.

***

Kansas Governor: Iraq War Slowed Response to Tornado

GREENSBURG, Kansas —  The government's response to a tornado that destroyed a Kansas town and claimed the lives of at least nine people was undermined by ongoing National Guard deployments to Iraq, Kansas' governor said.

The massive tornado — a Category F-5 with wind estimated at 205 mph — was part of a weekend of violent storms across the Plains that killed at least 11 people across Kansas and demolished 95 percent of Greensburg, a town of 1,500 residents.

"I don't think there is any question if you are missing trucks, Humvees and helicopters that the response is going to be slower," Gov. Kathleen Sebelius said. "The real victims here will be the residents of Greensburg, because the recovery will be at a slower pace."

Sebelius said she would address the issue with President George W. Bush when he arrives in Greensburg to tour the damage on Wednesday. White House spokesman Tony Snow rejected the criticism, saying the National Guard had equipment positioned around the country to respond to disasters when requested by states. ...

Yeah, and ... and, besides that, if Chimpy McHitlerburton hadn't repealed that there Kyoto treaty there wouldn't even have been a tornado. Ain't that right, Kathleen.

***

Kathleen Sebelius' Political Disaster
Confederate Yankee

wonder just how accurate this headline is: Iraq War Hampers Kansas Cleanup.

The rebuilding effort in tornado-ravaged Greensburg, Kansas, likely will be hampered because some much-needed equipment is in Iraq, said that state’s governor.

Governor Kathleen Sebelius said much of the National Guard equipment usually positioned around the state to respond to emergencies is gone. She said not having immediate access to things like tents, trucks and semitrailers will really handicap the rebuilding effort.

The Greensburg administrator estimated that 95 percent of the town of 1500 was destroyed by Friday's tornado.

The Kansas National Guard has about 40 percent of the equipment it is allotted because much of it has been sent to Iraq.

It is true, as Marc Danziger notes, that Gov. Kathleen Sebelius said just weeks ago that:

...she fears deployments of Kansas National Guard troops and equipment could hurt the state’s ability to react to disasters on the homefront.

In the same KCBS article cited above, Kansas Rep. Lee Tafanelli (R), a member of the Kansas National Guard, notes that that Kansas Army National Guard still retained 70-80 percent of its manpower. ...

Contributed by Bill Faith on May 8, 2007 at 12:27 AM in Dem Dumbness, Dem Perfidy, Iran, Iraq, Islamism Delenda Est | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack


Monday, 07 May 2007
 

2007.05.07 Dem Perfidy // Islamism Delenda Est Roundup

See previous: 2007.05.06 Dem Perfidy // Islamism Delenda Est Roundup

What Mandate? 
Tom Maguire

I was actually reading Frank Rich this morning, which is a clear indicator of the depths to which my morale has sunk, and I stumbled across this claim that the election was a mandate for the cut and run crowd:

Unlike Vietnam, Iraq is not in the past: the war escalates even as all this finger-pointing continues. Very little has changed between the fourth anniversary of “Mission Accomplished” this year and the last. Back then, President Bush cheered an Iraqi “turning point” precipitated by “the emergence of a unity government.” Since then, what’s emerged is more Iraqi disunity and a major leap in the death toll. That’s why Americans voted in November to get out.

This claim that the November election result was a call to disarm has been made elsewhere - I noticed it in a recent Times story and heard it at a recent dinner party, but I can't find links to either one.

But not so fast!  Back before the ballots were cast, the Dem leadership was quite clear in their strategy - their pre-election plan was to refrain from offering a plan on Iraq,  ...

While you're in the neighborhood, don't miss A Babbling Brook Called "Hillary".

Below the fold, newest items at the top:

  • French Riots, Right On Cue
  • Report: Saudis, US sponsoring covert action against Iran
  • Update: How Many Cars Torched? (Media Lies)
  • Iraqis vs al Qaeda in Anbar

*** ***     *** ***     *** ***     *** ***     *** ***     *** ***

French Riots, Right On Cue
Ed Morrissey

After the election of Nicolas Sarkozy, many analysts expected unrest in the banlieus, the Muslim ghettoes that have percolated with unrest for the last several years. Overnight, the French have seen hundreds of cars burnt and hundreds of rioters arrested (via Memeorandum):

French police have arrested a total of 592 people across the country as bands of rioters protested conservative Nicolas Sarkozy's presidential election victory Sunday, French media reported.

