Stop The ACLU » Iraq

CAIR Defends Islam: Fort Hood shooter murders in name of Allah?

Maggie Thornton — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 22:34:36 +0000

CAIR came out with their excuse for Muslim shooter, Nadal Malik Hasan: he is heinous, and Islam condemns his actions. No comment from CAIR spokesman Nihad Awad that the murders may have been committed in the name of Allah. Awad didn’t mention that there is a name for murders committed in the name of Allah – and that name is jihad. CAIR, by the way, is an un-indicted co-conspirator in the war on terror.

This article, written by Cynthia Tucker, supports CAIR’s position. The CAIR press release is here.

While most Americans will no longer buy this, our courts will. While most Americans know that Islam is an ideology with a Koranic mission to eliminate infidels entirely, the government will not even begin to explore that truth. It is a fact that many Muslims who live their lives peacefully, know that others inside the “faith” are committing jihad, and they do nothing to stop it. It is also a fact, that to abolish jihad from the “faith” is to abandon Islam.

Cynthia Tucker says [it] is probably not a “teachable moment from this horror,” and she cautions that the Army must focus more on stress-plagued soldiers.

There were about 7 hours of teachable moments yesterday – for some, those hours will never end – those hours will be the defining moments in their lives. The Army was already investigating Hasan. Tell me what they could have done with him, without cries of discrimination? There is nothing they could do except:

(1) let him out of the Army after paying thousands for his education, and send the message that if you don’t want to go to a war zone, just let us know and we’ll fix it for you, or

(2) deny all promotions and try to keep him quiet in an environment where men and women know they will be on a battlefield fighting the same ideology that Major Hasan believed so intensely in.

How many centuries has this been going on and we still reject that Islam is anything but peaceful?

There has never been a time, anywhere in the world, that Islam was not the aggressor. No, not every Muslim is radical, but can anyone show me one instance, even within the Military, where Muslims personally want to put an end to Islam’s threat to infidels?

We do not know the details of each and every Muslim serving alongside our Military. That’s the problem. What are we asking Muslims to do when deployed to a war zone fighting the war on terror. We are asking Muslims to kill Muslims, knowing that their “faith” teachs that only Muslims can, and should, survive. I know many Muslims are serving this country, but, really, I ask again, will they tell you they want to put an end to Islam’s threat to infidels? Will they?

My predictions:

(1) If Hasan lives, he will go to prison. I’m hearing this afternoon that he is paralyzed, so if he lives he will not go to prison – and no, being paralyzed is not punishment enough.

(2) The soldiers at Ft. Hood will be blamed for harassing Hasan for his religious beliefs. “Stress” will be used to excuse Major Hasan’s actions.

(3) No one can answer how a solider is supposed to react to a man among them, saying that America is the aggressor in Iraq. There is no answer, because every right answer is discrimination.

(4) Most Americas will no longer support the Muslim cries of “discrimination,” but our leaders will. Our troops will continue to serve side-by-side with Muslim soldiers who do not believe in the war on terror and are not fully committed to eradicating jihad.

(5) Fort Hood will happen again, somewhere, in some way.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

Nubs: A Mutt, A Marine, and A Miracle

Cassy Fiano — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 16:33:48 +0000

You probably hear a lot about the stray dogs that servicemembers find in the Middle East. The common theme is that our soldiers just love to kill those strays, because they’re bloodthirsty and mean and evil. It seems like that theme is more based in fiction than in reality, especially for one group of Marines. One dog even made such a connection with a Marine, Maj. Brian Dennis, that he searched the country for him, and Maj. Dennis fought to be able to take the dog he named Nubs home.

This is their incredible story.

When Maj. Brian Dennis of the United States Marine Corps met a wild stray dog with shorn ears while serving in Iraq, he had no idea of the bond they would form, leading to seismic changes in both their lives. “The general theme of the story of Nubs is that if you’re kind to someone, they’ll never forget you — whether it be person or animal,” Dennis tells Paw Nation.

In October 2007, Dennis and his team of 11 men were in Iraq patrolling the Syrian border. One day, as his team arrived at a border fort, they encountered a pack of stray dogs — not uncommon in the barren, rocky desert that was home to wolves and wild dogs.

“We all got out of the Humvee and I started working when this dog came running up,” recalls Dennis. “I said, ‘Hey buddy’ and bent down to pet him.” Dennis noticed the dog’s ears had been cut. “I said, ‘You got little nubs for ears.’” The name stuck. The dog whose ears had been shorn off as a puppy by an Iraqi soldier (to make the dog “look tougher,” Dennis says) became known as Nubs.

Dennis fed Nubs scraps from his field rations, including bits of ham and frosted strawberry Pop Tarts. “I didn’t think he’d eat the Pop Tart, but he did,” says Dennis.

At night, Nubs accompanied the men on night patrols. “I’d get up in the middle of the night to walk the perimeter with my weapon and Nubs would get up and walk next to me like he was doing guard duty,” says Dennis.

The next day, Dennis said goodbye to Nubs, but he didn’t forget about the dog. He began mentioning Nubs in emails he wrote to friends and family back home. “I found a dog in the desert,” Dennis wrote in an email in October 2007. “I call him Nubs. We clicked right away. He flips on his back and makes me rub his stomach.”

“Every couple of weeks, we’d go back to the border fort and I’d see Nubs every time,” says Dennis. “Each time, he followed us around a little more.” And every time the men rumbled away in their Humvees, Nubs would run after them. “We’re going forty miles an hour and he’d be right next to the Humvee,” says Dennis. “He’s a crazy fast dog. Eventually, he’d wear out, fall behind and disappear in the dust.”

On one trip to the border fort in December 2007, Dennis found Nubs was badly wounded in his left side where he’d been stabbed with a screwdriver. “The wound was infected and full of pus,” Dennis recalls. “We pulled out our battle kits and poured antiseptic on his wound and force fed him some antibiotics wrapped in peanut butter.” That night, Nubs was in so much pain that he refused food and water and slept standing up because he couldn’t lay down. Dennis and his team left again the next day, but Dennis thought about Nubs the entire time, hoping the dog was still alive.

Two weeks later, when Dennis and his team returned, he found Nubs alive and well. “I had patched him up and that seemed to be a turning point in how he viewed me,” says Dennis. This time, when Dennis and his team left the fort, Nubs followed. Though the dog lost sight of the Humvees, he never gave up. For two days, Nubs endured freezing temperatures and packs of wild dogs and wolves, eventually finding his way to Dennis at a camp an incredible 70 miles south near the Jordanian border.

“There he was, all beaten and chewed up,” says Dennis. “I knew immediately that Nubs had crossed through several dog territories and fought and ran, and fought and ran,” says Dennis. The dog jumped on Dennis, licking his face.

Most of the 80 men at the camp welcomed Nubs, even building him a doghouse. But a couple of soldiers complained, leading Dennis’ superiors to order him to get rid of the dog. With his hand forced, Dennis decided that the only thing to do was bring Nubs to America. He began coordinating Nubs’ rescue effort. Friends and family in the States helped, raising the $5,000 it would cost to transport Nubs overseas.

Finally, it was all arranged. Nubs was handed over to volunteers in Jordan, who looked after the dog and sent him onto to Chicago, then San Diego, where Dennis’ friends waited to pick him up. Nubs lived with Dennis’ friends and began getting trained by local dog trainer Graham Bloem of the Snug Pet Resort. “I focused on basic obedience and socializing him with dogs, people and the environment,” says Bloem.

A month later, Dennis finished his deployment in Iraq and returned home to San Diego, where he immediately boarded a bus to Camp Pendleton to be reunited with Nubs. “I was worried he wouldn’t remember me,” says Dennis. But he needn’t have worried. “Nubs went crazy,” recalls Dennis. “He was jumping up on me, licking my head.”

This is Maj. Dennis with his new best friend, Nubs:

When I read this story, I knew I just had to post it. It really just tugged at my heartstrings. It almost seems like destiny brought the two of them together, doesn’t it? For deployed Marines, the support of their significant other and their family can be what gets them through it. But you also can’t discount the difference a dog can make. Some people say that the dog chooses the owner, not the other way around, and it seems to certainly be the case for Maj. Dennis.

And of course, since we’re talking about a Marine… have you donated to Project Valour-IT? And hey, if you have, maybe you could forward this on to a friend and encourage them to donate. Remember, every little bit helps!

Cross-posted from Cassy’s blog. Stop by for more original commentary or follow her on Twitter!

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

Some Rasmussen Reports Data on Conditions in Michigan and the Nation

Gribbit — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 19:32:30 +0000

Amid massive unemployment and the federal government taking over 2 of the state’s largest companies, the peasant proletariat of the Democratic People’s Republic of Michigan (DPRM) are beginning to show signs that they are weary of Democrat failure.

In a poll released by Rasmussen Reports, 37% of voters would vote for a yet unspecified Republican candidate for Governor in 2010 versus 36% for an unnamed Democrat. 27% are yet undecided. This is HUGE for the DPRM.

From Rasmussen Reports…

Men like Republicans more, women prefer Democrats. Support for the GOP candidate is highest among voters ages 30 to 64.

Voters not affiliated with either major party prefer the Republican candidate by a more than two-to-one margin, but 55% of those voters are undecided. Married voters also go for the Republican by nearly two-to-one compared to those, unmarried.

Sitting two-term Democratic Governor Jennifer Granholm is facing forced retirement as the DPRM limits Governors to 2 terms.

Other news out of the DPRM poll shows that the Emperor’s Death Care scheme isn’t doing so well among the electorate in the DPRM. In a state which has been in the pocket of the liberal party for decades thanks to the overwhelming control of labor unions, support for the Death Care scheme is down to 45% with 48% opposed. This might seem like a tight split among those in the DPRM but when you take into consideration the strong weight that big labor and the Democrat Party play into the politics of that state, this is a stunning defeat for the Emperor in my humble but not-so-silent opinion. Nationally, the Emperor’s plan is opposed by 51% of the people with the same 45% support as garnered in the DPRM.

Economic conditions in Michigan are so bad that many are looking to leave the state.

More than one-out-of four voters (28%) in the state say they are at least somewhat likely to move out of Michigan, with 13% who say they are very likely to do so. But 67% say that a move as unlikely, with 39% saying it’s not very likely and another 28% saying it’s not at all likely for them.

The incumbent Governor’s numbers are dismal. Just 40% of the citizenry approve of Jennifer Granholm’s job performance and 60% disapprove. I think it’s telling that there are no undecideds in this area of the poll.

Those who strongly disapprove outnumber those who strongly approve by a 47% to 18% margin.

Some of you may ask why I call Michigan the Democratic People’s Republic of Michigan (DPRM). Michigan is the prime example of what happens when you leave the big government hounds of the Democrat Party in charge for too long and allow big labor unions to dictate political will. The people in Michigan are not so much an electorate as they are subjects. As in they are subjected to political abuse on a daily basis.

It’s not that I wish to belittle the people of Michigan but rather it is my goal to “nudge” them into seeing with their own eyes for a change. Prompt them to recognize the problems within their state and take action against the cause. Because the cause is liberal politics and big government.

In other news out of Rasmussen Reports, the Emperor’s Presidential Index is at -12 as his party is seen to be less trusted than Republicans on 10 key issues.

Health Care:

The people favor Republicans in the area of health care by a 6 point margin. 46% trust the Republicans to better handle the issue of health care as opposed to 40% for those pushing a government run system.

Education:

The people favor Republicans in the area of education by a 5 point margin. 43% of Americans trust Republicans with the issue of education as opposed to 38% who trust Democrats.

Social Security:

The people favor Republicans in the area of Social Security by a 8 point margin. 45% of Americans trust the Republicans to on the issue of Social Security as opposed to 37% trusting Democrats.

Taxes:

Here’s no surprise. The people favor Republicans in the area of taxes by a massive 15 point margin. 50% of Americans trust Republicans on the issue of taxes as opposed to 35% who trust Democrats.

Economy:

Again, no surprises here. The people favor Republicans in this area as well by a margin of 14 points. 49% of American trust the Republicans to better handle the economy as opposed to the 35% who actually are misguided enough to trust Democrats and their tax and spend ways.

Abortion:

The people trust Republicans more by a margin of 12 points on the issue of abortion. 47% trust that the Republican approach to the issue of abortion as opposed to the Democrats who are trusted by a mere 35%. So much for liberalism’s most central issue.

Immigration:

The people are more trusting in Republicans on the issue of immigration by a margin of 7 points. 40% trust Republicans over their Democrat colleagues on the issue with Dems snagging 33% support for their efforts.

National Security:

I know this is going to shock the hell out of your Obamabots, but the American people trust Republicans with National Security by a margin of 23 points. A full 54% trust Republicans more as opposed to the 31% who favor Democrat’s surrender in order for the world to like us policies.

Iraq:

Again, another shock for the defense-challenged liberals. Republicans again edge out Democrats by 19 points. For all their bitching during the Bush years about the Iraq war, the Dems haven’t make any progress in either war. Rasmussen’s polling numbers indicate that 50% of those surveyed trusted Republicans to handle the situation in Iraq as opposed to the dimwitted 31% who put their faith in the Party of pacifists.

Government Ethics:

In spite of all the “culture of corruption” rhetoric that still lingers from the 2006 midterms, the American people favor Republicans to better handle government ethics over Democrats by a margin of 4 points. Both numbers are rather dismal however Americans trust Republicans (33%) over Democrats (29%). Who is throwing around dangerous rhetoric now Nancy?

With Republicans being seen as more trustworthy on so many social issues, what does this say for the direction of the country? What does it say about Obamamania and the love affair with Democrats? I’m banking on the fact that said love affair is over and Obamamania is dead.

[Content Restricted]

Correction – In the original posting of this piece, I stated, “The people are more trusting in Republicans on the issue of immigration by a margin of 17 points.” This figure is incorrect. The spread is actually 7 points. It has been corrected in the body of the piece.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

Spotlight on a Marine Corps hero

Cassy Fiano — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 02:06:54 +0000

MY Marine Corps hero!

For the Project Valour-IT competition, the Marine Corps team is doing all kind of fun stuff. We’re going to have trivia and games, and we’ll also be spotlighting Marine heroes throughout the competition. To get the ball rolling, Cassandra asked me to kick things off by interviewing my Marine, my boyfriend Matt. I’m ridiculously proud of him, of course, and brag about him whenever I can as it is. And as if I don’t yak about him enough on here already, I get to feature even more fun stuff about him now, too.

In all seriousness, Matt truly is a hero to me, just like the thousands of other Marines out there. I can say without any bias that he loves what he does, he loves the Corps, and he loves his country. He’s willing to fight and die for America and for all of us. I may be his girlfriend and I’m certainly biased, but it’s still a pretty incredible thing.

So, with all that said, check out Matt’s and my “interview” after the jump, and there are a few pictures of him at the end as well. (Sorry they’re all with me, too, but I don’t have many pictures of Matt in uniform that doesn’t have me in them also.)

What is your rank and MOS in the Marine Corps?

- Corporal, 0311 (Infantry Rifleman).

How long have you been serving?

- Five years, and I just reenlisted in September of 2008.

Why did you join the Marine Corps?

- Because it was the hardest branch, and I wanted to challenge myself. From what I saw during my time in the Army, the Marine Corps was stricter and had more rules. That was what I wanted. I also wanted to go to Iraq and fight for my country, I wanted to get deployed. I felt like everyone else was doing their part; why shouldn’t I?

What was serving in Iraq like?

- In the beginning, when I first got to Iraq, it was worrisome because I thought I could just be attacked at any moment and was scared of dying. But after taking mortar fire for a couple of weeks, I got used to it and wasn’t scared anymore. I knew if it was my time it was my time. All I cared about was getting home to my family, and I was more concerned about how they’d feel if I was gone. I got to see Saddam Hussein during his trial, because I was guarding the embassy in Baghdad. I got to sit in during his trial. When I came back the first time, we landed in Maine, and everyone was real friendly and really happy about us coming back. Retired Marines were coming up to us, shaking our hands, and it was great.

The second time I went, I was more familiar with the country and I wasn’t worried at all. We would do convoy missions, and we were in some very well protected vehicles called MRAPs (Mine Resistant Ambush Protectant), and they can take small arms fire without doing any damage. It can take a 7.62 round without penetrating the armor, and that’s the primary round of our enemy, with the AK-47s. We were worried more about IEDs, so it was like fighting a silent enemy. You can’t find them, you just hope you don’t get blown up. Most of the other Marine units on patrol got hit my IEDs, but we didn’t. We were very fortunate. But every day, when you got into your truck and started riding out, you never knew what would happen. You would get these guys coming up to you with their arms in the air yelling “ALLAH AKBAR!”, which is what they yell when they’re about to blow themselves up. So you would grab your M-16 and just get ready to shoot them if they were going to try anything. For the most part we just tried to have fun. We would pass a lot of the times doing stupid sh*t and making up dumb jokes. A bunch of us, for example, got one Marine to drink a ChemLight to see if his pee would glow. He threw up, and his pee definitely did not glow. When we got back, it was in Massachusetts. It wasn’t as great of a homecoming, because we had just returned to our own country for the first time, and no one greeted us. We were in uniform, and everyone just stared. No one smiled or said thank you or anything. You wanna talk about not feeling welcome in your own country? We didn’t feel welcome. We felt like no one cared. We got treated better in Ireland drinking beer in the airport. It was a real sh*tty homecoming, until we got back to Camp Lejeune and got to see our families and everything.

What was the homecoming like?

- Homecomings are always great when you have a woman there that cares about you. When I got home, my girlfriend was there waiting for me. She could’ve been standing out there for hours for all I know, but she was there when I got off the bus. The feeling of knowing that someone is going to be there waiting for you, someone who cares so much about you, made the homecoming worth something, worth more than it did the first time. That’s what every Marine wants to come home from deployment to, a good woman who’s faithful to you and who cares about you. Also you realize you were taking for granted everything the United States has to offer before you left, especially coming back from a place like Iraq. You walk into a store and they have fresh food, fresh fruit, fresh water. In Iraq sometimes water is even hard to get.

Do you think Americans appreciate your service?

- I think most of them do. I always appreciate it when someone comes up to me and says thank you, but I feel more inclined to say thank you for them being supportive. There’s a lot of people who want to serve but can’t, for whatever reason. As long as they’re supportive, I’m more thankful for them than they should be for me, personally.

There are some people, especially on the Left, who don’t support the military. How do you feel about that?

-They have the right to say what they want. They’re Americans, and that’s their right. Of course, the only reason they have that right is because the military [is] willing to fight for it. They can put it down all day long and sit around at home being a coward, but at the end of the day, it’s thanks to the military that they can put us down. It’s thanks to the military that they aren’t speaking Japanese or German or Russian.

What does being a Marine mean to you?

- Being a cut above the rest. It’s not always about physical ability, sometimes it’s more mental. It sounds cliched, but it’s the whole “the few… the proud” thing. We’re very proud of who we are because of our training. I feel like we get better training than any other branch.

What about America is worth fighting for to you? The Marines have been known as the best fighting force the world has ever seen, but what is it that you are actually fighting for?

- Opportunity. People have more of an opportunity here than in other countries. It is a country that’s been through some hard times, but so have a lot of countries. What makes this country so great is… you can call it freedom, but it’s not what people usually think. It’s not the freedom to do whatever you want. The freedom to have a job, to raise a family, to not have a communist dictator running your life. The freedom to speak up and not have repercussions from your government, with them dragging you outside your house and shooting you, or raping your wife right in front of you. People like to put down this country, but it’s a lot better than most other countries. It’s a melting pot. If it’s so bad here, then why do so many other people leave their countries to come live in the United States? I fight for the Constitution. The Constitution was made for the United States, for the people, by the people. A document was signed that freed Americans from tyranny, and I’m not fighting for the president or my mom or my girlfriend. I fight for the Constitution, I fight for everybody.

Some people wonder all their lives wondering if they made a difference. The Marines don’t have that problem.

Cross-posted from Cassy’s blog. Stop by for more commentary or follow her on Twitter!

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

DU Thread Of The Day: The Military Is Waging War On The White House

William Teach — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 13:15:24 +0000

It’s been awhile since we had one of these to laugh at. And, of course, a good moonbat thread at the DU must start with some Seymour Hersh

The U.S. military is not just fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, America’s most renowned investigative journalist says.

The army is also “in a war against the White House — and they feel they have [President] Obama boxed in,” Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter Seymour Hersh told several hundred people in Duke University’s Page Auditorium on Tuesday night. “They think he’s weak and the wrong color. Yes, there’s racism in the Pentagon. We may not like to think that, but it’s true and we all know it.”

In a speech on Obama’s foreign policy, Hersh, who uncovered the My Lai massacre during the Vietnam War and torture at Abu Ghraib prison during the Iraqi war, said many military leaders want Obama to fail.

“A lot of people in the Pentagon would like to see him get into trouble,” he said. By leaking information that the commanding officer in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, says the war would be lost without an additional 40,000 American troops, top brass have put Obama in a no-win situation, Hersh contended.

“If he gives them the extra troops they’re asking for, he loses politically,” Hersh said. “And if he doesn’t give them the troops, he also loses politically.”

Got that? The military is waging war on Barry. Intentionally. However, I would think, based on Obama’s numerous campaign talking points about increasing troop strength by several brigades would be a win, politically. But, it is a shame that the Left has to think about war in terms of what is politically best, rather than what is best to win. Of course, politics is life for the Left.

Anyhow, this article brought on some interesting comments from the Reality Based Community

I’ve never been very comfortable with Gates in Obama’s administration. He doesn’t do anything really crazy to to get attention (and I sleep better knowing that Mr. Ding “Don” Rumsfield is out of the picture)…but, any Bush holdover, especially in Defense, is dangerous. I hope Hersch is over-reacting, but if he isn’t, I hope Obama’s got a plan to deal with all of these guys, at once. (don’t worry, I’m sure Obama has plenty of plans to deal with American’s who disagree with him. None to deal with threats to America, though)
The Pentagon is hopelessly infested with neocons and Christian fanatics……who believe they’re in a “crusade” against Islam. (translation: too many Joooooooo lovers and non-Muslim religious folks)
I agree. They are dangerous fanatics. (but, Islamic terrorists are “freedom fighters“)
This is much of the problem. They can’t think outside the ‘end times’ box. (I guess they are all “fundies,” as well)
Here we see the real enemy of our nation – once again the enemy within - the military industrial organization – the military and the corporations. POWER. (got that? The military, established by the Constitution, is the enemy)
I’d start by reassigning McChrystal. That was a punk move by him. Obama needs to let those boys know that he’s in charge. (I thought Rahm Emanual and David Axelrod were in charge)
Have you seen him, heard him talk? He’s an a**hole, bitter and dictatorial. (Is the DUmmy talking about McChrystal, or Barry?)
He should be replaced on principle.These are not zealots but patriots fighting invaders. (Told ya! The Islamists are patriots, the US military is the bad guy)
I’m sorry to say that I cannot respect military brass. The military seems to be corporate – evangelical – bigoted – and many have not grown up enough to treat women of the nations they are invading and occupying like humans – as well as our own – their co-military female soldiers. (DU moonbattery wrapped up in one nice, neat ball)

You just knew that, at some point, this thread had to move from “barking moonbat” to “bat sh*t crazy,” right? Here we go!

Red Cloud: Line up those who oppose their President and shoot them. Pre Pinochet thinking here. Their job is to do or die, not to become the Pentagon Propaganda machine (no comment necessary)

Wetzelbill: They flat refused to snatch terrorists when Clinton was president They did it several times. I think even The Weekly Standard wrote about that before. Richard Clarke discusses this in his book, Against All Enemies. There are people in the military status quo who will go along with any harebrained GOP scheme yet fight tooth and nail against anything that a Dem president wants. That’s just how it is. (huh? Now they are blaming the military for Clinton not accepting Osama on a platter three times?)

Greengestalt: How ’bout using force?…… And I’d just PURGE the NeoCON and “Dominionist” plants overnight. All of them, dishonorably discharged, no leave, no pay, no medical, no disability. I’d have the media, on threat of “Abuse of the Patriot act” quickly throw together made for TV movies that show them as child raping, “Non-Christian troop” fragging, psychopathic Nazis and take a few (quite a few, actually) examples of them harassing and threatening other troops and make sure those are played to ‘balance’ if they ever manage to get on the news about that. That way they’d be a huge burden on the “Religious Right”, while the rest of the real army could be repaired and mobilized for peaceful (non-armed) civilian public works projects.

I’d want to cut defense spending by 2/3, with 1/3 going to paying the debt, 1/3 to infrastructure. Laid off troops would become public servants in the new mass-transit systems. Due to all the enemies America has earned we’d need a small but still top trained army and a small nuclear ‘deterrent’, and sadly that would be the remaining 1/3. Basically, enough to defend the homeland, launch a limited “Precision Strike” if we decide to and the “MAD” option but in a smaller state.

But don’t say that the Left hates the military.

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

Obama’s Delay Is Turning Afghanistan Into A Quagmire

Gribbit — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 20:47:07 +0000

Barack Obama we are told is a smart man. He attended Columbia University and Harvard Law. He lectured Constitutional law at the University of Chicago, but does any of this qualify him to be Commander-in-Chief?

On the campaign trail, candidate Obama famously called Afghanistan the “good war”. But the truth of the matter, Afghanistan was the stagnant war. The enemy shifted its focus to Iraq because that is where we chose to fight. The Taliban and al Qaeda where chased out of Afghanistan and into Pakistan and needed to be regrouped. So they called on Islamic “freedom fighters” to engage the mean old United States in its war against Islam in Iraq. Iraq for all the left’s bitching was the front line of the Global War on Terrorism.

Now that the Islamofascists have had their collective a**es handed to them in Iraq, the newly reorganized al Qaeda and Taliban are beginning to fight back in Afghanistan. Now that Iraq has been largely turned over to the Iraqis (prematurely or not) US forces are now needed in mass in Afghanistan or all will be lost.

The President hand picked his own commander in Afghanistan. He just happens to be the man who got Saddam Hussein back in 2003. However when his commander asked for an Afghanistan “Surge” as General David Patreus had in Iraq, our paper President is indecisive and soldiers on the ground are dying.

Let me remind you that Obama called Afghanistan the “good war”. Promised to take the fight to Afghanistan. In the grand old tradition of the left during the Bush years, it seems that Obama lied and people are dying.

His indecision has led to a massive increase in the number of casualties.

From My Way News – US forces leave isolated Afghan base after attack

U.S. forces have withdrawn from an isolated base in eastern Afghanistan that insurgents attacked last week in one of the deadliest battles of the war for U.S. troops, the NATO-led coalition said Friday.

The pullout from the Kamdesh outpost near the Pakistani border is likely to embolden insurgent fighters in the region. The Taliban swiftly claimed “victory” for forcing the coalition to leave and said they had raised their flag above the town.

Now in all fairness the withdrawal was planned however, if the President wasn’t dragging his feet about increasing the number of ground troops in Afghanistan, perhaps the pull-out would not have been necessary at all. But Obama, like most Democrat Presidents since the end of World War II is indecisive. He would rather micro-manage from Washington than commit to winning the war on the battlefield using the best information possible – his commanders on the ground. This concern for not losing a battle tends to lead to drawn out conflicts.

Examples – Harry Truman’s inability to win in Korea led to years of stalemate and hundreds of thousands of dead and wounded because the President couldn’t pull the trigger. LBJ’s micro-managing of Vietnam led to hundreds of thousands of names on a granite wall in Arlington, Virginia.

The longer Obama stalls on an Afghan Surge, the more bodies will be coming home either mangled or in bags. This is the stuff that quagmires are made of.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

Obama: Taliban Killers Can Be Part of Afghanistan’s Government

Jay — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 02:14:12 +0000

I’ve known for a while that Obama’s marbles are not all there, but this news has revealed we have a crazy person at the wheel! No, Biden didn’t grab the keys, it’s Mr. Charisma himself spewing this crap! If the Taliban is not the enemy, why have we been fighting them for 8 years? Now we are gonna hand the country back to them? Is this insanity even considering how Iran is supporting these monsters? Listen to this stupidity.

Though aides stress that the president’s final decision on any changes is still at least two weeks away, the emerging thinking suggests that he would be very unlikely to favor a large military increase of the kind being advocated by the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal…

Obama’s developing strategy on the Taliban will “not tolerate their return to power,” the senior official said in an interview with The Associated Press. But the U.S. would fight only to keep the Taliban from retaking control of Afghanistan’s central government — something it is now far from being capable of — and from giving renewed sanctuary in Afghanistan to al-Qaida, the official said…
Bowing to the reality that the Taliban is too ingrained in Afghanistan’s culture to be entirely defeated, the administration is prepared, as it has been for some time, to accept some Taliban role in parts of Afghanistan, the official said. That could mean paving the way for Taliban members willing to renounce violence to participate in a central government — though there has been little receptiveness to this among the Taliban. It might even mean ceding some regions of the country to the Taliban…

Obama kept returning to one question for his advisers: Who is our adversary, the official said.

And perhaps they will swear on the Koran when they denounce their violence. No matter, Obama will take them at their word. Meanwhile perhaps we can get some tigers to renounce their stripes. This idiot can’t listen to his Generals and instead wants to wuss out and actually cede over parts of the country to murdering cavemen! It has become all about Obama’s ego now!

Ed Morrissey:

In other words, rather than eat crap by forthrightly admitting he’s prepared to abandon huge swaths of the country to Islamist fascists rather than invest another 40,000 troops, he’s going to create an artificial distinction between the Taliban and Al Qaeda to let him save face by claiming he’s focused on “the real enemy.” Much like how he was focused during the campaign on “the good war” in Afghanistan rather than “the bad war” in Iraq. I wonder how long it’ll be before he decides that not everyone who’s in Al Qaeda is an enemy either — or, better yet, that AQ’s been “substantially defeated” or something, which has been the unstated thrust of all those WH-leaked pieces in the press lately about how weak Bin Laden’s gang has become. Why, I’ll bet in a year or so we’ll be told that they’re so weak that we can start pulling out of Afghanistan altogether. Things sure have improved over there since Bush was president, huh?

Ace:

If Obama wants to lose the war that must be won, as he used to declare hourly — which he plainly does — he should do our troops the courtesy of removing them from harm’s way completely, rather that letting them twist in the wind in a war he’s already decided to lose.

This Aint Hell:

For six years we got to hear the Left complain that Iraq wasn’t complicit in world-wide terrorism. Now we get to hear them eliminate yet another group of enemies with their pathetic, intellectually shallow excuses. Besides, the Taliban says that they’re not a threat to us. they’ve never lied before, right?

What’s next? Are they going to tell us that Osama bin Laden didn’t know about the 9-11 attacks? How could he? He was all the way in Afghanistan.

JMF:

At the same time. evidence is coming to light that Iran may indeed be supplying the Taliban with weapons and supplies with which to wage war against our forces, just like they did in Iraq.

If this does indeed become the course of inaction that the administration chooses, I do not know what to say to all those service members and the families of those left behind, that would justify this.

And what to say to all of the Afghanis who will no doubt be massacred just like what happened in the aftermath of Vietnam and in Cambodia.

The mother of all expiration dates:

Then-candidate Barack Obama, July 15, 2008:

Our troops and our NATO allies are performing heroically in Afghanistan, but I have argued for years that we lack the resources to finish the job because of our commitment to Iraq. That’s what the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said earlier this month. And that’s why, as President, I will make the fight against al Qaeda and the Taliban the top priority that it should be. This is a war that we have to win.

And then in August, before the VFW:

This is the central front in the war on terrorism. This is where the Taliban is gaining strength and launching new attacks, including one that just took the life of ten French soldiers. This is where Osama bin Laden and the same terrorists who killed nearly 3,000 Americans on our own soil are hiding and plotting seven years after 9/11. This is a war that we have to win.

And then in his convention address:

I will end this war in Iraq responsibly, and finish the fight against al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan.

And then on October 22:

Abroad, we need a new direction that ends the war in Iraq, focuses on the fight against al Qaeda and the Taliban, and restores strong alliances and tough American diplomacy.
The New York Times, today:

President Obama’s national security team is moving to reframe its war strategy by emphasizing the campaign against Al Qaeda in Pakistan while arguing that the Taliban in Afghanistan do not pose a direct threat to the United States, officials said Wednesday.

Good coverage at Atlas Shrugs too.

Remember folks! The Taliban is not the enemy. This Taliban?

What a sad, pathetic, weak man we have in the White House. Obama Takes Yesterday’s Taliban Talking Points, Makes Them Today’s WH Spin God, help us!

Watch CBS News Videos Online

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

Bolton: ‘A Post-American Speech By Our First Post-American President’

William Teach — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 21:14:13 +0000

I’m just straight up stealing The Corner’s headline for John Bolton’s commentary on President Kumbaya’s United Nations speech (via DrewM at Ace of Spades)

Former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton tells NRO that President Obama’s address to the U.N. was “a post-American speech by our first post-American president. It was a speech high on the personality of Barack Obama and high on multilateralism, but very short in advocating American interests.”

“It was a very naïve, Wilsonian speech, and very revealing of Obama’s foreign policy,” says Bolton. “Overall, it was so apologetic for the actions of prior administrations, in an effort to distance Obama from them, that it became yet another symbol of American weakness in the wake of the president’s decision to abandon missile sites in Poland and the Czech Republic, and his recent manifest hesitation over what to do in Afghanistan.”

“The most significant point of the speech was how the president put Israel on the chopping block in a variety of references, from calling Israeli settlements in the West Bank illegitimate to talking about ending ‘the occupation that began in 1967.’ That implies that he supports going back to 1967 borders,” says Bolton. “Obama has a very tough road ahead. He is frequently taking the side of the Palestinians, who don’t have a competent leader who can make hard decisions and compromises in the future.”

I listened, or, at least, half listened, to most of Barry’s U.N. address, and, while he attempted to add in some “well, you better like us and help us, or I’m telling mommy’s,” it was all about pandering to thugs and dictators. You know, his standard fare.

Three other parts stand out, of the many many nutty things he said

On my first day in office, I prohibited – without exception or equivocation – the use of torture by the United States of America. I ordered the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed, and we are doing the hard work of forging a framework to combat extremism within the rule of law. Every nation must know: America will live its values, and we will lead by example.

First of all, Gitmo is no closer to being closed than when he made the pronouncement that it would be closed within 12 months of January 12, 2009 when he signed the order. Second, a good chunk of the countries represented tend to use torture before they even ask the first question, so, I doubt they were really impressed.

This body was founded on the belief that the nations of the world could solve their problems together.

Not really. It was a way of having the US and USSR snipe at each verbally instead of with weapons.

All of this must support efforts to strengthen the NPT. Those nations that refuse to live up to their obligations must face consequences. This is not about singling out individual nations – it is about standing up for the rights of all nations that do live up to their responsibilities. Because a world in which IAEA inspections are avoided and the United Nation’s demands are ignored will leave all people less safe, and all nations less secure.

Now, Barry may have been speaking specifically about nuclear weapons, but, if memory serves, Iraq refused to live up to their obligations, including IAEA inspectors, and faced the consequences of 17 UN resolutions, culminating in 1441, authorizing the use of force, which, if memory serves, Barry gave a speech against and refused to vote to fund. How ’bout dat!

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

Democrats Tell The Truth About Afghanistan

William Teach — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 13:11:30 +0000

Hullabaloo comes out and tells us what most Democrats/Liberals/Progressives think about Afghanistan

Escalation is a bad idea. The Democrats backed themselves into defending the idea of Afghanistan being The Good War because they felt they needed to prove their macho bonafides they called for withdrawal from Iraq. Nobody asked too many questions sat [sic] the time, including me. But none of us should forget that it was a political strategy, not a serious foreign policy.

There have been many campaign promises “adjusted” since the election. There is no reason that the administration should feel any more bound to what they said about this than all the other committments [sic] it has blithely turned aside in the interest of “pragmatism.”

Remember back to 2001. Quite a few of them were wondering what we, the USA, did wrong to make al Qaeda attack us. They were calling for restraint, moderation, thoughtfulness, and, said introspection into America’s blame. Barack Obama did just that in October, 2001. He also hired a 9/11 Truther for a high Czar position.

The war in Afghanistan started too quickly for the Left to get in full force demonstration mode, as with Iraq (which most do not seem to be complaining about, at least since 1/20/2009,) so, they were forced to mostly approve and support the Afghany operations, except in their conversations with each other. But, we knew the truth. Same with Osama Bin Laden. They didn’t care if we captured or killed him, except as a means to assault President Bush. Notice that talk of getting OBL has pretty much ended, as well.

Don’t forget, they do not even want to call it the War on Terrorism anymore. Which is official, per President Neophyte.

Anyhow, thanks for telling us what all Democrats are thinking, Hullabaloo. (via Jim Geraghty)

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

CIA Counterterrorism Expert: Obama and Holder ‘At War’ with Agency

Maggie Thornton — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 03:23:01 +0000

by Maggie at Maggie’s Notebook via Jim Simpson

This is an article every American should read. Period. Don’t wait on Obama and Holder to listen however. As [it] should be getting clearer and clearer, this administration is at war with America.

Jim Simpson

Reprinted with permission

By Kent Clizbe

In the early days and weeks after Sept. 11, 2001, a small cadre of men (and a few women) with vast amounts of intelligence experience reported to the Langley, Va., headquarters of the CIA. These unsung heroes then were dispatched across the globe to run operations against the al-Qaida conspirators who leveled the World Trade Center and struck the nerve center of the U.S. military.

The FBI, a domestic law enforcement agency, did not have the ability or skills needed to track down and strike the attackers overseas. The Pentagon, with F22s, nuclear aircraft carriers, intercontinental ballistic missiles, and battalions of the best armor in the history of mankind, was like an elephant attacked by a mouse — mighty, but helpless in its mammoth rage.

Our best hope was in the hands of the gray-bearded intelligence professionals who fanned out across the world. Supplementing the skeleton crew of staff officers left in the wake of President Clinton’s anti-intelligence scourging of the CIA, the volunteers went to the Middle East, Asia, Europe, Africa, South America, to the most remote and isolated outposts in the world. Sometimes they worked with friendly forces, and sometimes they worked alone. They focused like a laser beam on one thing: Stop the next attack.

Their mission: Seek and destroy the terrorist planners, facilitators, trainers, financiers, and their infrastructure wherever they were.

Twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week, CIA officers, both the contractors and the overextended staff officers, launched dozens of initiatives. The CIA Counterterrorism Center’s motto, “Deny, Disrupt, Destroy,” became the reason for our living. We left our families for months on end and sacrificed personal and professional lives to fight the Global War on Terror (GWOT). Google “Jihadists in Paradise,” for an unauthorized account of one of my contributions (I have been advised that I can neither confirm nor deny).

As I did my part in the Middle East, Southeast Asia, and Africa, my family tried to maintain a semblance of normalcy at home. My son was in eighth grade in September 2001. I did not see him graduate the next summer. I was home less than six months for each of the first three of his high school years.

Even with my nightly phone calls, his attitude and grades plummeted in my absence. He went from a happy, engaged, charming 13-year-old with straight A’s and a focus on the future to a sullen, uncommunicative, high school flunky. I put my successful and lucrative executive recruiting business on hold for eight years. Finally, after five years of constant travel, my family sacrifice account was overdrawn. Coming home was an option for me, and I took it.

Others did not take that option, and they sacrificed the quality of their marriages, participation in their children’s and grandchildren’s lives, the profitability of their businesses, and more. Personal and professional issues festered and rotted while they fought to keep America safe and prevented further attacks on our homeland.

In contrast, where was Eric Holder? Before leaving President Clinton’s employ, he orchestrated the pardons of several Puerto Rican separatist terrorists. Then in 2003, as a partner in the Washington law firm of Covington & Burling, Holder’s client, Chiquita Brands, admitted paying to support terrorist death squads in Colombia and paid a $25 million fine. During the time my friends worked to disrupt and destroy terrorist networks threatening America, Holder’s firm represented — for free — 16 terrorist detainees at Guantanamo.

Has he made any personal or professional sacrifices since his country was attacked in 2001? If he has, it is difficult to find them. When the special prosecutor comes calling, maybe someone from Covington & Burling can represent my colleagues for free, like they did for Lakhdar Boumedienne and 10 other terrorists in Gitmo.

The Holder/Obama Global War on the CIA (GWCIA) has only just begun, as it debuted with “grisly revelations” of revving drills, gunshots in the next cell, and threats against a terrorist’s children. The GWOT is not for the faint of heart, nor the queasy. No war ever has been. There may be slight improprieties stashed in the CIA’s closets, but the liberal-appeasing GWCIA is foolhardy and dangerous.

Mike Spann, was the first to die in the GWOT. He won’t have to worry about the Holder/Obama GWCIA. But others in the agency are very worried. While we sacrificed to achieve incremental victories, Holder and Obama plotted and schemed — not against those “evil-mongers” who killed our countrymen, but against those of us hunting the terrorists. Something is rotten in the state of Denmark. The odor is not from Langley, Mr. Holder.

Kent Clizbe is a former member of the CIA’s Directorate of Operations. In 2001, in the aftermath of Sept. 11, he returned to the CIA to serve multiple counter-terrorism deployments. In 2005, he was awarded the Intelligence Community Seal Medallion for his anti-terrorism work.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post