Confliction

Regarding possible CIA investigations, Glenn Reynolds puts my mind at ease:

"You know, I should feel bad about this, but given the CIA’s extensive efforts to undercut Bush, well, I hope they’re enjoying the new administration."

Don't you feel better too?

We Have Created the Piracy Threat

Abe Greenwald is very concerned about Obama's "overreaction" to the pirate issue, and concludes:

Let’s face it: on Sunday, we only created more pirates.

Thus, one of the best lines I have read in quite some time.

UPDATE: From humor to reality in 24 hours:

Somali pirates vowed to hunt down American ships and kill their sailors and French forces detained 11 other brigands in a high-seas raid as tensions ratcheted up Wednesday off Africa's volatile eastern coast.

Now we're going to have to let them become a nuclear power so they'll be nice to us.

Not Wordy Enough

For those trying to complexify the issue of terrorism, Tim Blair uses far fewer words and says a whole lot more:

A certain simplicity should emerge from study of those killed and those who killed them. In the former group: everyone. In the second: Islamic extremists.

Sometimes things should be quite easy to understand, even for academia.

A New Day Dawns

It's amazing how Iraq seems to have turned a corner since the presidential election. Reuters catches us up on the latest remarkable and sudden event in "Baghdad bridge of death becomes bridge of hope."

Why do I get the feeling we will be seeing many more headlines from the region making use of words like "hope" and "change?"

Rockefeller Lied

Contrary to Senator John D. Rockefeller's statement, "In making the case for war, the administration repeatedly presented intelligence as fact when it was unsubstantiated, contradicted or even nonexistent," people who have looked at the Senate Intelligence Committee's Phase II Report on pre-war intelligence have concluded the opposite.

Fred Hiatt at the Washington Post finds that nearly all of the Bush administration's claims about Iraq were "substantiated by intelligence information." Hiatt even thought he had the wrong report:

As you read through the report, you begin to think maybe you've mistakenly picked up the minority dissent. But, no, this is the Rockefeller indictment.

Hiatt also includes a rather damning statement from Rockefeller himself:

"There has been some debate over how 'imminent' a threat Iraq poses. I do believe Iraq poses an imminent threat. I also believe after September 11, that question is increasingly outdated. . . . To insist on further evidence could put some of our fellow Americans at risk. Can we afford to take that chance? I do not think we can."

Was that a Democratic senator, in the lead up to war, saying the time for providing evidence is over? Why yes, I think it was.

Power Line thinks Rockefeller, with his report, has gone beyond just another example of Democrats playing politics with national security into the realm of fraud, and adds:

It's easy to understand why Chairman Rockefeller and other Senate Dems want to see the history of the prewar debate rewritten in order (a) to perpetuate the phony "Bush lied" mantra and (b) air-brush themselves out of the picture. And it's easy to see why the Committee Democrats were frustrated by their inability to support the anti-Bush mantra except through specious reliance on the kind of statements they themselves made in spades. But frustration isn't a defense to fraud.

Senator Kit Bond, Vice-Chair, adds this special and unique snowflake:

“It is ironic that the Democrats would knowingly distort and misrepresent the Committee’s findings and the intelligence in an effort to prove that the Administration distorted and mischaracterized the intelligence."

Of course, there is no chance the heavy-breathers will ever admit they were wrong. And Rockefeller's refusal to simply admit the obvious is all the proof we need that the Dems have no plan to choose national security and honesty over partisan politics any time soon. But it is interesting to note that the MSM, in reading the report, no longer feels comfortable carrying the Democratic Party's water.

Most of the aspects of the report have been out there for anyone to see for years. It's just too bad the people who are supposed to find the truth were so uninterested in doing so years ago, when it might have made a difference.

Negative Nancy Rumsfeld

Here's some interesting reading from Douglas J. Feith's War and Decision blog; common misconceptions about the lead-up to the war in Iraq and the real story. Here's something I didn't know:

The most powerful analysis of the downsides of going to war in Iraq came not from the State Department or the CIA: it came from Donald Rumsfeld.

And there's plenty more where that came from.

Worse Than War

Ever wonder what affect cut-and-run would have on Iraq? Arthur Herman takes us through the aftermath of the Democrats last cut-and-run:

After nearly two decades of devastating war and 58,000 American combat deaths, the U.S. left Southeast Asia. As the last helicopter lifted off from Saigon, the New York Times's Sydney Schanberg wrote an article with the title, "Indochina Without Americans: For Most, a Better Life." And the Times's columnist Anthony Lewis asked, "what future could possibly be more terrible than the reality" of a war that had cost so much in lives and treasure?

With the North Vietnamese Communists and the Khmer Rouge taking over, the world was about to find out.

Read on to find out what is worse than war.

Willful Suspension of Fact

Good news from Iraq:

A new classified intelligence assessment on Iraq says there has been significant progress in security since the last assessment was delivered in August, a senior military official said.

Bad news for Iraq:

Congressional Democrats are warning U.S. Iraq commander General David Petraeus, and the U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, not to attempt to minimize the seriousness of the situation in Iraq when they testify to Congress next week.

In other words, reporting "significance progress in security" will not be tolerated. It's an election year, after all.

What a Joke

I would submit that, when Osama Bin Laden - who brought the most powerful nation to its knees almost seven years ago - is reduced to threatening the EU over some cartoons, the war on terror has been quite effective.

He has, ironically, become a cartoon himself.

The Intel Was Wrong Right

All this hand wringing over the Iran NIE is hilarious. One minute American intelligence agencies are incompetent (Iraq) and the next they are geniuses (Iran). Am I the only one with the feeling that Democrats weigh the value of intelligence strictly by inherent political value?

Joe Biden's heavy breathing takes the cake. Bush is a liar! He knew! He's an incompetent liar! What a joke.

Somebody tell Biden that intelligence does change from time to time, especially intel this sensitive and difficult to acquire. Someone might also tell Biden that national intelligence agencies might be a tad gun shy about making solid conclusions after Iraq intel failures were politicized so. This line, from an IHT article, would seem to bolster that conclusion:

...at the same time officials were airing ... dire warnings, analysts at the Central Intelligence Agency were secretly concluding that Iran's nuclear weapons work halted years ago and that international pressure on the Islamic regime in Tehran was working. (Emphasis mine)

Harry "I'm My Own Punchline" Reid reaches this conclusion:

Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, portrayed the assessment as "directly challenging some of this administration's alarming rhetoric about the threat posed by Iran."

Let's be clear: Iran is still enriching uranium, is still estimated to have a nuke in the next decade, is still providing arms and insurgents in Iraq, and threatens to wipe Israel off the map. Nothing to be alarmed about there. No sir. Time to start singing Kum-bay-yah while we dance around the May pole.

It would seem to me that the NIE is excellent news, if it is correct. Israel is taking it with a grain of salt and even believes Iran's nuke program has been reconstituted. Who knows? But suggesting that, since there is no immediate nuke threat from Iran, it is somehow benign, is just ridiculous.

Sure to Enrage Reality-Based Community

Many are getting enjoyment out of the fact that Jack Murtha has admitted he was dead wrong about the surge. Frankly, I'm surprised whenever a Democrat admits it, and would never have imagined Murtha would make that admission.

But that he has only makes Harry Reid, who, as recently as this week continued to insist the surge has not worked, look even sillier than usual.

Not that making Harry Reid look silly takes much effort.

Not a Lull

The ever cautious Michael Yon:

I don’t believe this is a lull. I believe this is the real thing. I believe that we’ve seen lulls before, and I’ve always been very circumspect on taking a chance and saying hey, this is the real thing. But I’ve seen a change in the mood of the people, and it’s remarkable. And I believe if we can just continue to help them progress, and we’ve got a little bit more serious fighting to do up in Ninewa Province, and then in Kirkuk and Salahaddin Province, and also out in Diayala Province, those four provinces. Other than that, I think really, it’s a matter of pouring on the juice and helping them to get this country going again. I mean, they’re just finished with the war, as long as we can help get the monkey off their back in the form of al Qaeda, which is pretty much crushed at this point.

UPDATE: Naturally, all this good news makes it extremely urgent for Democrats that the troops be pulled from the country immediately. Somebody might declare victory or something before the surrender is complete.

Zero Self-Defense

Volokh Conspiracy notes an interesting happening at the U.N.:

It's rather telling that the UN's American defenders fail to directly address an indisputable fact: U.N. Human Rights Council's subcommission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights has endorsed a report denying the existence of a human right of self-defense...

Then again, self-defense would make it a lot harder for peace-keepers to abuse underage girls. And besides, shouldn't that "zero tolerance" policy be enough?

Shameless Plug

A few months ago ECM Publishers started a site called Hometown Heroes, which is dedicated to bringing readers stories of returning vets, their families, and other related news.

As it happens, the top story there now is one I wrote about a local man who was seriously wounded by mortar fire while serving in the Diyala Province, Iraq. It marks the first opportunity I've had to talk one on one with a returning veteran, and one that saw action as the first wave of the surge, no less. It's good stuff, I hope you'll stop by and check it out.

Things Continue to Improve

More great news from Iraq:

October is on course to record the second consecutive decline in U.S. military and Iraqi civilian deaths and Americans commanders say they know why: the U.S. troop increase and an Iraqi groundswell against al-Qaida and Shiite militia extremists.

Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch points to what the military calls "Concerned Citizens" — both Shiites and Sunnis who have joined the American fight. He says he's signed up 20,000 of them in the past four months.

Meanwhile Minnesota's Pete Hegseth, in a column criticizing Army Lt.-Gen. Ricardo Sanchez' recent assertion that Iraq is a "nightmare," explains why:

The new counterinsurgency approach - namely, to take territory from al Qaeda, hold it, secure it and empower tribal sheiks to work together and rebuild their communities - finally provides an effective "counteroffensive" to the chief tactics of al Qaeda militants and Shiite death squads.

America's enemies in Iraq, radical insurgents living and fighting among the general public, understand that they can't continue their fight without capitulation from ordinary Iraqis. Finally, after almost four years, the U.S. military understands this as well.

Whereas we used to emphasize overwhelming firepower (even when I was there in 2006), we now emphasize firepower as a last resort. Whereas we used to rush to the scene after the violence occurs, we're now there to repel it or deter it altogether.

Hegseth says to call it a "surge" is simplistic and does not do justice to the changes in strategy and tactics implemented by General Petraeus. Interesting stuff.

Good News Travels Slow

The Washington Post finally gets around to analyzing General Petraeus' numbers from Iraq, and concludes:

...it's looking more and more as though those in and outside of Congress who last month were assailing Gen. Petraeus's credibility and insisting that there was no letup in Iraq's bloodshed were -- to put it simply -- wrong.

Actually it's worse than that - Patraeus was accused of lying by none other than Hillary Clinton, and of being a traitor by MorOn.org - but I'll take it where I can get it.

Osama Helps Out

Osama's back again, and as usual he sounds suspiciously like the reality-based community here in the U.S.:

• Bin Laden says President Bush's words echo "neoconservatives like Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Richard Perle."


• He says to the American people, "you made one of your greatest mistakes, in that you neither brought to account nor punished those who waged this war, not even the most violent of its murderers, [former Defense Secretary Donald] Rumsfeld…"


• He goes on to call Noam Chomsky "among one of the most capable of those from your own side," and mentions global warming and "the Kyoto accord."

So, Bush and Co. are "neo-cons" and "murderers" who need to be punished, while propogandist Noam Chomsky is capable, and global warming and Kyoto are important. How soon until Osama has his own Daily Kos diary?

Fighting for Surrender

Progressive Democrats who want a withdrawal in full swing before General Petraeus can deliver a positive surge report in September are cheesed they won't get one. One even brought out her "Give 'em hell" side:

“We don’t want to see any retreat,” a Progressive Caucus member, Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), said.

Captain Ed notes all that needs to be noted: "Oh, the irony. They want no surrender on their plans for a full and unconditional surrender on the battlefield."

Will Murtha Apologize?

As noted here, the "Haditha massacre" may not be all it has been cracked up to be by the media and certain left-wing politicians who revel in trashing the military:

An investigating officer has recommended dismissing murder charges against a Marine accused in the slayings of three Iraqi men in a squad action that killed 24 civilians in Haditha, according to a report released Tuesday.

The Guardian reports that this is the second time an investigating officer has recommended dropping the charges.

James Taranto wonders if Jack Murtha will apologize for calling Cpl. Justin L. Sharratt a murderer.

A Disappointment, I know

Unfortunately for expectant readers, I will not be able to live blog GoreAid as events unfold tomorrow. GD4 has soccer games in the extreme weather all day. As crushed as you are, imagine my distress.

Speaking of distress, Iowahawk has an important public service message from the English government to its people:

"We ask the public to report any behaviors by various people that may or may not be of a suspicious nature," said Lt. Clive Jameson of the Metropolitan Police Service. "We further ask the public to be especially vigilant for activities of broad stratas of people who may be from countries of some sort, especially those within the eastern and/or western hemisphere."

The elevated alert levels come on the heels of a week when London and Glasgow narrowly escaped potential events that intelligence experts say may have been related to diverse groups of people doing things.

Do your part for England and keep those eyes peeled for people from countries located in a hemisphere doing things, except for very skinny guitar-slingers wearing Greenpeace t-shirts. Aside from the copious amounts of CO2 they give off, these folks are relatively harmless as long as they are kept from your stash.