The police said a total of 730 vehicles were torched and 28 police officers were injured in violent incidents from Sunday night to Monday morning. Police fought stone-throwing rioters with tear gas, but it was not clear how many rioters were injured, according to Radio France.

Segolene Royal deserves some blame for this. She tried playing the fear card in the week before the runoff that made Sarkozy the new president, and signalled the would-be rioters that the expected response would be chaos and destruction. The French do not need much of a push to demonstrate in passionate terms, and the warning of Royal that Sarkozy's election would lead to riots could also be seen as expert analysis -- but one might think that a person vying for national leadership would have shown more discretion. ...

***

Report: Saudis, US sponsoring covert action against Iran
Michael Roston

The governments of Saudi Arabia and the United States are working with other states in the Middle East to sponsor covert action against Iran, according to a report in this month's edition of The Atlantic. The report also suggests that covert attacks may occur against Iran's oil sector.

David Samuels, in a lengthy article on Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's diplomatic initiatives in the Middle East, reports that the US is promoting a campaign against Iran that includes covert action. ...

***

Update: How Many Cars Torched? (Media Lies)
Charles Johnson (H/T: Michelle Malkin)

Not only did the Associated Press bury their report that 367 cars had been torched in France, now it turns out that the media have been lying about the violence.

Because the actual number of cars destroyed by “youths” last night was 730—about twice the number reported by the AP.

This Reuters article also says 78 policemen were injured by the “youths,” and the violence was much more widespread than we’ve been told: Police hurt in French election violence.

[...]

This comes as no surprise, because French media have openly stated that they will cover up the true extent of the violence. And the French Constitutional Council recently passed a law criminalizing the reporting of acts of violence by anyone other than professional journalists.

See related: "...pour leur dire qu'ils peuvent compter sur notre amitié"

***

Contributed by Bill Faith on May 7, 2007 at 01:19 AM in Dem Dumbness, Dem Perfidy, France, Iraq, Islamism Delenda Est | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack


Friday, 04 May 2007
 

2007.05.04 Dem Perfidy // Islamism Delenda Est Roundup

See previous: 2007.05.03 Dem Perfidy // Islamism Delenda Est Roundup

Below the fold, newest items at the top:

  • Investigative report: Iraqi PM tied to Iranian Revolutionary Guards, Mahdi Army
  • Don't Abandon Us
  • Iran's ad should send shivers
  • Commander in Chief Kennedy
  • The real Dana Milbank resurfaces

Clinton Proposes Vote to Reverse Authorizing War 

WASHINGTON, May 3 — Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton proposed Thursday that Congress repeal the authority it gave President Bush in 2002 to invade Iraq, injecting presidential politics into the Congressional debate over financing the war.

Mrs. Clinton’s proposal brings her full circle on Iraq — she supported the war measure five years ago — and it sharpens her own political positioning at a time when Democrats are vying to confront the White House.

“It is time to reverse the failed policies of President Bush and to end this war as soon as possible,” Mrs. Clinton said as she joined Senator Robert C. Byrd, Democrat of West Virginia, in calling for a vote to end the authority as of Oct. 11, the fifth anniversary of the original vote.

Her stance emerged just as Congressional leaders and the White House opened delicate negotiations over a new war-financing measure to replace the one that Mr. Bush vetoed Tuesday.

Even if Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Byrd succeed in their effort, it is not clear whether President Bush would have to withdraw troops, or if he could resist by claiming that Congress cannot withdraw its earlier authorization but instead has to deny money for the war to achieve that result.  ...

*** ***     *** ***     *** ***     *** ***     *** ***     *** ***

Investigative report: Iraqi PM tied to
Iranian Revolutionary Guards, Mahdi Army
Bryan Preston

The invaluable MEMRI has translated a report in the Egyptian press that contends that Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has direct operational ties to the Mahdi Army and, through them, to the Iranian Revolutionary Guards. If it’s true, he would be tied to the forces who are directly responsible for killing approximately 170 US troops via EFP IEDs.

