HOOAH!
Cross-posted @: Bottom Line Up Front
GEN David Petraeus was confirmed by the Senate as the new commander of Central Command in the Middle East (CENTCOM) while LT GEN Ray Odierno was promoted to 4-star GEN and confirmed to replace GEN Petaeus as Multi-National Force-Iraq commander in Iraq.
The Senate voted 95-2 for Petraeus and 96-1 for Odierno with Democratic Senators Robert Byrd and Tom Harkin opposing Petraeus, Harkin opposing Odierno.
While it’s unclear why Harkin of Iowa opposed the pair, D-WVa Byrd said he thinks Petraeus should finish the job in Iraq, saying:
“It does not seem prudent to remove the mastermind behind the fragile successes that have been thus far achieved.”
I suspect both Byrd and Harkin are pandering to their anti-war base, although it is true that Byrd has exhibited a complete lack of understanding military and counterinsurgency operations on the ground in Iraq.
Cross-posted @: Bottom Line Up Front
“Re-enlisting soldiers is one of my favorite duties, one of the greatest honors I think any of us can perform. And it is a true honor to be with you to re-enlist 281 of you at lest count, and that does include a ‘Sailor of One’.”
Someone needs to have a word with these soldiers. They’re making Democrats look bad.
Cross-posted @: Bottom Line Up Front
It’s just getting harder and harder for the Democrats to come up with excuses for failure in Iraq. The U.S. Department of Defense is reporting that U.S. troops begin coming home tomorrow, November 27:
WASHINGTON, Nov. 26, 2007 – The first reduction in American forces in Iraq is under way as the 3rd Brigade Combat Team of the 1st Cavalry Division heads back to Fort Hood, Texas.
The brigade will not be replaced. Roughly 162,000 U.S. troops are in Iraq in 20 brigade teams or their Marine equivalents. If all goes well, this will drop to 15 brigade combat teams over the next eight months, Navy Rear Adm. Gregory J. Smith, a spokesman for Multinational Force Iraq in Baghdad, said Nov. 24.
Iraqi security forces are attaining the expertise and operational capabilities needed to police their own country, Smith said. Iraqi forces are taking over more of the battle space in Baghdad and around the country.
“Current conditions allow for a withdrawal of the first unit … starting on Nov. 27,” Smith said. “If conditions continue to permit, a total of five brigade combat teams will be redeployed over the next eight months.”
The redeployment of the brigade shows the coalition’s confidence in Iraqi security forces and reflects the overall improved security in the country, Smith said. The brigade – based in Diyala province – will not leave a vacuum in the province.
Army COL David Sutherland, commander of the 3rd Brigade Combat Team, added:
“These concerned local citizens understand that the future of Iraq can be better if they get involved in ridding the province of al Qaeda and participate in the development of their own democracy.
“As I’ve said on numerous occasions, we cannot kill our way out of this. In Diyala, when the government loses its will, the people lose hope and they turn to other sources to provide that hope. Today, there is hope in Diyala.”
HOOAH!
Cross-posted @: Bottom Line Up Front
Redacted, a smear film on U.S. troops in Iraq centered around the rape of an Iraqi girl, grossed an abysmal $25,628 in theaters across the U.S. its opening weekend. Here are some headlines:
All CBS can ask is, “Too Soon to See Iraq on the Big Screen?”
Please! Bad acting and slander against the troops are always too soon.
This summer at the Venice Film Festival, other Hollywood types loved the movie. Reuters reported that Redacted’ Stunned Venice. The film’s director, Brian De Palma, said this in Venice:
“The movie is an attempt to bring the reality of what is happening in Iraq to the American people. The pictures are what will stop the war. One only hopes that these images will get the public incensed enough to motivate their Congressmen to vote against this war.”
Oh, not so much! People are incensed enough to boycott the movie, though!
Listen to the trailer and tell me, those of you who actually know soldiers serving in Iraq, if they sound anything like their portrayal in the clips. Of course they all joined for the college money, none are patriots, they’re all moral reprobates….
The global war on terror has been going on since 2001. How many wars can you name that have lasted 6 years with an all volunteer military and no draft? All branches consistently meet or exceed retention and recruitment goals. Most soldiers and commanders believe in the mission and are good, decent, heroic human beings.
