Journalist Muntadhar al-Zeidi, who was kidnapped by Shiite militants last year, was being held by Iraqi security Monday and interrogated about whether anybody paid him to throw his shoes at Bush during a press conference the previous day in Baghdad, said an Iraqi official. Showing the sole of your shoe to someone in the Arab world is a sign of extreme disrespect, and throwing your shoes is even worse. Image Credit: Newsday
“W” And The Shoe – Great On His Feet
One thing everyone could count on from George, that he was always best on his feet.
He starts the importance of his presidency standing in the rubble of the World Trade Center Towers with his arm draped around the shoulders of an old time firefighter, stating, “I can hear you. The rest of the world hears you. And the people who knocked these buildings down will hear all of us soon.”
George W. Bush ends his presidency ducking a couple of shoes hurled at him by a reporter in Iraq (a cultural sign of disrespect), turning the situation into a lesson in democracy by first stating “I’m OK,” “All I can report is it is a size 10,” and then later to reporters on how he understood the act, "It's like going to a political rally and have people yell at you. It's a way for people to draw attention," Bush said. "I don't know what the guy's cause was. I didn't feel the least bit threatened by it."
Lesson - In a democracy it is always OK to express a difference of opinion (even though the reporter that threw the shoes, who was escorted out by Iraqi officials, was promptly beaten).
How will history treat George Bush?
I have a suspicion it’s going to be better then a lot of people now suspect - or are willing to admit.
If only he could have pulled out a veto pen and used it as easily and with the athletic deft he showed he could dodge a shoe! …
… if he had, the way history will treat “W” would have been not only favorable, but great.
Senator Barack Obama and Terry Moran of ABC News - "I've always reserved the right, uh, to say---let's say that ethnic, uh, ethnic fighting broke out once again---I've reserved the right to say---I don't--I'm not going to stand idly by if genocide is occurring.”, said Barack Obama. Image Credit: ABC News via my.barackobama.com
Barack Obama And His Perfect Storm Of Peace In Iraq
In an interview with ABC’s Terry Moran for Nightline (July 21, 2008), Barack Obama showed why he really isn’t ready for “Primetime” let alone “Nightline”.
Junior Senator Barack Obama will not say he was wrong about his assessment of the Bush Administration’s implementation of the military operation that has become known as “The Surge”. This is the operation where an additional 30,000 or so United States soldiers were placed in Iraq in order to stop the strengthening growth of anti-Iraq insurgent (Al Qaeda) combatants and provide security for the newly elected government of Iraq to begin to operate.
Eighteen months ago, it was estimated that there were 12,000 armed combatants working throughout the country to disrupt the newly formed government of Iraq. Today, the estimate is that there may be 1,200 armed combatants holed up in the western provinces of Iraq. One year ago in June 2007, we lost over seventy soldiers to violence and IED roadside bombs throughout Iraq … June 2008 saw that number drop to five.
Moran noted that Obama had claimed that the surge "would not make a significant dent in the violence."
Barack Obama insists that the reason the violence is down in Iraq is due to a convergence of factors that he could not anticipate happening … OH, and some “terrific work by our troops”.
The Perfect Storm of factors the junior Senator sites are disturbing ---
“… but the Sunni awakening in which a whole host of Sunni tribal leaders decided that they had had enough with Al Qaeda, in the Shii’a community the militias standing down to some degrees. So what you had is a combination of political factors inside of Iraq that then came right at the same time as terrific work by our troops. Had those political factors not occurred, I think that my assessment would have been correct.”
Sorry Barack, the Sunni tribal leaders could not have “had enough” and say so if the additional 30,000 troops were not on the ground to provide security and combative strength. The Shii’a community mailtias would not have stood down if there wasn’t a very capable and ready force (bolstered by 30,000 United States military troops on the ground) aligned against their violent power grabbing agenda.
Further, Barack Obama had this to say as it relates to what HE would do if he were President and the military was pulled out of Iraq … and the violence began to increase inside the country ---
"But," asked Moran,"if the country had pursued your policy of withdrawing in the face of this horrific violence, what do you think Iraq would look like now?"
Obama said it would be hard to speculate. "The Sunnis might have made the same decisions at that time. The Shii’as might have made some similar decisions based on political calculation. There was ethnic cleansing in Baghdad that actually took the violence level down," he said.
Obama also told Moran that there were circumstances under which he could revise his instruction to U.S. generals to begin withdrawing combat brigades at the pace of one-to-two per month.
"I've always reserved the right, uh, to say---let's say that ethnic, uh, ethnic fighting broke out once again---I've reserved the right to say---I don't--I'm not going to stand idly by if genocide is occurring. I'm not going to stand idly by if vital United States interests are at stake. Um, so in that sense yes, I retain the flexibility anyone who in the job of commander in chief is constantly reassessing facts, risks, and so forth."
--- So, basically Barack Obama advocates that our military go back to Iraq and start a third war insde Iraq.
This scenario actually would be an insult to Jimmy Carter and the suggestion that a Barack Obama presidency would result in a second term for the Carter Administration.
Actually, a Barack Obama Administration would be of a greater failure than a Carter’s Second Term.
Barack Obama sits down to speak with the editorial board of The Military Times. Image Credit: YouTube Account, pe11201 - Video by M. Scott Mahaskey / Military Times Staff
The “I”- “Me” (monopolistic thinking of), uh, Barack, uh, Oba, uh, ma
Somebody please ask junior Senator Barack Obama what he means when he says that contract worker support of our war effort should be just used for kitchenwork and automobile repair. Does Barack Obama actually know what kind of invaluable service outfits like Blackwater perform in the support of our efforts in ferreting out zeolots who want to do harm to the Iraqi citizens we are trying to liberate?
There is room for private contractors to work in the mess hall, providing basic supplies and doing some logistical work that might have been done in-house in the past. I am troubled by the use of private contractors when it comes to potential armed engagements... I think it creates some difficult morale issues when you've got private contractors getting paid 10 times what an Army private's getting paid for work that carries similar risks…
Does Barack even understand what Blackwater does ... they are NOT mercenaries. They do not replace the activity of our armed forces but actually complement the effort through special tasks best left to security professionals.
But Barack continued:
… When it comes to our special forces, what we've seen is that it's a potential drain of some of our best-trained special forces, and you can't blame them if they can make so much more working for Blackwater than they can working as a master sergeant. That, I think is a problem.
Q: Blackwater would argue that they're a bargain: that you get a higher level of ability, that they can put people there, they can keep top-level talent there perpetually.
A: I am not arguing that there are never going to be uses for private contractors in some circumstances. What I am saying is if you start building a military premised on the use of private contractors and you start making decisions on armed engagement based on the availability of private contractors to fill holes and gaps that over time you are, I believe, eroding the core of our military's relationship to the nation and how accountability is structured. I think you are privatizing something that is what essentially sets a nation-state apart, which is a monopoly on violence. And to set those kinds of precedents, I think, will lead us over the long term into some troubled waters.
Barack Obama doesn’t know… what he doesn’t know. What does he mean when he says I think you are privatizing something that is what essentially sets a nation-state apart, which is a monopoly on violence. WHAT?!
War is war and to be truthful, there is no monopoly of violence when bullets start flying or when people are strapping bombs to themselves to blow innocent citizens up. What does exist is an environment where specialized talents are placed into use to enable our effort to push back and win more efficiently and effectively. This is not much different than how American Rules football is put together, where specialized talent helps to move the ball down the field.
The same interview showed that Barack also does not understand the difference between an ally and an enemy.
He continued, And if you look at costs and benefits and if you look at the deteriorating situation in Afghanistan, overall I think it was a bad decision on the part of our commander in chief. ---- Those are the kinds of decisions that are going to be coming up in the future.
We're going to have to make decisions about Iran, we're going to have to make decisions about Pakistan.
The capacity of the next commander in chief to forge alliances so that we can, when we act militarily, act in the ways that we did during the first Gulf War, a war in which, not only were our casualties kept low, but it effectively cost us almost nothing in terms of taxpayer dollars.
For us to think in a forward-looking way about energy, and understanding the strategic geopolitical implications of our failure to implement a serious energy strategy in this country.
Our ability to engage the Muslim world in a serious way so that we are tamping down anti-American sentiment even as we recognize that there is always going to be an element of extremism that can only be dealt with militarily.
Pakistan is an ally … Iran is an enemy. Also, what happened to Mr. Negotiation when he now comes out and says - Our ability to engage the Muslim world in a serious way so that we are tamping down anti-American sentiment … is this type of comment an example of his famous promise of “CHANGE”?
We, at MAXINE, must add that Barack has become increasing difficult to listen to . He used the “uh” transition filler eleven times in a single 90-second segment of this interview (as observed by Hugh Hewitt on his program this afternoon). I do not care if this becomes Obama's first term or Carter's Second Term if Barack gets into office ... four years of listening to him alone without a teleprompter will ruin the country.
The audio of this interview is very telling as to the level of what the junior Senator Barack Obama does NOT know.
Additional proof on how hard it is to listen to Senator Barack Obama - he says "uh" nine, or ten times in this fifty-five second clearification of his position on Iraq (some would say flip-flop). Video Credit: YouTube account 3873uj201, added July 07, 2008
Hugh Hewitt while broadcasting live from the exposition floor of Blogworld & New Media Expo. in Las Vegas - 11-08-2007. Image Credit: Edmund Jenks (MAXINE)
It Takes A Village To Kill A Terrorist
Yesterday afternoon, Hugh Hewitt was interviewing a Sergeant Long of the U.S. Marines and a Consultant to the Marines on asymmetric war tactics whose name I missed (I looked for transcript information on the interview) when the following exchange ensued.
The Consultant on war tactics stated that most of the larger battlefield successes on the ground in Iraq happened when the leaders and citizens in each of the small villages throughout the countryside became feed up with the violence. He went on to state his point just so, “It takes a village to control the insurgency in Iraq.”
Hugh asked, “So, it takes a village to kill a terrorist?” and the Consultant enthusiastically, and without hesitation responded, “Yes!”, then Hugh mused, “It takes a village … I like that.”
Over this Christmas holiday season, when a family member or friend wants to discuss the politics about the war in Iraq, just remember that when one happens to discuss the value of “The Surge” and its dramatic success, the Marines did not do this in a vacuum. They had help through a valuable partnership and relationships with the Iraqi people that had been built up with the boots-on-the-ground over the last four years … “It Takes A Village!”
An F/A-18 Hornet approaches for landing on the USS Theodore Roosevelt aircraft carrier after flight operations in this Thursday, March 20, 2003 file photo. The first Tomahawk cruise missiles were fired early Thursday against Iraqi targets Image Credit: AP Photo/FILE/Richard Vogel
YES! More Troops For Iraq
It is always confusing for a politically charged, micro-management focused, uninformed populous to rile against what a war power professional may recognize as the right thing to do at a time of conflict ... but, YES, more troops for Iraq.
General Petreaus was approved by unanimous vote by the Senate because it was the right thing to do - and now HE wants more troops because it IS the right thing to do.
The one thing that we have learned as it relates to task competency is that one leaves the decision making of each task to the trained professionals.
MAXINE has one question - When you have a pain in your jaw coming from a cracked tooth, which do you want to work on it ... Senator Kennedy, Senator Clinton ... Any Senator, or a trained and proven dentist with a going practice?
Give the General his request and let him run the war, thank you!
Excerpts from the Boston Globe -
General seeks another brigade in Iraq By Bryan Bender, Globe Staff March 16, 2007
WASHINGTON -- The top US commander in Iraq has requested another Army brigade, in addition to five already on the way, as part of the controversial "surge" of American troops designed to clamp down on sectarian violence and insurgent groups, senior Pentagon officials said yesterday.
The appeal -- not yet made public -- by General David Petraeus for a combat aviation unit would involve between 2,500 and 3,000 more soldiers and dozens of transport helicopters and powerful gunships, said the Pentagon sources. That would bring the planned expansion of US forces to close to 30,000 troops.
News of the additional deployment comes about a week after President Bush announced that about 4,700 support troops will join the initial 21,500 he ordered in January. They are in addition to the estimated 130,000 troops already in Iraq.
"This is the next shoe to drop," said one senior Pentagon official closely involved in the war planning, who requested anonymity because of prohibitions against publicly discussing internal deliberations. "But you cannot put five combat brigades in there and not have more aviation guys, military police, and intelligence units." ---- "There is a problem in the way the administration reported the surge numbers to begin with," said Frederick W. Kagan , a resident scholar at the conservative American Enterprise Institute. "When they initially reported the numbers they only reported the combat strength of the brigades, and they did not count support troops" and other personnel that the operation would need.
"Petraeus has now requested what many thought would be needed to begin with," Kagan said, "but it looks like another surge."
The plan for the aviation brigade is occurring as commanders express cautious optimism that US and Iraqi forces, working together, are quelling the violence in the city and building some much-needed good will among the population. ---- But news that Petraeus wants several thousand more troops is bound to further frustrate the Democratic majority in Congress, which is intent on pressuring President Bush to start bringing troops home within months.
For the second day yesterday, the Senate debated a resolution that would require President Bush to begin a phased withdrawal of US troops within 120 days.
The resolution failed to garner enough votes to pass, but Democratic leaders have pledged to use their power to force the White House's hand, including placing limitations on federal funds for the war. ---- Despite the congressional opposition, the number of US troops committed to Iraq has steadily grown since Bush decided to send the 21,500 troops, the equivalent of five Army brigades and two Marine Corps battalions.
The Congressional Budget Office predicted last month that the total "surge" could ultimately double in size and cost once all support troops are in place. ---- The new unit would bring to four the total number of aviation brigades in Iraq. The official said American commanders would have to reassess in a few months whether they want to keep the higher number; if so, they would have to identify another brigade to relieve one of them.
Military strategists consider the aviation unit an "enabler," meaning it will help the additional combat troops who are spearheading the new Baghdad security plan and operations to secure several cities in Anbar Province where Sunni insurgents and followers of Al Qaeda have gained a foothold. ---- " Any time you deploy more combat forces you need more support forces," said Michael O'Hanlon , a defense specialist at the Brookings Institution who compiles the Iraq Index. "You need some tactical mobility to get them out of trouble." Read All>> (free subscription required)
More support forces to enable more troop forces, makes sense to MAXINE!
The MV 100 offers in-the-field identity checks using a forensic quality fingerprint scanner, an integrated Personal Digital Assistant, a digital camera, a magnetic stripe card reader and wireless communications. The MV 100 uses the same optical technology found in Cross Match’s industry leading Verifier® fingerprint scanners capturing high quality fingerprint images regardless of skin pigment or the presence of stains from ink, dyes, grease, or dirt. Image Credit: Cross Match Technologies
Cross Match Delivers Biometrics For “Snakes” In Iraq
The military and police forces in Iraq have much in common with the police forces in major cities throughout the United States, especially those cities with organized gang activity.
For both efforts, quick field identification of suspected individuals who may be involved in illegal or deadly insurgent activity is a must in order to remove offending culprits.
At home, our police departments are provided full IT (information technology) tools, all of the way down to their patrol units, where the patrol officer can log-in and check available databases (many linked to nationwide networks) and have delivered to him all of the information he would need to make a proper assessment. Job done!
In Iraq, however, there does not exist the infrastructure to place all that equipment the average patrol car has but through technology, there is an answer.
The cornerstone to a database development system as well as a field tool that identifies people once the information has been captured is supplied by Cross Match Technologies. This portable tool combined with radio access to existing databases in Iraq may help the military and Iraqi security forces turn the tide in hunting down and stopping insurgent activity.
The Iraqi Army has a nickname for the “gang” of insurgents who seek to do harm to the citizens of Iraq – “Snakes”.
Excerpts from The Wall Street Journal’s Opinion Journal –
The Snake Eater Give our troops the tools our cops have. BY DANIEL HENNINGER, Deputy Editor – Editorial’s, The Wall Street Journal - Thursday, February 8, 2007 12:01 a.m. EST
Subject:
A case study of how the U.S. got bogged down in Iraq.
Problem:
If a cop in Anytown, USA, pulls over a suspect, he checks the person's ID remotely from the squad car. He's linked to databases filled with Who's Who in the world of crime, killing and mayhem. In Iraq, there is nothing like that. When our troops and the Iraqi army enter a town, village or street, what they know about the local bad guys is pretty much in their heads, at best.
Solution:
Give our troops what our cops have. The Pentagon knows this. For reasons you can imagine, it hasn't happened.
This is a story of can-do in a no-can-do world, a story of how a Marine officer in Iraq, a small network-design company in California, a nonprofit troop-support group, a blogger and other undeterrable folk designed a handheld insurgent-identification device, built it, shipped it and deployed it in Anbar province. They did this in 30 days, from Dec. 15 to Jan. 15. Compared to standard operating procedure for Iraq, this is a nanosecond.
Before fastening our seatbelts, let's check the status quo. As a high Defense Department official told the Journal's editorial page, "We're trying to fight a major war with peacetime procurement rules." The department knows this is awful. Indeed, a program exists, the Automated Biometric Identification System: retina scans, facial matching and the like. The reality: This war is in year four, and the troops don't have it. Beyond Baghdad, the U.S. role has become less about killing insurgents than arresting the worst and isolating them from the population. Obviously it would help to have an electronic database of who the bad guys are, their friends, where they live, tribal affiliation--in short the insurgency's networks. ---- Some, like Marine Maj. Owen West in Anbar, have created their own spreadsheets and PowerPoint programs, or use digital cameras to input the details of suspected insurgents. But no Iraq-wide software architecture exists.
Operating around the town of Khalidiya, north of Baghdad, Maj. West has been the leader of a team of nine U.S. soldiers advising an Iraqi brigade. This has been his second tour of duty in Iraq. When not fighting the Iraq war, he's an energy trader for Goldman Sachs in New York City.
It had become clear to him last fall that the Iraqi soldiers were becoming the area's cops. And that they needed modern police surveillance tools. To help the Iraqi army in Khalidiya do its job right, Maj. West needed that technology yesterday: He was scheduled to rotate back stateside in February--this month.
Since arriving in Iraq last year, Maj. West had worked with Spirit of America (SoA), the civilian troop-support group founded by Jim Hake. In early December, SoA's project director, Michele Redmond, asked Maj. West if there was any out-of-the-ordinary project they could help him with. And Maj. West said, Why yes, there is. He described to them the basic concept for a mobile, handheld fingerprinting device which Iraqi soldiers would use to assemble an insurgent database. Mr. Hake said his organization would contribute $30,000 to build a prototype and get it to Khalidiya. In New York, Goldman Sachs contributed $14,000 to the project.
Two problems. They needed to find someone who could assemble the device, and the unit had to be in Khalidiya by Jan. 15 to give Maj. West time to field-test it before he left in February. ---- To build the device, they approached a small California company, Computer Deductions Inc., Its basic platform would be a handheld fingerprint workstation called the MV 100, made by Cross Match Technologies, a maker of biometric identity applications. The data collected by the MV 100 would be stored via Bluetooth in a hardened laptop made by GETAC, a California manufacturer. From Knowledge Computing Corp. of Arizona they used the COPLINK program, which creates a linked "map" of events. The laptop would sit in the troops' Humvee and the data sent from there to a laptop at outpost headquarters.
Regardless of whether a weapon system is wired or wireless, the biggest challenge facing any Military market is obtaining proper connection between weapons systems. Since reliability is a major factor under the toughest environment, only a rugged notebook such as the A790 can meet the challenge. The A790 can be modified to be equipped with special interface cards in its expansion bay allowing it to receive and transmit data between systems. Image Credit: GETAC, Inc.
Meanwhile, SoA began to think about how they'd get the package to Maj. West by Jan. 15. They likely would have less than seven days transit time after CDI finished. ---- This meant finding someone who could get into Iraq quickly.
The someone was Bill Roggio. Mr. Roggio is a former army signalman and infantryman who now embeds with the troops and writes about it on his blog, the Fourth Rail, or for the SoA Web site. He was at home in New Jersey, about to celebrate his birthday with his family. He agreed to fly the MV 100 to Iraq as soon as it was ready, in conjunction with an embed trip. With SoA's Michele Redmond, he started working out the logistics for getting to Iraq ASAP. ---- And so, a month from inception, Bill Roggio handed the electronic identification kit to Maj. West.
Fingerprinting and photographing the bad guys. Database development and identification in the field. Image Credit: U.S. Marines, The Iraqi Army via Opinion Journal
On the night of Jan. 20, Maj. West, his Marine squad and the "jundi" (Iraq army soldiers) took the MV 100 and laptop on patrol. Their term of endearment for the insurgents is "snakes." So of course the MV 100 became the Snake Eater. The next day Maj. West emailed the U.S. team digital photos of Iraqi soldiers fingerprinting suspects with the Snake Eater. "It's one night old and the town is abuzz," he said. "I think we have a chance to tip this city over now." A rumor quickly spread that the Iraqi army was implanting GPS chips in insurgents' thumbs.
Over the past 10 days, Maj. West has had chance encounters with two Marine superiors--Maj. Gen. Richard Zilmer, who commands the 30,000 joint forces in Anbar, and Brig. Gen. Robert Neller, deputy commanding general of operations in Iraq. He showed them the mobile ID database device.
I asked Gen. Neller by email on Tuesday what the status of these technologies is now. He replied that they're receiving advanced biometric equipment, "like the device being employed by Maj. West." He said "in the near future" they will begin to network such devices to share databases more broadly: "Bottom line: The requirement for networking our biometric capability is a priority of this organization."
As he departs, Maj. West reflected on winning at street level: "We're fixated on the enemy, but the enemy is fixated on the people. They know which families are apostates, which houses are safe for the night, which boys are vulnerable to corruption or kidnapping. The enemy's population collection effort far outstrips ours.
The Snake Eater will change that, and fast." You have to believe he's got this right. It will only happen, though, if someone above his pay grade blows away the killing habits of peacetime procurement. Read All>>
Glenn Reynolds has a book titled "An Army Of Davids: How Markets and Technology Empower the Little Guy to Beat Big Media, Big Government, and Other Goliaths" where it outlines the strength and power of independent effort, the new media, and how, in today's technological world, things get done.
This story and its success illustrates the power of an army of davids!
As stated in a speech by John Kerry, delivered on the Senate floor on Nov. 9, 1997, as recorded in the Congressional Record. "Plainly and simply, Saddam Hussein cannot be permitted to get away with his antics, or with this latest excuse for avoidance of international responsibility". Image Credit: www.john-kerry.com
Politics? Or Conscious Acts Of Treason ... For Simple Political Gain?
Good question.
Now that the Democrats are in power over the Congress --- Hypocrisy RULES to the detriment of national security issues. The Democrat Congress does not believe that the military is up to the task of victory in Iraq and chooses to castrate their efforts as opposed to supporting their mission --- and this "surge" in hypocrisy is effecting some jello-kneed / round-heeled Republicans.
Typical of the “John Kerry Party” - the Democrats are of one voice about the surge strategy in Iraq when in saying “I was for it, before I was against it”.
Excerpts from The Washington Times -
Advocates of troop surge about-face in Congress By Charles Hurt - THE WASHINGTON TIMES - January 31, 2007
For many in the Senate, they were for a surge of troops in Iraq before they were against it.
"We don't have enough troops in Iraq," Sen. John Kerry, Massachusetts Democrat, said in 2005.
In 2004, he told NBC's Tim Russert some things he believes "very deeply."
"Number one, we cannot fail," Mr. Kerry said. "I've said that many times. And if it requires more troops in order to create the stability that eliminates the chaos, that can provide the groundwork for other countries, that's what we have to do."
He no longer believes that now. He is among at least a dozen Democratic senators who in the past have called for more troops in Iraq but now support a resolution condemning President Bush's plan to do just that. Many Republicans who voted for the war now plan to support a no-confidence resolution, including Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, who in the past had warned that the war would be a long, tough slog and that Americans should "speak with one voice." ---- Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Joseph R. Biden Jr. has for years advocated increasing the number of troops on the ground in Iraq. But after Mr. Bush offered his proposal to do that earlier this month, the Delaware Democrat drafted a resolution rejecting the idea as not "in the national interest."
In June 2005, he said, "There's not enough force on the ground now to mount a real counterinsurgency."
"They're going to need a surge of forces," he said in another interview.
By last week, Mr. Biden had reversed his war strategy.
"The president and others who support the surge have it exactly backwards," he told reporters.
As late as last month, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid was still open to the idea of a surge.
"If it is for a surge -- that is, two or three months and it's part of a program to get us out of there as indicated by this time next year -- then sure I'll go along with it," said the Nevada Democrat who voted for the war in 2002. "If the commanders on the ground said this was just for a short period of time, we'll go along with that."
After Mr. Bush laid out his plan to increase troops, the Democratic leader flatly rejected it.
"The surge is a bad idea," Mr. Reid said on CNN's "Late Edition."
Democrats say that the time for a surge has long passed and now that the war has become so bloody and so unpopular, it's time to pull the plug.
"The bottom line is that you cannot unscramble an omelet," House International Relations Committee Chairman Tom Lantos, California Democrat, said yesterday. ---- Mr. Hagel, who is considering a run for the presidency and has been one of the harshest critics of the war and the Bush administration's handling of it.
"There is no strategy," he said last week. "This is a pingpong game with American lives."
But he hasn't always opposed the war. He voted for it.
"There are no easy answers in Iraq," Mr. Hagel said on Oct. 9, 2002, before voting to authorize the war. "The decision to commit our troops to war is the most difficult decision members of Congress make.
A veteran of the Vietnam War, he also warned his colleagues that an Iraq war would be a long, tough slog.
"This is just the beginning," he said. "The risks should not be understated, miscast or misunderstood. Ours is a path of both peril and opportunity with many detours and no shortcuts."
And Mr. Hagel warned them against sowing seeds of division with hot rhetoric.
"America -- including the Congress -- and the world, must speak with one voice about Iraqi disarmament, as it must continue to do so in the war on terrorism," he said. "Because the stakes are so high, America must be careful with her rhetoric and mindful of how others perceive her intentions."
Mr. Hagel co-authored the resolution with Mr. Biden rebuking Mr. Bush and his "escalation" plan.
Sen. John W. Warner, Virginia Republican, also has drafted with others a nonbinding resolution that condemns the plan but, he said, does so more gently. Read All>>
If you are FOR having our country stand and aid the continued freedom of the 95%+ majority of the 25,000,000 liberated people of Iraq (who have also voted to be free - 3 times), sign the pledge and get active in persuading Congress to continue to support the mission of our troops.
At the web site TheNRSCPledge.com more than 30,000 people signed the pledge of non-support for individual senators and the NRSC in the first three days of its operation. Thousands of bloggers have joined on as well. We, at MAXINE, expect the numbers to grow, and the memory of the votes of next week to remain strong for years to come.
A new Time Magazine national poll has New York Senator Hillary Clinton leading the democratic pack with 40-percent, 19-points ahead of Illinois Senator Barack Obama. Now all eyes are on Clinton as she heads to Iowa this weekend and her trip could tell us a lot about how she plans to run her primary campaign. Image Credit: KCRG News
Senator H.R. Clinton - NOT Presidential Material
In an "Off-With-Their-Heads" proclamation combined with whiney "If President ... I don’t want the responsibility" attitude, now Senator, Hillary Rodham Clinton proves SHE is NOT up to the task of Presidential leadership.
If she had her way, the heavy lifting and responsibility of being leader of the most powerful free nation on earth would be removed so that she would be able to concentrate on what she really wants to do … create a liberal, popularity-loving, and socialist America.
Excerpts from The Associated Press via the International Herald Tribune -
Clinton wants all U.S. troops out of Iraq when Bush leaves office The Associated Press - Published: January 28, 2007
DAVENPORT, Iowa: U.S. presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton said Sunday that U.S. President George W. Bush should withdraw all U.S. troops from Iraq before he leaves office, saying it would be "the height of irresponsibility" to pass the war along to the next commander in chief.
"This was his decision to go to war with an ill-conceived plan and an incompetently executed strategy," the Democratic senator said her in first presidential campaign tour through the early-voting state of Iowa.
"We expect him to extricate our country from this before he leaves office" in January 2009, the former first lady said.
The White House condemned Clinton's comments as a partisan attack that undermines U.S. soldiers. ---- Pressed during a forum to defend her vote to authorize force in Iraq before the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003, Clinton responded by increasing her criticism of Bush.
"I am going to level with you, the president has said this is going to be left to his successor," Clinton said. "I think it is the height of irresponsibility and I really resent it."
Bush describes Iraq as the central front in the global fight against terrorism that began after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. "The war on terror will be a problem for the next president. Presidents after me will be confronting ... an enemy that would like to strike the United States again," he recently told USA Today newspaper.
One questioner asked Clinton if her track record showed she could stand up to "evil men" around the world.
"The question is, we face a lot of dangers in the world and, in the gentleman's words, we face a lot of evil men and what in my background equips me to deal with evil and bad men," Clinton said. She paused to gaze while the audience interrupted with about 30 seconds of laughter and applause. ---- During the town hall meeting, she tried to make clear that she thinks she would be a chief executive with enough fortitude to confront any danger facing the country.
"I believe that a lot in my background and a lot in my public life shows the character and toughness that is required to be president," Clinton said. "It also shows that I want to get back to bringing the world around to support us again." Read All>>
U.S. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York speaks during town hall meeting in Davenport, Iowa. Image Credit: AP Image
Hillary ought not limit her demands to a single item (that the United States leave Iraq and its potential representative spread of Islamo-fascism throughout the world) ...
... Hillary ought to insist that Bush also complete ALL of the following, so as not to "irresponsibly" pass-on these additional items to the next President ... so that SHE may focus on more important items during her tenure:
1) Rebuild all of New Orleans to better than original. This will allow her to focus on more creative, village-supported initiatives.
2) Eradicate the H5N1 flu virus from all sectors throughout the world (don’t forget to include a plan for free vaccination to all if his administration is not successful by the end of 2008).
3) Revamp the entire automobile infrastructure so that our country is not dependent on foreign oil before the next President takes office. This includes market availability of automobiles and hundreds of thousands of ethanol stations for fuel. The will allow her (or any next President) to not have to deal with the issues of ANWAR, Mideast oil, and the other sticky issues surrounding petroleum-based economies.
4) Why not insist that Bush rebuild all of Mexico along with its failed economy and culture so that the border problem just goes away. After all, terrorist security will be a thing of the past because He will have already pulled our troops out of Iraq.
5) Oh yes, make the Social Security solvency problem just go away!
6) Sign the Kyoto Protocol -- so that Global Warming will be just a thing of the past.
7)
8)
9)
AND ETC. - Please feel free to add your own wishes of problems to be eliminated due to the fact that if the problem still exists ... it must be irresponsible that the problem remains for the next President to deal with.
At MAXINE, our reaction to Hillary's apparent fear of the challenge of leadership this stance shows -- assuming that She is elected President.
"WE REALLY RESENT IT!"
The statements made by New York Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton are just NOT Presidential and this episode proves she is NOT Presidential material.
Radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr delivers a speech during prayers in Kufa, Iraq, in this Nov. 24, 2006 file photo. Muqtada al-Sadr's bloc announced Sunday, Jan. 21, 2007, that it is lifting its nearly two-month political boycott of Iraqi parliament after reaching a compromise over its demands for a timetable for Iraqi forces to take over security and the withdrawal of U.S. forces. Image Credit: AP Photo/Alaa Al Marjani, File
Bush’s Threat Of Surge Pays Early Dividends
In Iraq, it’s the Crips and Bloods all over again. Baghdad is South Central LA and the ugliest elements of the wild, wild west all rolled into to one pot and power is the only currency that has favor.
It is good to see that a return to basics seems to be having an initial positive effect.
Excerpts from the Associated Press via Yahoo! News -
Iraqi leader drops protection of militia By STEVEN R. HURST, Associated Press Writer 1-21-07, 3:00 PM PST - BAGHDAD, Iraq
Iraq's prime minister has dropped his protection of an anti-American cleric's Shiite militia after U.S. intelligence convinced him the group was infiltrated by death squads, two officials said Sunday.
In a desperate bid to fend off an all-out American offensive, the radical cleric Muqtada al-Sadr last Friday ordered the 30 lawmakers and six Cabinet ministers under his control to end their nearly two-month boycott of the government. They were back at their jobs Sunday.
Al-Sadr had already ordered his militia fighters not to display their weapons. They have not, however, ceded control of the formerly mixed neighborhoods they have captured, killing Sunnis or forcing them to abandon their homes and businesses. ---- Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's turnaround on the Mahdi Army was puzzling because as late as Oct. 31, he had intervened to end a U.S. blockade of Sadr City, the northeast Shiite enclave in Baghdad that is headquarters to the militia. It is held responsible for much of the sectarian bloodshed that has turned the capital into a battle zone over the past year.
Shiite militias began taking revenge after more than two years of incessant bomb and shooting attacks by Sunni insurgents.
Sometime between then and Nov. 30, when the prime minister met President Bush, al-Maliki was convinced of the truth of American intelligence reports which contended, among other things, that his protection of al-Sadr's militia was isolating him in the Arab world and among moderates at home, the two government officials said.
"Al-Maliki realized he couldn't keep defending the Mahdi Army because of the information and evidence that the armed group was taking part in the killings, displacing people and violating the state's sovereignty," said one official. Both he and a second government official who confirmed the account refused to be identified by name because the information was confidential. Both officials are intimately aware of the prime minister's thinking.
"The Americans don't act on rumors but on accurate intelligence. There are many intelligence agencies acting on the ground, and they know what's going on," said the second official, confirming the Americans had given al-Maliki overwhelming evidence about the Mahdi Army's deep involvement in the sectarian slaughter.
Earlier this month, Bush and al-Maliki separately announced a new security drive to clamp off the sectarian violence that has riven the capital and surrounding regions.
Bush announced an additional 21,500 American soldiers would be sent to accomplish the task and al-Maliki has promised a similar number of forces, who will take the lead in the overall operation. ---- The neighborhood-by-neighborhood sweep, expected to begin in earnest by the first of the month, will target Sunni insurgents, al-Qaida in Iraq and its allied militant bands equally with Shiite militias, both the Mahdi Army and the Badr Brigade.
The latter is the Iranian-trained military wing of Iraq's most power[ful] Shiite political group, the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq.
The first government official said al-Maliki's message was blunt.
"He told the sheik that the activities of both the Sadrist politicians and the militia have inflamed hatred among neighboring Sunni Arab states that have been complaining bitterly to the Americans," the official said.
Sunni Muslims are the majority sect in key Arab countries like Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt, all of which have shunned al-Maliki. Shiites, long oppressed by Iraqi's Sunni minority, and vaulted to power with the ouster of Saddam Hussein.
Many of the leading Shiite figures in Iraq have deep historical ties to Iran, also a majority Shiite state, whose growing muscle in the Middle East is deeply threatening to the autocratic Sunni regimes in the region. Read All>>
Journalist Muntadhar al-Zeidi, who was kidnapped by Shiite militants last year, was being held by Iraqi security Monday and interrogated about whether anybody paid him to throw his shoes at Bush during a press conference the previous day in Baghdad, said an Iraqi official. Showing the sole of your shoe to someone in the Arab world is a sign of extreme disrespect, and throwing your shoes is even worse. Image Credit: Newsday