The first document, labeled “secret, personal, and urgent,” is a January 2007 letter from Al-Maliki’s office to the Iranian Embassy in Baghdad, with copies to the presidency of the [Shi’ite party] Supreme Council of the Islamic Revolution in Iraq and to the Al-Shahid Al-Sadr organization.” [2] In it, Al-Maliki requests that the commanders of the Mahdi Army, who have ties with the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, be pulled off the Iraqi frontlines, in order to protect them from being arrested or killed. The following is a translation of the document:  ...

Connections between Maliki and Sadr have been rumored to exist for a while now. Maliki’s exile time during the Saddam years lends weight to the possibility that he would be connected to the Iranians, since he was connected to them then. But to be connected to them now, when they’re driving much of the violence in Baghdad and elsewhere? When Iran’s short-term goals are to ramp up the pressure on the US via terrorist attacks, so the Democrats will force a retreat from Iraq, and its long-term goals are to become the regional power?

Yeah, it’s still plausible. All too plausible.

***

Don't Abandon Us
By Hoshyar Zebari (H/T: Kim Priestap)

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.

These small but significant snippets of normality are overshadowed by acts of gross violence, which fuel the opinion of some that Iraq is in a downward spiral. The Iraqi people are indeed suffering tremendous hardships and making grave sacrifices -- but daily life goes on for 7 million Baghdadis struggling to take back their capital and country.

Today, at an international summit on the future of Iraq in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, my government will ask the international community to maintain its engagement in our country to help us achieve our goals of security and stability. We recognize that our request conflicts with a plethora of voices decrying the situation in Iraq and those in the British and American publics who seek an expeditious withdrawal from a war they claim is all but lost.

So why should the world remain engaged in Iraq? ...

***

Iran's ad should send shivers
The notice, appearing worldwide, sought bids for constructing two nuclear power plants.
Claudia Rosett (H/T: Scott Johnson)

Among the surreal events becoming ever more frequent in the nuclear showdown with Iran was the appearance of an ad last week in the International Herald Tribune, inviting bids to build "Two Large Scale Nuclear Power Plants in Iran."

The ad ran in all editions of the paper, which is owned by the New York Times, and reaches more than 240,000 readers in more than 180 countries. Somehow this outrageous solicitation escaped the notice of major world media. That's remarkable, at a time when Iran has been flagrantly defying United Nations Security Council resolutions calling on Tehran to halt its nuclear bomb program - with both the U.N. and U.S. Treasury calling for a freeze on the assets worldwide of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, on behalf of which the ad was placed.

The ad did get noticed in Israel, a country that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has said he would like to see wiped off the map. Bloggers picked up the story, and a scanned version of the ad began circulating, with commentary, on the Internet. It smacked of Iranian nose-thumbing so extreme one had to wonder if it was a spoof.

It's no joke. ...

See also: 'Herald Tribune' defends Iran nuke ad

***

Commander in Chief Kennedy
James Taranto

"Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton proposed Thursday that Congress repeal the authority it gave President Bush in 2002 to invade Iraq," the New York Times reports:

Mrs. Clinton's proposal brings her full circle on Iraq--she supported the war measure five years ago--and it sharpens her own political positioning at a time when Democrats are vying to confront the White House. ...

The question could prompt a constitutional debate over war powers that only the federal courts could resolve.

Mostly, Mrs. Clinton appeared to be trying to claim a new leadership position among the Democratic presidential candidates against the war in Iraq.

So let's see. Mrs. Clinton supported the war when it was popular, then changed her position after public opinion shifted. She is now pretending Congress can put the toothpaste back into the tube by "repealing" the authority for an intervention that has already occurred. The legislation she is proposing has little chance of passing, since significant Republican support would be needed to override a veto. If it did pass, no one has any clue what practical effect it would have. It would be left to federal judges to sort that out.