Take a lesson from history, Hollywood: America wants movies like The Best Years of Our Lives, The Longest Day and The Sands of Iwo Jima. Patriotism is cool; enemy propaganda isn’t.
RELATED POSTS:
Lions for Lambs Bombs Worldwide
Why Hollywood War Movies Are KIA
Cross-posted @: Bottom Line Up Front
October and November 2007 have yielded the fewest U.S. casualties since the start of the war in 2003. September 2007 yielded the lowest since it tied with 42 in 2005. Otherwise, you’d have to go back to 2003 at the start of the war to find a lower figure. August 2007 yielded the lowest U.S. casualties since 2004.
Essentially, we’re seeing the best downward trends in both civilian and military fatalities since the start of the war. HOOAH!
Cross-posted @: Bottom Line Up Front
Bottom Line Up Front: If LT Michael Murphy had been a cold-hearted killer, me may very well be alive today.
Because the U.S. military trains ethics and moral codes to its soldiers, and because soldiers usually adhere to those ethics, soldiers are at greater risk of death and injury because when faced with the moral dilemma of erring on the side of caution for themselves or a civilian, they usually choose the latter.
This point is made clear in a letter to the editor of the Wall Street Journal by a former Army officer about the incredible story of LT Michael Murphy, who recently received the Medal of Honor.
But first, some background:
Navy SEAL LT Michael Murphy was awarded the Medal of Honor, the highest military award given by the United States, two years after his death in Afghanistan on June 28, 2005.
Murphy’s mission was to find, kill or capture Ahmad Shah, a high-ranking terrorist leader guarded by scores of heavily armed Taliban fighters.
As Murphy and his men watched and waited on the mountain, three Afghan shepherds trailing a herd of goats crossed their paths, blowing their cover. The shepherds presumably reported their presence and location to the Taliban and a fierce firefight ensued. Murphy decided against killing the shepherds to prevent the outing of their position. According to LT. Murphy’s father:
“Michael was adamant that the civilians were going to be released, that he wasn’t going to kill innocent people … “
President Bush, who awarded the Medal of Honor to Murphy’s parents on their son’s behalf, described what happened next this way:
……and the SEALs launched a valiant counterattack while cascading from cliff to cliff. But as the enemy closed in, Michael recognized that the survival of his men depended on calling back to the base for reinforcements. With complete disregard for his own life, he moved into a clearing where his phone would get reception. He made the call, and Michael then fell under heavy fire. Yet his grace and upbringing never deserted him. Though severely wounded, he said “thank you” before hanging up, and returned to the fight — before losing his life.
A Wall Street Journal letter to the editor today said this:
If Lt. Murphy Had Been A Cold-Blooded Killer
November 5, 2007; Page A17As a former Army officer from Long Island, I was moved by Mark Lasswell’s account of how Lt. Michael Murphy won the Medal of Honor and the story of the one Navy SEAL who made it back to tell the story (”Lone Survivor,” Oct. 27, editorial page).
What struck me was that Lt. Murphy’s unit was discovered by three goat herders. If the SEALs executed those herders, Lt. Murphy and his men might have survived. But we train officers in morality in the U.S. military. By doing the right thing, Lt. Murphy and 18 other Americans perished. Why didn’t the media pick up on this part of the story? Is it because it doesn’t fit the assumption that our soldiers are murderous thugs, killing and terrorizing women and children in the night?
Rich Bilello
USMA ‘90
Bay Shore, N.Y.
Politics create a moral dilemma: using military or civilian deaths to influence public policy and opinion against the war can actually create more casualties, but where is the media focus on LT Murphy’s selfless humanitarianism and compassion?
SIGN THE FAMILY GUESTBOOK FOR LT. MICHAEL MURPHY
Cross-posted @: Bottom Line Up Front
On May 12, 2006, three U.S. soldiers were abducted by al-Qaeda in Iraq. PFC Byron Fouty and PFC Joseph Anzack Jr. were later found murdered. SPC Alex Jimenez was never found.
The New York Post is reporting that U.S. intelligence officials got mired for nearly 10 hours seeking approval to use wiretaps against al Qaeda terrorists suspected of kidnapping SPC Jimenez:
Sometime before dawn, heavily armed al Qaeda gunmen quietly cut through the tangles of concertina wire surrounding the outpost of two Humvees and made a massive and coordinated surprise attack.
Four of the soldiers were killed on the spot and three others were taken hostage.
A search to rescue the men was quickly launched. But it soon ground to a halt as lawyers - obeying strict U.S. laws about surveillance - cobbled together the legal grounds for wiretapping the suspected kidnappers.
Starting at 10 a.m. on May 15, according to a timeline provided to Congress by the director of national intelligence, lawyers for the National Security Agency met and determined that special approval from the attorney general would be required first.
For an excruciating nine hours and 38 minutes, searchers in Iraq waited as U.S. lawyers discussed legal issues and hammered out the “probable cause” necessary for the attorney general to grant such “emergency” permission.
Finally, approval was granted and, at 7:38 that night, surveillance began.
“The intelligence community was forced to abandon our soldiers because of the law,” a senior congressional staffer with access to the classified case told The Post.
“How many lawyers does it take to rescue our soldiers?” he asked. “It should be zero.”
The FISA law applies even to a cellphone conversation between two people in Iraq, because those communications zip along wires through U.S. hubs, which is where the taps are typically applied.
Now Congress is voting this week on the Democratic version of a bill to renew the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that will make it harder to track possible suspects such as those involved in the kidnapping of U.S. soldiers in Iraq. Fox News reports:
The latest bill would require more warrants to eavesdrop on suspected terrorists.
Intelligence officials, for example, would have to get a warrant in advance if they want to eavesdrop on a suspected terrorist overseas who they think may be calling someone in the United States.
Democrats have fought Pres. Bush on the warrantless wiretap issue for several years now, covering warped political motivations under the guise of Constitutionality. Exactly which Americans are Democrats trying to safeguard here and what Constitutional right is more fundamental that the right to life?
Cross-posted @: Bottom Line Up Front
138 Muslim leaders, politicians and scholars from around the world wrote an open letter to Pope Benedict XVI on the one year anniversary of his controversial remarks quoting a 14th century Byzantine emperor who denounced Mohammed’s attempt to spread religion by the sword as incompatible with the nature of God.
Pope Benedict invited a large Muslim envoy to the Vatican a month following his controversial quotation denouncing religion and violence. Many overlooked the warm meeting between the world’s top Christian leader and top Muslim leaders who agreed that religion is incompatible with violence.
This unprecedented open letter, An Open Letter and Call from Muslim Religious Leaders, addresses all Christians, starting with the Pope and ending in the ordinary layperson. It aims to bridge the gap between Muslims and Christians. It calls for unity among the religions that have the ability to bring peace to the world and essentially worship the same God. Christians, Jews and Muslims all share the same father in faith, Abraham. Here are some excerpts of this astounding olive branch:
Muslims and Christians together make up well over half of the world’s population. Without peace and justice between these two religious communities, there can be no meaningful peace in the world. The future of the world depends on peace between Muslims and Christians.
The basis for this peace and understanding already exists. It is part of the very foundational principles of both faiths: love of the One God, and love of the neighbour. These principles are found over and over again in the sacred texts of Islam and Christianity. The Unity of God, the necessity of love for Him, and the necessity of love of the neighbour is thus the common ground between Islam and Christianity.
…..justice and freedom of religion are a crucial part of love of the neighbour. Thus in obedience to the Holy Qur’an, we as Muslims invite Christians to come together with us on the basis of what is common to us, which is also what is most essential to our faith and practice: the Two Commandments of love.
As Muslims, we say to Christians that we are not against them and that Islam is not against them — so long as they do not wage war against Muslims on account of their religion, oppress them and drive them out of their homes.
Finally, as Muslims, and in obedience to the Holy Qur’an, we ask Christians to come together with us on the common essentials of our two religions … that we shall worship none but God, and that we shall ascribe no partner unto Him, and that none of us shall take others for lords beside God … (Aal ‘Imran , 3:64).
Let this common ground be the basis of all future interfaith dialogue between us, for our common ground is that on which hangs all the Law and the Prophets (Matthew 22:40).
Finding common ground between Muslims and Christians is not simply a matter for polite ecumenical dialogue between selected religious leaders. Christianity and Islam are the largest and second largest religions in the world and in history. Christians and Muslims reportedly make up over a third and over a fifth of humanity respectively. Together they make up more than 55% of the world’s population, making the relationship between these two religious communities the most important factor in contributing to meaningful peace around the world. If Muslims and Christians are not at peace, the world cannot be at peace. With the terrible weaponry of the modern world; with Muslims and Christians intertwined everywhere as never before, no side can unilaterally win a conflict between more than half of the world’s inhabitants. Thus our common future is at stake.
The very survival of the world itself is perhaps at stake. And to those who nevertheless relish conflict and destruction for their own sake or reckon that ultimately they stand to gain through them, we say that our very eternal souls are all also at stake if we fail to sincerely make every effort to make peace and come together in harmony. God says in the Holy Qur’an: Lo! God enjoineth justice and kindness, and giving to kinsfolk, and forbiddeth lewdness and abomination and wickedness. He exhorteth you in order that ye may take heed (Al Nahl, 16:90). Jesus Christ said: Blessed are the peacemakers ….(Matthew 5:9), and also: For what profit is it to a man if he gains the whole world and loses his soul? (Matthew 16:26).
So let our differences not cause hatred and strife between us. Let us vie with each other only in righteousness and good works. Let us respect each other, be fair, just and kind to another and live in sincere peace, harmony and mutual goodwill.
Wow. My suggestion is that we let these good Muslims frame the debate with Christians and peace loving people, not Osama bin Laden or Ayman al-Zawahiri. A fatal mistake we non-Muslims make is to continually elevate terrorists to the level of religious leaders by engaging in their taunt of “jihad” and ignoring that there are indeed both apostates and faithful within Islam. A friend in the comment section of another post said this:
“…until OBL stops calling it jihad I will call them jihadis.”
I propose we let these good Muslims who want to bridge the gap define Islam. Allowing Osama Bin Laden to define terrorism as “jihad” is letting the inmates run the asylum, the enemy call the shots and the apostates define theology. I would no more let David Koresh or Jim Jones define Christianity for me than Muslims want OBL defining Islam for them.
Since 2001 we’ve wondered where the good, peaceful Muslims were and why they weren’t speaking out against terrorism in the name of their religion. In the past year, movements within Islam have emerged showing that most Muslims reject the heretics who kill in the name of Allah. This open letter is yet another step toward peace which we should appreciate and accept rather than dismissing. The consequences of doing so are simply too damning.
Cross-posted @: Bottom Line Up Front
Bottom Line Up Front: Today’s U.N.’s WMD snafu is a reminder of the unusual change in U.N. reporting regarding Saddam’s WMD program.
New proof has emerged that Saddam had no WMD ambitions! Okay, that was sarcastic, but it is pretty ironic that dangerous chemical weapons taken at an Iraqi chemical weapons plant in 1996 by weapons inspectors were found in an office in the United Nations in New York City today.
Why ironic? As late as 2004 the U.N. weapons inspectors officially reported that Iraq had no WMD after 1994. The chemicals found at the U.N. today are from 1996 and are the kind used as lethal weapons during World War I.
Even more ironic is that 1996, the year these chemicals were taken from Iraq and stored in the U.N. as souvenirs, the infamous Oil for Food programme was begun by the U.N.
So a year after Operation Iraqi Freedom had begun, a war which U.N. WMD inspectors resisted, they reported there were no WMD after 1994 knowing WMD were found in Baghdad in 1996. Enter Oil for Food. Hmmmmm….
David Kay, top U.S. weapons inspector who headed the Iraq Survey Group, addressed a Congressional committee in October 2003, saying:
-Some WMD personnel crossed borders in the pre/trans conflict period and may have taken evidence and even weapons-related materials with them.
-Any actual WMD weapons or material is likely to be small in relation to the total conventional armaments footprint and difficult to near impossible to identify with normal search procedures. It is important to keep in mind that even the bulkiest materials we are searching for, in the quantities we would expect to find, can be concealed in spaces not much larger than a two car garage.
In their final report, David Kay and the Iraq Survey Group Final Report (Global Security) announced:
On Feb. 14, 2003:“Saddam issues directive banning private companies and individuals from importing WMD materials or producing WMD.”
That was weeks before the start of the invasion. Even John Bolton serving as Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security voiced grave concerns about Syria’s WMD capabilities. in Sept. 2003 to Congress.
Confusing? Here’s how it looks chronologically.
TIMELINE: