Recently we've seen news in Iraq about a resurgent al-Qaeda -- you know, the terrorist organization that our President, Champ, had said was "on the run" during the 2012 election -- taking on the Iraqi army in Anbar Province, including the storied city of Falluja. Today's Burg has a story about the civilians who have fled that city and another editorial from Dawn (of all places!) that wonders when American resolve will set things in Iraq straight.
Dream on.
Ms. Rubin at 'Right Turn' -- she being, with George Will, the token conservatives at WaPo -- points out that Champ and our large-chinned Secretary of State, Jahwn Kerry, are preparing the ground for the U.S. to abandon Iraq. While we say we want Iraq to succeed, so says Kerry, and we'll even ship them a few drones and missiles (if the Iraqi government, led by Prime Minister al-Maliki, promises not to use them against civilians), we don't plan to intervene directly. Ms. Rubin quotes a former ambassador to Iraq, James Jeffrey, who points out in a WaPo op-ed piece that Kerry's recent statement that "this fight is not our but the Iraqis", undercuts all the 'good commitments' that have been made to Iraq.
Of course it undercuts our commitments. That's precisely the point.
Champ has no intention of stopping al-Qaeda in Iraq, and Jahwn Kerry's statements in the recent presser that "this fight is not our but the Iraqis" makes that perfectly clear. Kerry and Champ are simply laying the groundwork for a bout of handwringing and inaction. Expect one or both (or the numbskull Joe Biden) to tell us in the very near future about how our options are limited and how -- gasp! -- we don't want to put boots on the ground. Ms. Rubin lays out the sequence of events in more detail if you need the dots shoved very, very close together. Suffice to say that we're pretty far along.
But there's more to this. This is not an isolated event for Champ and the administration; it's not war-weariness; and it's not just that we're drawing (yet another) red-line, this time to the Iraqis, telling them to shape up and solve their problems because we've already given at the office. You haven't heard a single word, phrase, speech or leak to deliver that message, because that isn't Champ's message.
No, the message Champ has is simple: we're not renouncing American power in Iraq, we're renouncing American power. This is just another example for Champ to make clear to Russia, to China, to the Saudis, to the Syrians, and to the Europeans that he wants to withdraw American influence around the world in every way he can. Al-Qaeda can have Iraq, Iran can have nuclear weapons, Pencilneck can gas the people of Syria, Morsi can have power back in Egypt (and the bomb too if he pushes for it, Champ is generous that way), the Palestinians can have all the land between the Jordan and the Med, and the Chinese can do whatever they like in East and South Asia -- which is everything. Putin will get his too. There will be no advancement of American interests because Champ doesn't believe that we have any legitimate interests in the world. Instead we'll waste time, effort and diplomatic energy twisting the arms of the Israelis into giving up their country, which should seal a second Nobel peace prize.
Champ doesn't care about foreign policy. He never has, it's an inconvenience to him that takes time away from his true goal of "transforming" America into a socialist state. He has no firm grasp of history, no true understanding despite his education in Indonesia and in proper left-wing academia of how the world works, no desire to wield power outside our borders, and has fixed himself to the most socialist, left-wing nonsense about America's place in the world.
People keep missing the point which Champ keeps trying to make as clearly as he can: the biggest enemy in the world to him is the Tea Party, followed closely by the Republicans, then the Catholic Church, and after them the British. The world? Islamicism? Genocide? Thuggery? None of that registers.
Posted by: Steve White ||
01/09/2014 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"Champ and ...Kerry ...are preparing the groundwork for the US to abandon Iraq" ...
East Asia + 1/2 of Pacific, Hawaii = EASTPAC?, 1/2 of CONUS-NORAM for "living space", but hey who's measuring???
I hear Californey may break up into six new states, but clearly there is no common link wid the above ....
#2
Hadda a dream the night before last. I was trapped in a hotel with Champ, and all the doors were locked -- except for the public area bathrooms. Champ didn't seem to care.
#4
Excellent piece Doctor. Darth Bolton was interviewed yesterday and he mirrors your assessment on Champ's obvious lack of concern for our national security.
I suspect Champ, now realizing he's approaching the "the back nine" of his term, is anxious to complete his domestic social justice, redistro plan. Defense is a nice big pot of money, and the military generally didn't vote for him anyway.
He may have other things on his mind right now. That creamy Danish at the Mandela Memorial may have put FLOTUS over the top. Nothing like a little family scandal to occupy the press.
#5
SYMPOSIUM: IF I WANTED AMERICA TO FAIL
Socrates (470-399 B.C.) a renowned Greek philosopher from Athens who taught Plato, and Plato taught Aristotle and Aristotle taught Alexander the Great. Socrates used a method of teaching by asking leading questions. The Greeks called this form dialectic starting from a thesis or question, then discussing ideas and moving back and forth between points of view to determine how well ideas stand up to critical review with the ultimate principle of the Socratic dialectic being Veritas Truth.
Note: Above taken from the Ellis Washington Report, and there from a the video and column If I wanted America to fail by Ryan Houck, executive director of FreeMarketAmerica.org, a project of Americans for Limited Government. His work was inspired by Paul Harveys If I were the Devil published in 1964 and 1996.
#6
History warns either you influence events or events influence you. As dirty as foreign affairs and involvement are, reducing yourself to only responding to outside 'stimuli' means giving the initiative to others who, by the record, are not concerned with your good will or well being.
#7
Champ is nothing more than Buchanan with a wife. It's the American people who are the problem. They can be forgiven for electing him once. But twice, when it's clear what he was? There's only one reason he was re-elected. After what he's done with the power he got courtesy of them, I'd say we're even.
#12
Concluding that Champ does not care about National Security is off the mark. He most certainly does, it's just that his threat assessment has determine the American People are the greatest danger to his administration. See: the FBI's new Mission Statement.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
01/09/2014 11:16 Comments ||
Top||
#13
The war in Vietnam was declared "unwinnable" by Cronkite while the Democrats were still leading the country. Nixon took over and basically won the war. Democrats could not accept that and starved the South Vietnamese of support and they eventually fell.
The war in Iraq was declared unwinnable by virtually every member of the MSM. Bush doubled down with the surge and turned thing around and the war seemed to be won when the Democrats took over.
Seems they would rather lose wars than have Republicans get credit.
Posted by: Bobby ||
01/09/2014 16:14 Comments ||
Top||
#15
Your right rjschwarz.
Democrats have been calling Iraq 'another Vietnam' since aout the day after it was started. Slimy Reid (spit!) as much as declared 'the war is lost' on the senate floor.
And they have been working overtime to make it (and Afghanistan) another pair of 'Vietnam' war ever since. Just so they can relive their 'Glory Days'. No matter how many American soldiers and Iraqi and Afghanistan civilian lives it may cost - in fact the more the merrier.
I wonder if Kerry still watches the films he created while he 'served' in Vietnam like the pathetic old man who still watching his big high school football win to relive his glory days. As I recall didn't he (Kerry) used to go back to sites with a camera and 're-enact' certain actions.
#16
American Power means no one can attack, assault, kill, maim, destroy Americans without they, themselves being on the fatal end of a response.
American Power means we are not having to put our children and our childrens children into extreme debt to other major countries around the world before they are old enough to get a job or before they are even born.
American Power means majority rule by all the people, and not minority rule by a few people over many people without representation.
American Power means being a good neighbor and being there when our friends need us when our friends are facing evil.
American Power. Means all of the above is worth fighting and dying to preserve for our friends, neighbors, and family.
[Bangla New Age] EVEN before the completion of the elections to the tenth Jatiya Sangsad, with results of eight constituencies pending as voting in 597 polling stations was suspended on January 5, let alone oath-taking by members of the tenth Jatiya Sangsad and the formation of the next government, there seem to be ample indications that the Awami League-led governing political elite have chosen to take the state down the path of autocracy. According to a report published in New Age on Wednesday, the detective police on Tuesday locked away Drop the heater, Studs, or you're hist'try! four leaders of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party, including its chairperson's adviser and vice-chairperson, as wholesale arrests of opposition leaders and activists continued in the capital Dhaka and elsewhere in the country. The same day, according to another New Age report also published on Wednesday, two ministers of the so-called 'all-party interim government' declared that the new AL government would go tough on violence by the opposition. These developments are indeed disturbing but not quite surprising; after all, the prime minister spelt out Monday and also on Tuesday that the incoming administration would deal with the opposition with an 'iron hand.'
It goes without saying that the increasingly repressive attitude and actions of the incumbents leave the opposition to choose between the devil and the deep sea; they can either persist with their protests in rejection of the farcical January 5 general elections and the consequent national parliament, which lacks political legitimacy, and thus face sustained repression, or give in to whims and wishes of the incumbents. As the incumbents continue with the employment of legal and extra-legal measures to squeeze the opposition's political space for democratic dissent, the latter has been practically forced to resort to retaliatory violence. Simply put, the violence by the opposition that the incumbents so enthusiastically refer to, in a bid to justify their tough talks and actions, is essentially a reaction to state violence. If the incumbents carry on with their strong-arm tactics, such retaliatory violence is only likely to increase and result in further loss of lives and property. In all likelihood, thus, the country and the people may be staring at a prolonged period of social disorder, which could eventually lead to disastrous consequences.
The incumbents need to realise that if the situation comes to such a pass, people on the lam will ultimately blame them for having endangered their safety and security no matter how hard they try to pass the buck on to the opposition. There already seems to be considerable displeasure among a vast majority of the people with the ruling alliance for having denied them their fundamental rights to exercise adult franchise. They may have grudgingly ignored such insolence in the hope that the incumbents would initiate a process to peacefully resolve the ongoing political crisis through dialogues. Hence, the incumbents would do better to rein in their autocratic impulses and actions, stop legal and extra-legal persecution of the opposition and sincerely try to engage positively with the opposition.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/09/2014 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
[DAWN] FUMING and frothing they demand Musharraf be made an example of for his act of treason. They give long sermons on the virtues of democracy and on the curse of military dictatorship. Can anyone disagree? Certainly not. Surely the ghost of Bonapartism has to be buried once and for all to make democracy secure in this holy land.
But the irony is that the faces of many of those calling for the head of the disgraced former military ruler on TV talk shows and in newspaper statements are too familiar for us to forget their past association with various military rulers. They form a long list of crusaders, and include politicians of all hues, retired generals, retired bureaucrats and, not to be left behind, TV presenters and right-wing newspaper columnists.
Treason, they shout, must not go unpunished. Musharraf, the sole sinner, must be condemned. What about his partners in crime? No, there weren't any. He was the only perpetrator.
But wasn't Gen Zia also closely allied with the 'infidel' Americans? That was for a holy cause comes the reply.
Hypocrisy is the name of the game as the knives are out for the man in the dock. What an irony that these children of dictatorship have now turned champions of the rule of law and democracy, seeking to launder their own sins.
How can one miss retired Lt-Gen Hamid Gul The nutty former head of Pakistain's ISI, now Godfather to Mullah Omar's Talibs and good buddy and consultant to al-Qaeda's high command... pontificating on the attributes of justice and democracy? Ubiquitous on almost every TV channel nowadays, the former ISI chief notorious for his political manipulations during his heyday is one of the biggest proponents of a trial of Musharraf for subverting the Constitution. Is it not amusing to see a Zia loyalist talk about the sanctity of the Constitution, which was shredded to pieces by his mentor?
It seems so surreal that the retired general, who unabashedly defends the Taliban challenging the Pak state and the Death Eater group responsible for killing thousands of innocent people, wants retribution. It is so obvious that support for the treason trial by the likes of Hamid Gul is not based on any principle and least of all on love for democracy; it is more about retrogressive ideology.
Those who supported Gen Zia's dictatorship are now shouting themselves hoarse for Musharraf's blood -- actually for his action against Islamic gunnies and snuffies in the tribal areas and certainly not for his acts of subversion.
Then there is a born-again democrat, a top bureaucrat who served in successive military governments before his retirement in the late 1980s. His role, as an advisor to the then president, in the ouster of Nawaz Sharif ... served two non-consecutive terms as prime minister, heads the Pakistain Moslem League (Nawaz). Noted for his spectacular corruption, the 1998 Pak nuclear test, border war with India, and for being tossed by General Musharraf... 's first government in 1993 is well known. I remember his interview in a BBC documentary days after the Oct 12, 1999 coup hailing the military takeover. Our salvation lies with military rule, he argued. But now he is one of the most fervent advocates of putting the leader of that coup on trial. Is this change of heart for real or is it political opportunism?
Many of those who remained closely associated with the Musharraf regime till the end are now securely ensconced in the new political order -- some of them part of the treasury benches and even members of the federal cabinet. It was most shocking, however, to see a retired general and a key member of Musharraf's original team joining the condemnation of his former friend and leader.
Once the country's strongest man, Musharraf today stands isolated, deserted by his old associates and followers. Such is the game of power politics in this Islamic republic.
Indeed Musharraf must be held accountable for his illegal, unconstitutional actions, but justice should not be selective. The trial must not be seen as an act of Dire Revenge™ against one person. It is convenient for the politicianship and judiciary to restrict the trial to the Nov 3, 2007 action. It is not in their interest to go back to the original sin of Oct 12, 1999.
There are too many skeletons in their closets. It was the judiciary that had legitimised the coup and an elected parliament later indemnified all the actions taken by the military-led government.
It is also a fact that almost all opposition political parties had welcomed the overthrow of the Sharif government. And months later, a majority of the ousted PML-N joined the military government. The renegades under the banner of PML-Q became the face of the new order and shared power for five years. Legislators then re-elected Gen Musharraf in uniform for a second term and approved his decision to impose emergency.
It is highly unlikely that the trial would reach any conclusion. But even if by chance the former military ruler is convicted, it is not going to block the way for any future adventurers as most political pundits believe. We need to change the political culture where usurpers are welcomed.
Someone recently posted a picture from the past of Gen Zia flanked by Nawaz Sharif and Manzoor Wattoo who is now Punjab provincial chief of the PPP on Facebook. That says a lot about our politicianship, past and present.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/09/2014 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
[DAWN] ONE can only wonder whether there was an element of déjà vu involved in this week's urgent despatch of armaments by the US to the Iraqi military as the latter prepared to re-conquer Fallujah.
After all, it was 10 years ago that four American contractors working for Blackwater were ambushed by one of the many gangs resisting the US occupation, and their charred corpses were subsequently suspended from a bridge across the Euphrates. This grotesque display led to some of the most vicious battles of the Iraq war. It was several months before Fallujah could be retaken.
The names Anbar and Ramadi -- the western governate encompassing about one-third of Iraq, and its capital city -- may also ring a bell. The province was insurgency central until the occupying army coerced, cajoled and bribed tribal leaders into what was dubbed the Sunni Awakening, which made it much harder for the outfit known as Al Qaeda in Iraq to use the area as a base for its operations.
That modus vivendi was falling apart even before the US completed its military withdrawal, with the successor regime of Nouri al-Maliki ... Prime Minister of Iraq and the secretary-general of the Islamic Dawa Party.... reluctant to cultivate the tribal sheikhs it viewed as sectarian adversaries, just as it diverged more broadly from American recipes for relative Shia-Sunni harmony.
Resentments have consequently been building up, and the attack by government forces on a Sunni protest camp in Ramadi -- not for the first time -- brought matters to a head. It also offered an opportunity for the reincarnation of Al Qaeda in Iraq, now known as the Islamic State of Iraq and Al Sham (ISIS), which stepped into the breach and occupied large parts of Fallujah and relatively smaller segments of Ramadi.
Maliki responded by threatening military action unless local forces drove out what is invariably referred to as an Al Qaeda affiliate. It appears, though, that many of the tribal sheikhs are as wary of Storied Baghdad ...located along the Tigris River, founded in the 8th century, home of the Abbasid Caliphate... 's army as they are of the jihadists aiming at a caliphate encompassing Iraq, Syria and possibly even Leb.
When ISIS took control of Fallujah and parts of Ramadi at the turn of the year, an Iraqi government source suggested its immediate intent was to declare a caliphate encompassing Anbar and segments of Syria. Nothing of the sort had come to pass at the time of writing, but it wasn't an inaccurate assessment of the ISIS aim, with the 'Al Sham' part of its nomenclature assumed to include Leb.
It is widely believed that during the initial Iraq conflict, Syria's President Bashar Al Assad facilitated the influx of Salafist jihadis into the war zone. It is possible, of course, that he merely turned a blind eye to the phenomenon. The point, however, is that the Iraq-Syria border hasn't become particularly less porous in the interim (although it has been reported that Turkey has been the most popular conduit for jihadis into Syria), and ISIS has long been active on the Syrian side.
It has lately encountered a few road bumps, though, with even Salafist elements in the Syrian opposition choosing to combat it in rebel-held areas of the country. Internationally, though, its leading role in the Syrian conflict has prompted some rethinking, with the likes of Ryan Crocker -- a former US ambassador in Damascus, Storied Baghdad, Kabul and Islamabad -- suggesting that Assad should not be written out of the picture, and vociferous local opponents of the Syrian president admitting that, given a choice between ISIS and Assad, they would opt for the latter.
During the Iraq war, it was claimed more than once that Al Qaeda had been more or less eliminated from the country, without, not surprisingly, any mention of the fact that its very genesis in Iraq was a direct consequence of US intervention. That claim was at the very least a gross exaggeration.
It could be argued that ISIS and its predecessor organization were only whimsically offshoots of the late Osama bin Laden ... who is now beyond all cares and woe... 's and Ayman Al Zawahiri ... Formerly second in command of al-Qaeda, now the head cheese, occasionally described as the real brains of the outfit. Formerly the Mister Big of Egyptian Islamic Jihad. Bumped off Abdullah Azzam with a car boom in the course of one of their little disputes. Is thought to have composed bin Laden's fatwa entitled World Islamic Front Against Jews and Crusaders. Currently residing in the North Wazoo area. That is not a horn growing from the middle of his forehead, but a prayer bump, attesting to how devout he is... 's outfit, given that neither Abu Musab Al Zarqawi nor Abu Bakr Al Storied Baghdadi were inclined to strictly follow instructions, but that is somewhat besides the point in view of the broad ideological convergence. Notwithstanding the strategic and tactical differences, the obscurantist goal is generally the same.
It was a long time ago, or so it seems, that US determination to invade Iraq spurred warnings of what it would mean for the 'Arab street'. That street remained fairly quiet for a while. And when it erupted, it did so in a manner that threw Washington off balance. The crucial venue, it has turned out, is not the street but the battlefield, where the Islamist equivalents of the ideologically driven American neocons are now determined to have their way.
Hopefully, in this case too, their ambitions will ultimately be thwarted. As before, though, it may take a while.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/09/2014 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under: Islamic State of Iraq & the Levant
#2
ideologically driven American neocons are now determined to have their way.
Eh?
During the Iraq war, it was claimed more than once that Al Qaeda had been more or less eliminated from the country, without, not surprisingly, any mention of the fact that its very genesis in Iraq was a direct consequence of US intervention. That claim was at the very least a gross exaggeration.
Oh. Bush's fault. It is kind of a central part of the fight them there not here theory Mahir. Maybe we can all sit around on a rug and hope the bad people go away.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
SYMPOSIUM: IF I WANTED AMERICA TO FAIL
...the creepy-looking former dictator of Pakistain. Zia was an Islamic nutball who imposed his nutballery on the rest of the country with the enthusiastic assistance of the nation's religious parties, which are populated by other nutballs. He was appointed Chief of Army Staff in 1976 by Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, whom he hanged when he seized power. His time in office was a period of repression, with hundreds of thousands of political rivals, minorities, and journalists executed or tortured, including senior general officers convicted in coup-d'état plots, who would normally be above the law. As part of his alliance with the religious parties, his government helped run the war against the Soviets in Afghanistan, providing safe havens, American equipiment, Saudi money, and Pak handlers to selected mujaheddin. Zia died along with several of his top generals and admirals and the then United States Ambassador to Pakistain Arnold Lewis Raphel when he was assassinated in a suspicious air crash near Bahawalpur in 1988...
Hamid Gul
Nawaz Sharif
Nouri al-Maliki
Zawahiri
