. . . He is one of the foremost comic writers in the Anglophone world, and his mirth derives, as much as anything, from his politics. Over the last several decades Mr. O'Rourke has crowded his C.V. as the scourge of fashionable causes at home and also abroad, serving as foreign correspondent to "the absolute, flat-out, goddamn worst places in the world," as he puts it. His 150-proof journalism is savage, profane, relentlessly irreverent, throwing in various breaches of decorum and moral trespasses for good measure--and usually vertiginously, caustically hilarious. When I meet him, he looks well marinated, cured even, as though he'd be great company for steaks and stiff drinks, with several orders of first- and secondhand smoke on the side. In fact, he is. . . .
Mr. Mayor, can we get a proclamation and a key to the city?
Posted by: Mike ||
01/07/2007 08:51 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
And a Fatwa, we need a Fatwa for this. The Imam of the North we hopefully supply.
#2
...Oh, amen to THAT - PJ is a hysterically funny and always on-target write.
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
01/07/2007 10:21 Comments ||
Top||
#3
I would not call him a comic writer like Dave Barry, but a political writer who can be, as Mike says, hysterically funny. His politics do tend toward the Rantburgish end of the spectrum.
A couple recomendations:
All The Troubles In The World - a trip to some of the 'interesting' (ok, foo'ed up) places in the world. You will learn why in Bangladesh it *is* all about jute.
Parlament of Whores - a scathingly funny look at Congress. Money quote: "Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys"
#4
Everybody just gets exasperated. Twenty years ago we were all very interested in what was making these people fight each other, and who was right and who was wrong, and after a while you say: Sit down and shut up. Go to hell.
This has been pretty much my experience, too. This is why people turn conservative as they age. After a while you've heard all the new ideas, all the theories, all the plans -- and all the excuses why they didn't work. And then you hear them again. And again.
Finally, you don't want to hear them anymore. You start wondering about the old plans. "Hey, why not orphanages? Why not imperialism?"
#6
I put Holidays In Hell & Give War a Chance on the top of the pile. I love both books and reread them from time to time. Later works arent as clearly focused (chapters seem to be compilations of articles rather than stand-alones) but still good.
#8
I'd also recommend Holidays in Hell. A number of priceless pieces in it, including one on how communists couldn't get the formula for concrete right.
Soaring and legendary are figures describing the money oil-producing Arabs spent throughout the second half of the 20th century via careless ways and primitive methods. Such funds were ample enough to make them the most powerful people on Earth. They couldve been in a situation where nuclear bombs were their simplest weapons. They also couldve built palaces on both near and remote planets, if they wished.
But such high figures regarding Arab spending have gone with the wind due to lack of strategy or thinking about the future and what remains is a feeling of regret for what has passed. If the situation continues in this manner, Arabs will lose what remains of their riches, which are dwindling without achieving the minimum degree of protection for their homelands, which are exposed to the threat of invasion and direct occupation.
I mention all of this because of the international fuss North Korea has aroused after forcing itself into the nuclear club, despite being one of the worlds poorest nations. It proved that poverty doesnt just regard finances or material capabilities, but theres also poverty of intellect and poverty in national pride. Strategy and determination were involved in its departure from the realm of the weak and entering the nuclear club.
From there, it can move into the industrial club in order to ensure safety in the face of aggression and polarization in an age without moral coexistence, peaceful thinking or exchange of interests in accordance with the laws of justice because the powerful have transformed them into laws of transcontinental piracy. Thus, mutual fear has become the guarantee to protect the weak from being devoured.
Weve lost the 20 centuries and were about to lose the 21st century too. Arab efforts and their remaining riches are flying like the dust overshadowing their capitals, which are filled with ruins.
After a series of disappointments, its not strange that this great nation has converted from one afflicted by economic, health and military starvation and begging for the simplest components of life as a result of totally neglecting the future to concentrating on the here and now, as well as total dependence upon the enemy to be both protector and thief at the same time. Such is a trick disclosed by mad individuals among the Arabs before reasonable ones.
The utmost necessity is to reconsider everything weve done to ourselves and against our nations and immediately begin following the right path, which guarantees future generations dignity and survival in this world.
I and the bewildered masses wonder what prevents us from sincerely extending our hand to neighboring Iran to learn from it and participate with us in building up the required power to deter our aggressors, who have sentenced humiliation and deprivation against us and given our historical enemy all that makes it strongest, despite being the smallest, and putting it in control of the regions destiny?
The United States in particular and the West in general should realize that we stand with Iran regarding possessing nuclear power for peace or for war, just as theyve stood with the Zionist entity to build its nuclear arsenal, which threatens all of us and the entire world too.
What future will Arabs have without possessing a deterrent power to protect them first from their protector-thief and then from their actual enemy, the Zionist entity, as well as other enemies?
I admit that this question is long, but its answer is even longer and supposes that those interested have comprehended the question and realized its dimensions in order to benefit from its answer. Since Im one whos sure that those asked this question are too stupid and indifferent, theres no use indulging in an answer when those concerned dont understand the question.
Dr. Abdulaziz Al-Maqaleh is Yemens prominent poet and intellectual. He is the director of the Yemeni Center for Studies.
Source: Al-Thori newspaper
Posted by: john ||
01/07/2007 14:04 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The lack of understanding of so many things ... economics, history, technology is so breathtaking..
...and what is this obsession with ruling the world?
Posted by: john ||
01/07/2007 14:11 Comments ||
Top||
#3
If the situation continues in this manner, Arabs will lose what remains of their riches, which are dwindling without achieving the minimum degree of protection for their homelands, which are exposed to the threat of invasion and direct occupation.
Without oil nobody would want their stinking shithole land, even if the Arabs weren't there. What a fantasy. They are destined to squander their resources, get a few million (or more?) Arabs nuked by stupid decisions, and still not be able to build a microwave oven (as someone else so eloquently commented here). Their Imams and Mullahs will keep them ignorant and rabid (and unvaccinated) til a plague wipes out the remainder, and eventually, they'll be gone, leaving the Earth a better place without them. Good luck, Ummah, you deserve your future, and you can always blame the Joooooos
Posted by: Frank G ||
01/07/2007 14:37 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Your future is a return to the barren desert rat heritage you've always had. You have no future, which is very fortunate for civilzation. When we weaken the oil lobby and turn to other energy sources, you will be broke within a few years buying simple food. You have none and no ability to sustain yourselves. We'll drain you within a very few years. Then, we'll piss on you and forget your very existence.
#6
For college English 101, this is a perfect model of essay rambling. He may well have an argument in here, but you'd have to sort past a mess to find it. Must've been that dang "flowery language" again.
#7
you will be broke within a few years buying simple food.
Nope. Things rarely happen that rapidly in the world of economics (financial markets that are subject to the momentary hysteria of crowds are different). Ask anyone who's watched an incompetent management destroy a good company. It takes time.
The Arabs have already started to go broke. They can no longer buy whatever they want whenever they want. And the author knows it as does everyones else in the ME. But they wouldn't do anything when they had the excess cash, so they certainly won't now. So they'll have a slow, painful descent into poverty. Little islands of royal wealth surrounded by oceans of increasingly turbulent poverty. We all know how that ends. Just like any other third world cesspool abandoned by its tin horn dictator for his Swiss bank accounts. But it was fun while it lasted. It couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of swine.
Posted by: Mullah Richard ||
01/07/2007 17:32 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Post WWII Japan started with nothing, worked hard, educated their children and became a wealthy highly advanced 21st century power. The Arab world started with vast oil wealth and is headed in the opposite direction. If the good Dr. Al-Magaleh is an example of scholarship in the Arab world, it's easy to see why.
#10
The Japanese had a culture that valued learning and hard work. Japan had a history of making things.
The total number of books translated into Arabic yearly is no more than 330, or one-fifth of those translated in a small country like Greece.
(UN Arab Human Development Report).
There is no scientific research, all skilled labor is imported. Most manual labor is imported.
Arabs do not make things. The much vaunted great age of islam coincided with their conquest of other peoples and assimilation of the knowledge of others - Persians, Egyptians, Greeks, Indians.
When conquest ceased, all Arab advances also ceased.
Posted by: john ||
01/07/2007 18:24 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Arabs do not invent things, other than conspiracy theories, at which, they are masters
Posted by: Frank G ||
01/07/2007 18:33 Comments ||
Top||
#12
At first I wondered why this story didn't have a Rantburg Sympathy Meter. Then I wondered if that was a sufficiently definite statement of my utter lack of concern for "Dr." Al-Maqaleh and his fellow savages. Therefore I propose (drumroll, please)...
The Rantburg Give-A-Shit Meter.
Posted by: RIcky bin Ricardo (Abu Babaloo) ||
01/07/2007 19:16 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Dr, The answer doesn't have to be long.
The Arabs are hundreds of years behind the west and only have been recently exposed to the technology. They have squandered their oil wealth and Arabs nations. They're just irresponsible and their pride is hurt.
Now they're trying to bum them off Iran because they're too stupid to figure it out.
Moonbat slap-down in Canada
Leftover myths about Saddam By RACHEL MARSDEN
When Saddam Hussein finally went to the gallows this week, you'd think the Iraqis had just killed grandpa. (Have you seen the execution video on YouTube? ) Here are some statements I've heard from the political left over the past few days -- along with my response:
Iraq was so much better off under Saddam.
Yeah, and the buses and trains ran right on time under Hitler and Mussolini.
And as liberals keep reminding us, Cuba has a fabulous health care system under Fidel Castro.
Saddam Hussein was responsible for massive human rights violations, but that can't justify giving him the death penalty, which is a cruel and inhuman punishment.
This gem comes to us courtesy of the folks at Human Rights Watch. Look, when the accused kills, rapes and tortures hundreds of thousands of people and then brags about it, I say let's get the piece of trash squared away. Liberals seem to have trouble parting with garbage. The next time you're in the lunch room at work, watch how your liberal friends take great pains to carefully clean and sort every precious piece of rancid trash so it can be salvaged through "recycling".
Liberals would prefer to just rinse Saddam off and toss him in the blue box.
If Saddam is executed for killing people, then George W. Bush should be executed too, for killing people through war.
No joke, some folks really believe this. Here's a little reality check for these people.
When Saddam Hussein's countrymen opposed him, he killed them. Unless Bush has invited the likes of Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and John Kerry to go "shooting" with Dick Cheney, then you can relax. Heh. Love the 'Big' Dick Cheney comment
Saddam's regime tortured Iraq's national soccer team when they lost. When the U.S. got hammered in the last World Cup, I doubt that Bush (or anyone else in America) even noticed.
Saddam used the gallows at Abu Ghraib prison to play Hangman with political prisoners. According to the left, the worst case scenario under Bush's watch is that the prison hosted the odd game of naked Twister for terror suspects.
The U.S. rushed to hang Saddam.
Granted, I'd rush to hang the guy too, if I knew that under Iraqi law, no one over the age of 70 can be executed. This means that in a few more months, the Iraqi taxpayers would have been forever stuck with the bill for this creep's room and board. Thwap!
But the trial -- presided over by Iraqis -- started in October 2005, and Saddam was finally executed in December 2006, for crimes he committed in the 1980s. I just hope whoever thinks a 20-year quest for justice is "rushing" isn't delivering my next pizza order. Ka-pow!
And remember that Saddam could have prevented the Iraq war altogether by taking the safe passage into exile offered by President Bush immediately prior to the 2003 U.S. invasion. Instead, he whizzed by every possible off-ramp en route to his meeting with his maker last week.
Saddam used to be America's "friend" during the Iran-Iraq war. And now they're letting him hang!
So? O.J. Simpson used to be a star running back. Aiiiiieeeeeeee!
By the same logic, once you're married, you can never get a divorce. And if you let someone stay in your house and he trashes the joint, you have to keep letting him sleep on your couch and raid your fridge.
But then when has the left ever let logic get in the way of sympathizing with a murderous anti-American despot?
#1
Next time you hear a liberal telling about the Cuban wonderful health care system remind them that Castro was forced just a couple days ago to ask the Spanish health care system (not preciseley the best in
world) to send him a doctor.
Oh and when they tell you that Saddam was America's friend ask why then all his weapons were Russian and, to lesser degree French. I have never heard of an American ally who hadn't a single F16 or M1 in his arsenal. If they counter telling that waht counts is the (non-existant VMD) answer yeah, German technology for gasses and French technogy for nukes.
For a long time, I let my hopes for a decent outcome in Iraq triumph over what I had learned reporting from Lebanon during its civil war. Those hopes vanished last summer. So, I'd like to offer President Bush my updated rules of Middle East reporting, which also apply to diplomacy, in hopes they'll help him figure out what to do next in Iraq.
Rule 1: What people tell you in private in the Middle East is irrelevant. All that matters is what they will defend in public in their own language. Anything said to you in English, in private, doesn't count...
#2
Rule 11: The most underestimated emotion in Arab politics is humiliation. The Israeli-Arab conflict, for instance, is not just about borders. Israel's mere existence is a daily humiliation to Muslims, who can't understand how, if they have the superior religion, Israel can be so powerful. Al Jazeera's editor, Ahmed Sheikh, said it best when he recently told the Swiss weekly Die Weltwoche: "It gnaws at the people in the Middle East that such a small country as Israel, with only about 7 million inhabitants, can defeat the Arab nation with its 350 million. That hurts our collective ego. The Palestinian problem is in the genes of every Arab. The West's problem is that it does not understand this."
rule #16 - you don't deserve to rule because your 350 million are infected with congenital stupidity from the 7th century: Islam. If you put on black-out glasses, don't expect to win a footrace
Posted by: Frank G ||
01/07/2007 15:20 Comments ||
Top||
#3
The secular West surrenders a little, every time we allow Saudi or Iranian financing of a mosque in our territories. A mosque is a forward camp for jihad terror.
As the president contemplates a ``surge'' of U.S. troops into Baghdad, a Vietnam analogy is pertinent. A surge might merely intensify a policy that is akin to Defense Secretary Robert McNamara's and Gen. William Westmoreland's policy in Vietnam. A better policy might resemble that of two men who subsequently occupied the offices those men held -- Mel Laird, President Nixon's first defense secretary, and Gen. Creighton Abrams, who in 1968 replaced Westmoreland as U.S. commander in Vietnam.
Richard Nixon won the 1968 election with an implicit promise to replace the McNamara-Westmoreland policy of engagement and attrition (``search and destroy''), which was failing militarily in Vietnam and politically in America. Nixon's policy, formulated with Laird and Abrams, was for phased withdrawals of U.S. forces, coinciding with increased U.S. advisers and other aid for South Vietnam's army. The announced policy of withdrawals gave the U.S. some leverage to force the government in Saigon -- not a paragon, but better than the government in Baghdad today -- to recognize that the clock was running on its acceptance of responsibility for Vietnam's security.
Unfortunately, the political climate in Washington today is analogous to that of 60 years ago. In 1946-47, partisan divisions, deepened by disdain for a president considered in over his head, were threatening to make it impossible to reverse the unraveling of the U.S. position in the region that then was most crucial to U.S. interests -- Europe. In 1946, the president's party lost control of both houses of Congress, in what was partly a vote of no confidence in President Harry Truman. A shattered Europe was sliding toward chaos, with communism gaining ground in Western as well as Central Europe.
Truman, however, embraced a proposal for substantial U.S. aid to Europe, but directed that Secretary of State George Marshall's name, not his, be on it. That was achieved when Marshall made the proposal in his June 1947 Harvard commencement address. Truman also instructed Marshall and his deputy, Dean Acheson, to make necessary accommodations with Sen. Arthur Vandenberg, the Michigan Republican who chaired the Foreign Relations Committee.
Today, no one has a promising idea for Iraq comparable to the Marshall Plan. And who would be the Democrats' Vandenberg, capable of muting Democrats' ferocious rejection of all the president's ideas?
Recently, after his 10th trip to Iraq, Bing West, a former Marine and current correspondent for The Atlantic Monthly, noted that 70 percent of U.S. casualties are not from bullets but from roadside bombs. The enemy rarely engages in sustained firefights with U.S. forces, so U.S. forces are killing fewer insurgents than the insurgents recruit. Furthermore, U.S. units spend 15 percent to 30 percent of their time training Iraqis: ``If winning is not a direct goal for U.S. units, we don't need so many troops in Iraq. If winning is a direct goal, we don't have enough units in Iraq.''
Under a ``Laird-Abrams'' approach, winning would be the ``direct goal'' of Iraqi units. There is, however, this sobering arithmetic: Based on experience in the Balkans, an assumption among experts is that to maintain order in a context of sectarian strife requires one competent soldier or police officer for every 50 people. For the Baghdad metropolitan area (population: 6.5 million), that means 130,000 security personnel.
There are 120,000 now, but 66,000 of them are Iraqi police, many -- perhaps most -- of whom are worse than incompetent. Because their allegiances are to sectarian factions, they are not responsive to legitimate central authority. They are part of the problem. Therefore even a substantial surge of, say, 30,000 U.S. forces would leave Baghdad that many short, and could be a recipe for protracting failure.
Today, Gen. George Casey, U.S. commander in Baghdad, is in hot water with administration proponents of a ``surge'' because he believes what he recently told The New York Times: ``The longer we in the U.S. forces continue to bear the main burden of Iraq's security, it lengthens the time that the government of Iraq has to take the hard decisions about reconciliation and dealing with the militias. And the other thing is that they can continue to blame us for all of Iraq's problems, which are at base their problems.''
Baghdad today is what Wayne White -- for 26 years with the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research, now with the Middle East Institute -- calls ``a Shiite-Sunni Stalingrad.'' Imagine a third nation's army operating between -- and against -- both the German and Russian forces in Stalingrad. That might be akin to the mission of troops sent in any surge.
The prospective new commander of U.S. military forces in Iraq, Lt. Gen. David H. Petraeus, is being hailed in these pages and elsewhere in the news media as just what the doctor ordered.
Petraeus "gained fame for his early success in training Iraqi troops," The Washington Post says on the front page. He "helped oversee the drafting of the military's comprehensive new manual on counterinsurgency," the New York Times adds, admittedly in a less fawning review.
I've never met Gen. Petraeus and in fact have heard nice things about him from friends and national security professionals.
But still I ask, why the optimism? Though Petraeus may be an intellectual and promotional wizard, I have a hard time seeing any true success and product from his early work in or on Iraq. And why besmirch the career of Gen. George W. Casey Jr., whom Petraeus is scheduled to replace, just because the Bush administration wants to create the aura that it is doing something in its rearranging of the deck chairs?
Balance at the link, additional below from Powerline:
Perhaps the most remarkable test of his luck and physical rigor came on Sept. 21, 1991. Shortly after taking command of a battalion in the 101st, Petraeus was watching an infantry squad practice assaulting a bunker with live grenades and ammunition. Forty yards away, a rifleman tripped and fell, hard. Petraeus never saw the muzzle flash. The M-16 round struck just above the "A" in his uniform name tag on the right side of his chest, and blew through his back. Had it hit above the "A" in "U.S. Army," on the left side over his heart, he would have been dead before he hit the ground.
He staggered back and collapsed. Standing next to him was Brig. Gen. Jack Keane, the assistant division commander, who by 2003 had become the Army's four-star vice chief of staff. "Dave, you've been shot," Keane told him. "I want you to keep talking. You know what's going on here, David. I don't want you to go into shock."
Keane later described the day for me. "He was getting weaker, you could see that. He said, 'I'm gonna be okay. I'll stay with it.' We got him to the hospital at Campbell and they jammed a chest tube in. It's excruciating. Normally a guy screams and his body comes right off the table. All Petraeus did was grunt a little bit. His body didn't even move. The surgeon told me, 'That's the toughest guy I ever had my hands on.'"
A medevac helicopter flew Petraeus, with Keane at his side, to Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, 60 miles away. "It was a Saturday and I was afraid the top guys wouldn't be on duty. I had them call ahead to make sure their best thoracic surgeon was available," Keane recalled. "We got off the helicopter and there's this guy they'd called off the links, still in his golf outfit, pastel colors and everything." It was Dr. Bill Frist, who a decade later would become majority leader of the U.S. Senate. More than five hours of surgery followed.
"Petraeus recuperated at the Fort Campbell hospital," Keane continued, "and he was driving the hospital commander crazy, trying to convince the doctors to discharge him. He said, 'I am not the norm. I'm ready to get out of here and I'm ready to prove it to you.' He had them pull the tubes out of his arm. Then he hopped out of bed and did 50 push-ups. They let him go home."
SAN FRANCISCO; AND CAMBRIDGE, MASS. The US State Department's effort last month to issue a travel ban on 12 Iranians suspected of supporting that nation's nuclear program wasn't big news at first. Shortly thereafter, it was revealed that the analysis supporting the ban was provided not by the CIA, but by a single junior analyst using Google searches.
The lesson? Advanced technology and Web-savvy citizenry now make it possible for open-source information gathering to rival, if not surpass, the clandestine intelligence produced by government agencies.
Indeed, open-source methods have already proved their worth in counterterrorism. Shortly after Sept. 11, Valdis Krebs, a security expert, re-created the structure and identities of the core Al Qaeda network using publicly available information accessed from the Internet. He started with two 9/11 hijackers, Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid Almihdhar, who were identified from a photograph taken while they attended a meeting with known terrorists in Malaysia in 2000. By scanning public sources for information linking these suspects to others, he re-created the social network identifying all 19 hijackers and described their relationships to their coconspirators, including the identification of Mohammed Atta as the ringleader.
A US-based research center, the Search for International Terrorist Entities (SITE) Institute, monitors the public communications of terrorist and extremist websites and has successfully penetrated password-protected Al Qaeda-linked sites. SITE has successfully accessed terrorists' propaganda, training manuals, and communications, offering insight into their activities that is difficult to obtain elsewhere. According to a Marine colleague who just returned from Iraq, information on the SITE website was used within hours of posting to prevent a terrorist attack in Iraq, demonstrating that third-party analysis has become a key component of intelligence.
A third example comes from a new database at the Jebsen Center for Counter- Terrorism Studies at Tufts University's Fletcher School in Medford, Mass. Researchers there have collected historical data on the life paths of hundreds of terrorists and analyzed their letters, wills, and interviews. This information, based on open-source data, is being used to identify the factors that tend to predict terrorist acts.
Technology that lets anyone analyze data
While motivated citizens and academics have often been able to generate analysis that rivals that of government experts, the difference today is that technology such as wikis and blogs allows thousands to contribute to an analysis. Readers can then "vote" the most accurate and relevant information to the top, giving them enough credibility to be taken seriously. Take, for example, the Wikipedia entry of Moqtada al-Sadr. Mr. Sadr's entry in this free encylopedia that anyone can edit has been modified approximately 500 times by about 50 people in the past three years. These motivated authors have expanded the entry and corrected hundreds of one another's errors and omissions. Thousands read the profile and hundreds of others have linked to it, making it the first entry in most search engines' results.
Blogs are another tool for massive parallel analysis and collaboration - a search for blogs dealing with terrorism generates nearly 1 million results.
While most bloggers generate little of value to intelligence analysis, the collaborative nature of the technology gives greater weight to the better analyses, pushing them to the top. Additionally, the increasing reliance of terrorist groups on the Internet provides these amateur intelligence specialists with tomes of data that will make it easier to understand terrorist goals and objectives, improving their ability to conduct pattern analysis. The result is that analysts have increasingly better access to data, and the consumers of their work have better tools for distinguishing great analyses from those that are merely good.
A disconcerting fact about the Iranian travel-ban event is that the State Department had repeatedly requested that list of names from the CIA, but was refused for reasons of secrecy.
How US intelligence can adapt
To be fair, the US intelligence community has taken some first steps in adopting collaborative technology by creating an "Intellipedia" - a secret, internal version of Wikipedia. However, the strength of Wikipedia is not the technology, but the massively collaborative effort that the technology enables. US intelligence agencies must adopt this collaborative spirit and become more adept at incorporating the increasingly valuable analysis produced in the public domain with their internal efforts. America will be a more secure country once it discards the notion that secrecy is equal to strength and begins harnessing the power of 100,000 bloggers.
Douglas Raymond is a former US Army captain, former member of the 66th Military Intelligence Group, and currently a term member of the Council on Foreign Relations. Paula Broadwell is a PhD student in counterterrorism policy studies at Harvard University and the deputy director of the Jebsen Center for Counter-Terrorism Studies at Tufts University's Fletcher School.
Posted by: Steve White ||
01/07/2007 23:40 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
Hat Tip to Melanie Phillips via Tipper EFL
The Iran We Cannot Avoid
There is no escape from the war Iran is waging against us, the war that started in 1979 and is intensifying with every passing hour. We will shortly learn more about the documents we found accompanying the high-level Iranian terrorist leader we briefly arrested in Hakims compound in Baghdad some days ago, and what we will learnwhat many key American officials have already learnedis stunning. At least to those who thought that Iran was meddling in Iraq, but refused to believe that it was total war, on a vast scale.
Several good journalists are working on this story (see, for example, todays article by Eli Like in the NY Sun), and the outlines are pretty clear. First, we had good information that terrorists were in Baghdad, and had gone to the compound. We did not know exactly who they were. We entered the compound and arrested everybody who looked like a usual suspect. One of them told us he was the #3 official of the al Quds unit of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps, a particularly vicious group. He was carrying documents, one of which was in essence a wiring diagram of Iranian operations in Iraq. That wiring diagram included both Shiite and Sunni terrorist groups, and was of such magnitude that American officials were flabbergasted. It seems that our misnamed Intelligence Community had grossly underestimated the sophistication and the enormity of the Iranian war campaign.
I am told that this information has reached the president, and that it is part of the body of information he is digesting in order to formulate his strategy for Iraq. If he sees clearly what is going on, he must realize that there can be no winning strategy for Iraq alone, since a lot of Iraqi activitynot just lethal materiel such as the latest generation of explosive devices, now powerful enough to penetrate the armor of most of our vehiclesis actually Iranian in origin. We cannot solve the Iraqi problem without regime change in Iran.
Those of you who have borne with me for the last few years will not be surprised to hear this; whats new is the apparently irrefutable evidence that has now providentially fallen into our hands. The policy makers will not like this evidence, because it drives them in a direction they do not wish to go. I am told that, at first, there was a concerted effort, primarily but by no means exclusively from the intel crowd, to sit on the evidence, to prevent it from reaching the highest levels. But the information was too explosive, and it is now circulating throughout the bureaucracy.
I have little sympathy for those who have avoided the obvious necessity of confronting Iran, however I do understand the concerns of military leaders, such as General Abizaid, who are doing everything in their considerable power to avoid a two-front war. But I do not think we need massive military power to bring down the mullahs, and in any event we now have a three-front war: within Iraq, and with both Iran and Syria. So General Abizaids objection is beside the point. We are in a big war, and we cannot fight it by playing defense in Iraq. That is a suckers game. And I hope the president realizes this at last, and that he finds himself some generals who also realize it, and finally demands a strategy for victory.
#1
I can almost see, in the near future, an intense aerial attack on Iran followed in a few hours by W going on national TV to disclose the extent of the war Iran has been waging against us in Iraq and the necessity to strike immediately, along with some kind of ultimatum. An intense effort against terrorism in Iraq would also have been going on for some time. I saw JFK on TV when he announced the beginning of the Cuban missile crisis in 1962. This time the shooting is likely to start before a Presidential message.
#2
We will shortly learn (what we suspected all along) more about the documents we found accompanying the high-level Iranian terrorist leader we briefly arrested in Hakims compound in Baghdad some days ago,
...that was phueching subsequently released due to "diplo-immunity." Thank you US State Dept and mindless Klingons.
It seems that our misnamed Intelligence Community had grossly underestimated the sophistication and the enormity of the Iranian war campaign.
Klingon denial and harboring of intelligence again? How can this be? Sounds like we need to relieve some US Army generals and put a Klingon in charge of DoD, oh it's already been done? .......sorry.
#3
Considering that every rantburg type in America - without any access to Intel - already knew the Iranians were involved in Iraq, I sure as hell hope the Intel community and the Whitehouse have known about Iranian involvement for years. If not, lets level the CIA building and put a playground in its place. We might as well let kids pretend to be secret agent man. Its a helluva lot cheaper then paying adults to do it.
Posted by: Mike N. ||
01/07/2007 4:20 Comments ||
Top||
#4
If oil drops below $50/brl look for rioting in the streets of Tehran.
Posted by: Baba Tutu ||
01/07/2007 5:06 Comments ||
Top||
#5
If we owned the Saudi oil fields, we could drive the price of oil down to $10/bbl. Hint hint.
#6
Any documents alleged to have been captured with the Iranians that might implicate Iran as engaging in acts of war against the US were no doubt fabricated and planted by the evil Chimpy Bushitler and his Halliburton minions to build support for his planned illegal invasion of peaceful Iran.
See, anybody can be a Kos Kid; it's easy and fun, and takes no thinking at all!
#8
Michael remains my candidate for a Medal of Freedom. Few have been more persistent and forward leaning in terms of liberty for Iranians.
Posted by: Captain America ||
01/07/2007 10:50 Comments ||
Top||
#9
This is just the sort of thing that Reagan would have taken personally. I hope Bush can get a call through to Pelosi and get her to come over to the oval office, open her purse, take out his balls and let him borrow them for a few days.
#10
The West has to stop allowing Iranian and Saudi support of terror mosques in our countries. For one thing, there is no quid pro quo. Those terror states allow neither inducement of conversion to the Mohammadan cult nor construction of facilities for other faiths.
I recall an instance where Bush41 was in Saudi Arabia during Thanksgiving. In order to celebrate the holiday, the President had to be flown to a US military ship. He returned to the terrorist entity the next day.
#11
How did we come to this? We're POWERLESS(unless you good folks know anything that I don't know)
Sure...I have a medium-sized home/perimeter protective device collection arsenal to protect my family.
BUT, I NEVER would have thought (until recently), that the "...Beacon of Democracy and Freedom..."; would ever have rolled over and played dead in the face of islamO-facist coc#suc#ers. Thanks U.S. State Dept., DOJ, MSM, ACLU, ABA, etc. I hope that you all rot in hell.
Posted by: Asymmetrical T ||
01/07/2007 21:55 Comments ||
Top||
UN Resolution 1737 was the first resolution passed against Iran since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, evoking Article 41 of Chapter Seven of the United Nations Charter. The fact that the negotiations among the 5+1 group members -- the five permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany - were drawn out showed that it was not easy to reach a consensus against Tehran, but due to its step-by-step mechanism, the resolution can pose serious political and economic threats to Iran in the future.
Iranian officials have no doubt that it is an oppressive move against the country, but they should deal with it with wisdom and foresight. The resolution also requires the establishment of a special committee to follow up the sanctions against Irans nuclear program. The nature and responsibilities of this committee are similar to the Iraq Sanctions Committee, recalling the Wests treatment of the Iraq issue, whereas Iran is in no way comparable to Iraq under Saddam Hussein.
Although the anti-Iran resolution imposes sanctions on Irans nuclear and missile programs, it also has the potential to hinder the Islamic Republics relations with the international community under the pretexts of sanctions, extensive control, and limitation of Irans political and economic ties. The resolution requires Iran to suspend uranium enrichment-related and reprocessing activities without further delay, but Iranian officials have repeatedly rejected the demand. This shows that efforts to find a compromise have reached an impasse.
Meanwhile, the resolution has implicitly set the suspension of enrichment as a precondition for the resumption of nuclear talks. In addition, all UN member states are required to implement the resolution, which means it can damage Irans relations with its neighbors, which could lead to increased tension and crises in the region. In light of the fact that the resolution is part of a long-term anti-Iran plot hatched by the West, which Expediency Council Chairman Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani has called dangerous, it is essential that Iran formulate a well thought-out strategy to counter the resolution. The adoption of Resolution 1737 has put Iran in a more difficult situation and restricted its options. Thus, the responsibility of Irans diplomatic apparatus has become even heavier. The Iranian government should thoroughly analyze the resolution and take appropriate measures as soon as possible.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/07/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Some Netters/Bloggers argue that REsol #1737 prohibits the USA from attacking or taking mil action agz Iran, yet it doesn't say anything about the 12th Imam/Mahdi from appearing this spring equinox, which by Moud's alleged divine views likely also includes Jesus Christ [in sring?]. LOOKS LIKE DHS MAY HAVE TO SHOOT JESUS DOWN FOR FAILING TO HAVE A PROPER OWG CLOUD OPER'S LICENSE???
Our usual Sunday helping of Steyn
As part of this column's ongoing commitment to in-depth coverage of the issues that matter, we're pleased to present the first of a new series: Sheep In the News. Here are two headlines from the last week.
From the Wall Street Journal: "Ritual sacrifice? Not on my street, some Belgians say."
And from the Sunday Times of London: "Science told: Hands off gay sheep."
The first story is about the 25,000 sheep in Brussels that a few days ago found themselves pointed toward Mecca and then slit through the throat and bled to death. Muslims do this to celebrate Eid al-Adha, which commemorates Abraham's willingness to sacrifice his son to God and God's willingness to settle for a ram in lieu. The Belgian Muslim population has grown so fast that there aren't enough places in the city to perform the ritual sacrifice, and come Eid it's like sheep drivetime at every Brussels slaughterhouse, with rams backed up ram-to-ram as far as the eye can see. As reported by the Journal, Mohamed Mimoun grabbed his sheep, took a number and realized he was in for a two-hour wait. Even worse, en route to the slaughterhouse, he was stopped by a cop and fined for having the sheep in the trunk of his Toyota. By law, the sheep is supposed to ride in the rear passenger seats. Baa, baa, back seat. Heh. I am sure PETA will be onto this pronto.
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.