Mrs. Clinton is seeking the presidency, so maybe the idea here is to make the job easier by delegating her commander-in-chief duties to Justice Anthony Kennedy. It's hard to see how the Times can keep a straight face while calling this "leadership," though.

***

The real Dana Milbank resurfaces 
Paul Mirengoff

When I cancelled my subsription to the Washington Post in 2004, the woman on the other end of the phone asked me, as she was required to do, what my reason was. I responded, "Dana Milbank." Milbank's abominable coverage of President Bush wasn't my only reason, of course, but it pretty much captured the problem.

These days, I wouldn't cite Milbank. He's left the Whtie House beat and set up shop on page 2 where he produces "human comedy" style reporting in which he takes mostly deft shots at politicians from both parties, though more Republicans than Democrats.

Evidently, though, Milbank's hatred of President Bush has not abated, and today he produced a disgraceful column in which he attacks Bush for once again playing the al Qaeda card in Iraq. Milbank declares: "The man who four years ago admitted 'no evidence' of an Iraqi role in the Sept. 11 attacks now finds solid evidence of a role in Iraq by the Sept. 11 hijackers." Milbank goes on to suggest that Bush's argument flies in the face of the Pentagon inspector general's conclusion that al Qaeda had no ties to Iraq before the U.S. invasion. He thus engages in the absurd pretense that there's a contradiction between the view (which itself isn't quite true) that al Qaeda wasn't in Iraq in 2002 and the view that it's there today.

But surely Milbank understands that the level of contact between al Qaeda and Iraq prior to our invasion tells us nothing about the extent of al Qaeda's presence in Iraq today. Bush's argument, as reported by Milbank, is that we should remain in Iraq and "fight against the same international terrorist network that attacked us on 9/11." It's a pretty good argument, good enough that Milbank wants to change the subject and talk about whether al Qaeda was in Iraq before 9/11. But whatever was true pre-invasion, no one seems to dispute that al Qaeda is there now. The question is whether we will remain to take it on, or give up that fight.

Milbank makes a second argument which is as bad as the first.  ...

Contributed by Bill Faith on May 4, 2007 at 02:32 AM in Dem Dumbness, Dem Perfidy, Iraq, Islamism Delenda Est | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack


Wednesday, 02 May 2007
 

2007.05.02 Dem Perfidy // Islamism Delenda Est Roundup

See previous: 2007.05.01 Dem Perfidy // Islamism Delenda Est Roundup

Below the fold:

  • No safe way for U.S. to leave Iraq, experts warn
  • Debutantes of Defeat
  • House Fails to Override Bush Veto of Iraq War Spending Bill
  • Even A Liberal Notices: Democrats Are
    "Illiterate" And Willfully, Cynically Blind About Iraq
  • The mask slips in Palestine
  • Now What?
  • Freed UK sailors back in the Persian Gulf
  • If It’s Not Lost, How Can We Win?
  • If Entering Iraq Was a Mistake, Leaving Is Worse
  • Bush Keeps Vow to Veto War Funding Bill
  • The 'new' Democrats and the war
  • They Are Not Serious. They Are Not Patriotic.

***

Another Grunt’s Rant on Iraq
Jules Crittenden

George Bush vetoed the surrender bill with a pen given to him by the father of Marine Cpl. Dustin Derga, killed in Anbar May 8, 2005. Robert Derga wanted him to use the pen to veto that bill, and called to make sure he was going to do it.

Larry Gwin, former XO of 2/7 Cav, veteran of the Ia Drang battles of 1965 and author of “Baptism, A Vietnam Memoir,” is very familiar with death in war. He has not been a great fan of this war but has stated all along that once troops are committed, the nation must be behind them to the end. He circulated the following among some friends the other day and said I could run it. The Democratic-controlled Congress is giving Gwin a flashback. I’m guessing he’s not the only one:   

Another Grunt’s Rant on Iraq

Am I wrong, or am I wrong?  It looks like there’s going to be a Constitutional crisis on the war in Iraq –  a showdown between Congress and the President. Congress has voted to tie military funding to a timetable for withdrawal, and the President has vowed to veto their bill.  That will put the burden back on Congress to reconsider legislation that will fund the war, i.e. support the troops, and if they refuse, the Defense Department’s budget is going to take a hit.

The Democrats insist that what they’re doing is obeying the will of the people, as demonstrated by the November elections that gave them a majority in both houses.  What a crock that is!  There never was any referendum on the war– just a straight election for representatives in the House and Senate, some of whom supported the war, and some of whom didn’t.  It seems to me that the Democrats, who have a majority in both houses of Congress for the first time since 1994, now think they can ram a surrender down our throats in the name of the people, even though there has never been a specific referendum on making a stand or withdrawing in Iraq.  So, who is right?

We’ll see. ...

What the Democrats are doing is akin to what we did in Vietnam by signing a peace agreement with the North Vietnamese, tantamount to bailing out on our allies’ without their concurrence, then departing with absolutely no intention of ever coming back, no matter what the North Vietnamese did. Congress also cut off financial support for South Vietnam after our departure.  And sure as hell, as soon as we left, the North Vietnamese attacked south in full force, and for two more years, the two sides pounded each other until the more determined North, supported by Russia and China, won the war.  And we veterans here at home who had fought and seen so many of our buddies die over there, had to keep our mouths shut and just take it.

And we felt the shame of defeat.  Not a defeat we’d suffered, but a defeat of our national will.  And that enraged me and made me feel ashamed.  It took me more than forty years to get over it, and I still simmer when I think about it.

And we’re going to do it again, thanks to the Democrats in Congress. ...

Read the whole thing and don't forget to follow the links to learn more about the gentleman who wrote it.

*** ***     *** ***     *** ***     *** ***     *** ***     *** ***

(I've moved an item that I originally posted here to my 5/3 roundup.)

Debutantes of Defeat
Contributed by Russ Vaughn

In 2003 they came to the Ball,
For some merry martial dancing;
Girlishly giggling in the Capitol hall,
Finding chords of war music entrancing.
Filled with excitement, throwing care to the wind,
DebiDems wanted Bush to be tough,
So the ladies signed on for a Ball with no end,
Without thinking it just might get rough. ...

***

House Fails to Override Bush Veto of Iraq War Spending Bill 

WASHINGTON —  The Democratic-controlled House failed Wednesday to override President Bush's veto of an Iraqi war spending bill with timetables for troop withdrawals. Lawmakers went directly to the White House to talk about a new version.

"Yesterday was a day that highlighted differences," Bush said. "Today is the day where we can work together to find common ground."

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi sat on either side of the president. The Democratic leaders were stone-faced as Bush made his brief statement. The White House meeting started late, apparently delayed by the failed override attempt.

"I'm confident we can reach agreement," Bush said.

The 222-203 vote, far short of the two-thirds majority needed for a veto override, occurred just ahead of a White House meeting that Bush called to begin compromise talks with congressional leaders of both parties on new legislation to finance the war, now in its fifth year.

Voting to override Bush's veto were 220 Democrats and two Republicans. Voting to sustain the veto were 196 Republicans and seven Democrats. ...

***

Even A Liberal Notices: Democrats Are
"Illiterate" And Willfully, Cynically Blind About Iraq

Ace of Spades

... Maybe it was a slip of the tongue. But, when Nancy Pelosi confessed last year that she felt "sad" about President Bush's claims that Al Qaeda operates in Iraq, she seemed to be disputing what every American soldier in Iraq, every Al Qaeda operative, and anyone who reads a newspaper already knew to be true. (When I questioned him about Pelosi's assertion, a U.S. officer in Ramadi responded, incredulously, that Al Qaeda had just held a parade in his sector.) Perhaps the House speaker was alluding to the discredited claim that Al Qaeda operated in Iraq before the war. Perhaps. But the insinuation that Al Qaeda's depredations in Iraq might be something other than what they appear to be has become a staple of the congressional debate over Iraq. Thus, to buttress his own case for withdrawal, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said, "We have to change course [away from Iraq] and turn our attention back to the war on Al Qaeda and their allies"--the clear message being that neither plays much of a role there.

What is going on here? There are two possibilities: First, Reid and Pelosi could be purposefully minimizing the stakes in Iraq. Or, second, they don't know what they're talking about. My guess is some combination of the two. Political maneuvering certainly contributes to the everyday pollution of Iraq discourse. But a lot of the pollution derives from legislators being functionally illiterate about the war over which Congress now intends to preside....

***

The mask slips in Palestine
By TigerHawk (H/T: Jules C.)

I missed this story the first time around, but it has longer shelf life than most news these days. And besides, we should all know what our enemies say when they think we aren't paying attention.

The "Nancy Pelosi" of the Palestinian Arabs had this to say Friday before last:

Sheik Ahmad Bahr, acting Speaker of the Palestinian Legislative Council, declared during a Friday sermon at a Sudan mosque that America and Israel will be annihilated and called upon Allah to kill Jews and Americans "to the very Last One."

The United States has given the Palestinian Authority more than a billion dollars in aid since 1993. We are the only country on Earth that sends massive amounts of aid to governments whose elected leaders then bend over backwards to insult us or, in the case of the Palestinians, call for our annihilation. Presumably, we only gave this money to the Palestinians to suck up to Muslims with oil and mollify European politicians and American transnational progressives. Even so, it's pretty damned degrading. ...

***

Now What?
Ed Morrissey

With George Bush delivering only the second veto of his presidency, the question of funding the mission in Iraq became even more acute. Eighty-six days after the start of the 110th Congress, the military still has not received funding for operations in Iraq this year, and the process has to start from Square One while the Pentagon has to start juggling the books:

[...]

At some point, a compromise has to be reached -- but it cannot take the form of mandated timetables for withdrawal. The British did that in Basra, and the result has been the formation of militias and internecine fighting in a region homogenous to Shi'ites. Imagine what would happen in the melting pot of Baghdad, let alone the al-Qaeda theater of operations in Baghdad. Announcing withdrawal dates only emboldens those who oppose the democratically-elected government of Iraq and encourages the rest to choose the least-egregious warlord to obey.

***

Freed UK sailors back in the Persian Gulf
Bryan Preston

Because, you know, it worked so well the last time.

Seven of the 15 British Royal Navy personnel held captive by Iran are back in the Persian Gulf searching for smugglers, Britain’s military said Tuesday.

The seven returned to duty on the frigate HMS Cornwall, the Defense Ministry said. Another seven of the Royal Marines have returned to duty at a naval base in Scotland. No decision has been made on whether to send those marines back to the Persian Gulf, the Defense Ministry said.

The seven sailors back in the Gulf include the group’s only woman, Leading Seaman Faye Turney. They are again working in small boats boarding ships in Iraqi waters to check for contraband goods, the ministry said. It was during one such operation that the sailors and marines were captured by naval forces of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards on March 23.

The Littlest Sailor isn’t among his mates in the Gulf. ...

***

If It’s Not Lost, How Can We Win?
War buzz from Lt. Col. Patterson

Retired U.S. Air Force Lieutenant Colonel Robert “Buzz” Patterson is author of the upcoming book War Crimes: The Left’s Campaign to Destroy Our Military and Lose the War on Terror (Crown Forum, June). As the president prepares to veto Congress’s timetabled war-funding bill, Lt. Col. Patterson took some questions from NRO editor Kathryn Lopez about the Democratic congressional majority, war reporting, and more.

Kathryn Jean Lopez: Your upcoming book begins with a quote from Cicero about how a nation “cannot survive treason from within.” Surely you’re not calling Democrats traitors. Or are you?

“Buzz” Patterson: I am. They certainly are if their behavior during our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is held up to the light of the U.S. Constitution. Article III, Section 3 defines treason against the United States as “adhering to (our) enemies, giving them aid and comfort. Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Dick Durbin, and John Murtha, amongst others, are guilty of exactly that. When a government official stands on the floor of Congress and declares the war lost; or travels to Syria, a state-sponsor of terror, and meets with the leadership that is funneling insurgents into Iraq to kill Americans; or, publicly compares our military men and women to Nazis, Soviets in gulags, and Pol Pot; or refers to our Marines as “cold blooded killers” before an ongoing investigation is completed and charges filed, they have crossed the line and have taken their politics to the battlefield. These are behaviors that give aid and comfort to our enemy.

It’s not just the Democrats though but many on the Left — its faculties and administrations on college campuses, big media, Hollywood, and left-wing organizations such as the Ford Foundation, Moveon.org, United for Peace and Justice, etc. What is particularly disturbing to me is that these Americans are doing it while their fellow citizens are fighting and dying in combat. The best ally that al Qaeda has these days is the Democrat Party leadership. It’s reprehensible.

Lopez: Is it fair even to say “The Left has declared war on the U.S. military and the global War on Terror”? ...

***

If Entering Iraq Was a Mistake, Leaving Is Worse
By Dennis Prager

In arriving at their decision that America should withdraw its forces from Iraq, the Democratic Party and the Left around the world regularly make reference to what they regard as America's initial error -- invading Iraq.

Perhaps the Left is correct in its contentions that bringing freedom to a Muslim Arab country at this time in history is impossible and that an Iraq under Saddam Hussein would be better for American and world security.

But even if the war was a major blunder and even if everything the Left charges -- including "Bush lied" -- were true, none of these contentions has any bearing on the question of what should be done now.

The preoccupation of the Left with the alleged wrongness of the war and the alleged deceit of President Bush is another example of passion rather than reason determining a leftist position on a major issue.

A responsible, rational opponent of the war in Iraq and of George W. Bush would say, "I am appalled by the disastrous war in Iraq, appalled by the wasted American lives, appalled by the moral wasteland of Iraq, and I loathe this president. But we are in Iraq. And as much as I loathe supporting anything this president does and as much as I oppose this war, I know what is likely to happen if we leave Iraq. So I cannot in good conscience advocate an American withdrawal or fixing a specific date to do so." ...

***

Bush Keeps Vow to Veto War Funding Bill

President Says Pullout Deadline Is 'Date for Failure'
By Michael Abramowitz and Peter Baker, Washington Post Staff Writers

President Bush vetoed a $124 billion measure yesterday that would have funded overseas military operations but required him to begin withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq as early as July, escalating the most serious confrontation between the White House and Congress over war policy in a generation.

Bush carried through on his veto threat just after the legislation arrived at the White House, calling the timetable a "prescription for chaos and confusion" that would undercut generals. "Setting a deadline for withdrawal would demoralize the Iraqi people, would encourage killers across the broader Middle East and send a signal that America will not keep its commitments," he said last night. "Setting a deadline for withdrawal is setting a date for failure." ...

***

The 'new' Democrats and the war

With President Bush meeting today with congressional leaders on the war-funding bill, the administration continues to be hammered by Democrats who are never at a loss for words when it comes to professing their admiration for our troops or browbeating the Iraqis to "do more" to defend their own country. But these talking points from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi bear little resemblance to the actual behavior of House and Senate Democrats, who have undercut the ability of U.S. and Iraqi forces to carry out their missions. ...

***

I Question
They Are Not Serious. They Are Not Patriotic.
By Erick (at Redstate)

I question the seriousness of the Democratic Party. They have been so intent to cut off funding to the troops in Iraq, they passed the bill and then held it for a week so Nancy Pelosi could read it. Or was that to print it on parchment. Their unserious excuses have been all over the map for the past week.

Witness the seriousness of the President who vetoed the bill upon receipt versus the unseriousness of the Congressional Democrats who wanted to time the delivery to the anniversary of President Bush's speech aboard the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln, only to deny that today and tell NPR that the timing was a "coincidence." ...

I question the Democrats' seriousness. I question the Democrats' patriotism too. ...

The Democrats say they support the troops, but they have consistently sought since 2002, to undermine the efforts of the troops, the military leadership, the cause, and protective measures the Bush Administration has implemented to keep this nation safe -- from terrorist surveillance to unionization of the Department of Homeland Security to the Patriot Act.

You're damn right I question their patriotism. ...

Contributed by Bill Faith on May 2, 2007 at 12:37 AM in Caring about our troops, Dem Dumbness, Dem Perfidy, Iraq, Islamism Delenda Est | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack