Monday Night News & Notes

Tom Brady is the best ever. End of argument. He's in the pantheon of greats along with Gretsky, Jordan, Howe, Griffey Jr. and Walter Payton.

Here's what's new in the world:

-Apparently the Hamas explosives guru wasn't that careful around explosives.

-Trump and Mattis need to address this immediately. When half of the strike fighters can't fly due to money, they are nothing but expensive paperweights.

-The world is moving to the right. Le Pen, Brexit, Trump and now Temer in Brazil.

-The Iraqi army is leaving ISIS fighters bodies in the street to rot as a warning and lesson. No matter how far into the future we go, the middle east will always be tribal and vicious.

-Example #298,742 why Trump was elected.

-Did you know the Patriots winning was due to White Supremacy? Me neither but apparently the SJW's believe that to be the case. I watched the game and I saw quite a few black men playing in the white jerseys. Is it possibly because the Patriots field a majority white receiving corps? I don;t know, I guess I'm just not smart enough to see race issues everywhere and in everything. I just enjoyed watching a good game.

-China believes they have reached the point they could surpass the US for sea supremacy in the South China Sea. I'm guessing once Mattis gets the Navy back to a sharp edge, China will learn that they are not yet at that point.

-I'm by no stretch a Lady Gaga fan but her performance was excellent. I thought I'd miss it coming home from the party I was at but I saw it all and she killed. It ranked up there with Prince and Michael Jackson in my humble opinion.

The War on Terror Continues

Unfortunately with Obama in office the last eight years, the media has dutifully not reported on the ongoing battles that make up the greater War on Terror that started on 9/11. It was on the front page while Bush was in and leveled Bush's wars. The media gleefully reported every death and were giddy as the death toll reached higher levels. That may sound really cold but that is exactly what happened from the invasion of Iraq on. They restrained themselves during the onset of the war in Afghanistan, at least until they felt comfortable criticizing Bush for that affair. They never criticized Obama for the many deaths on his watch.

Then Obama was elected as the anti-war president. He would get the world to understand that peace is the answer and through sheer will and his magical words the world would settle down. That didn't happen. He pulled us out of Iraq without a plan and that's devolved into the mess we now have. He led air strikes against Qaddafi without having a plan to fill the void left by the lack of leadership and he further destroyed any US credibility by drawing a line in the sand with regard to Assad in Syria and then not reacting when that line was crossed.

He labeled ISIS the Jayvee team and paid them no credence until it was too late and they had retaken areas where many US men and women died fighting for. He decided to fight a war where we would send over-worked special operations units in to "advise" with horrible rules of engagement. He said "no boots on the ground" and the media played that up while we had the boots of SEAL's, Rangers and other special operators on the ground.

Now the war has come down to us having troops in more countries than ever. men are dying in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and other areas we will never hear about. Through disjointed "leadership" and men and women advising him who do not believe that we are fighting a true enemy but that we are in fact as bad or worse than they are we have landed in this spot.

President Trump will inherit more of a mess than Obama did and it's all through the sheer lack of a coherent strategy on fighting the greater war.

The Rest of the World: Islamic Terror is Coming to the West Obama: I Have No Plan & I Have a Fundraiser To Get To

Yesterday Great Britain took the rather important step of raising their terror alert status to just short of imminent. Also, Saudi Arabia warned that ISIS will attack Europe within a month and the US within two. Israel has been screaming about the terror threat for months. And we do nothing.

Let's start with the UK:

Britain faces the “greatest and deepest” terror threat in the country’s history, David Cameron warned as he pledged emergency measures to tackle extremists.

The UK threat level was raised to “severe” — its second highest — meaning that a terrorist attack is “highly likely” in light of the growing danger from British jihadists returning from Iraq and Syria.

The Prime Minister said that the risk posed by Isil (the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant) will last for “decades” and raised the prospect of an expanding terrorist nation “on the shores of the Mediterranean”.

 When you juxtapose Cameron's speech with Obama's you'll feel even worse. Cameron was direct, had a plan and confidence and instilled a sense of mission. Obama on the other hand looked irritated he even had to disuse the issue, seemed rambling and unsure and said that the US has no plan to deal with it. But hey, he wore a tan suit so that's news, right?




Cameron states very clearly that ISIS is not a result of the Iraq war or any other world events but directly is the result of radical Islam. Obama would never even consider doing that.

The US State Department contends that we are not at war with ISIS but the evidence clearly shows that they are at war with us. This line of thinking coupled with the administration's reluctance to deal with any issue that does not help them politically is a recipe for disaster. ISIS plans on attacking the US and Obama plans on issuing executive orders to allow up to 5-million illegal immigrants into the US. ISIS expands their weapons cache and territory, the US president goes to fundraisers. The borders are left wide open and the Obama administration wants to stick their collective heads in the sand and ignore the fact that those who wish us harm are coming across.

Our folks in the intelligence services and military are working hard to detect these threats and eliminate them but the Obama administration is loathe to act on what they discover. Sure, Obama will authorize a couple of sorties and check the box that he's "doing something" but anything of consequence is not forthcoming. This threat is not just in the Middle East but is in America. As we speak there's a plot being formed somewhere be it Chicago, Washington, DC, New York City or Los Angeles. It will not be airplanes attacking buildings but much more ambitious as we are seeing evidence of coming from ISIS strongholds.

This is the direct result of electing (twice) and ideologue with no experience. Obama cares only about expanding his power and his statist goals. everything else is secondary. Where we should have someone, anyone on the Democrat side speaking out we have nothing. Can anyone make the controlling party see that everything they supposedly abhor: rape, racism, misogyny, genocide are being perpetrated by an enemy that has a stated goal of attacking the US? No, they rail about a fictitious war on women by the Republicans. The war on women is happening in Syria and Iraq as we speak where 12-year old girls are being sold for $10 each to ruthless thugs to be used as sex slaves but there's one thing that the Democrats will never speak out against and that's Islam.

Maybe a terror attack in the heart of San Francisco will wake people up but i fear it will be way too late to do anything about it.

ISIS, Jordan, Israel and Saving One of the Few Allies We Have Left

One of the major failures that historians will write about the Obama years is the way we treated and lost many long-standing allies. Be it the shameless way he appeased Russia by pulling defensive missiles from Poland, the embarrassing way he treated Britain or the way he smacked Israel at every opportunity, this will be at the top of major foreign policy blunders. 

We now have the opportunity to help another ally when they need it most and my guess is that he will screw them over as well.

Israel and the US may be prepared to aid Jordan as the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria eyes the Jewish state’s eastern neighbor, The Daily Beast on Saturday quoted US officials as saying. 

US officials speaking on condition of anonymity have speculated that if ISIS were to pursue a full-on assault on Jordan, Amman might not be able to repel the Islamists.

Correction; Jordan will not be able to repel the invading horde of ISIS terrorist's.  They've taken advantage of two teetering regimes in Iraq and Syria and have increased their numbers and effectiveness in both places. They've become a trained army and have sparked a revolution gaining adherents and momentum while the US sits back and allows them to expand unchecked. They've already managed to win and hold a huge swath of land from Aleppo to the northwest to the outskirts of Baghdad on the southeast:

The Jordanian's have been our most trusted ally in the region where we have few and King Hussein and then his son King Abdullah have expended serious political capital in recognizing Israel at the behest of the US while stoking enmity throughout the rest of the Arab world. As with most Arab governments, they seem a house of cards that can be easier undermined. Abdullah has bravely stood with the US and done our bidding when to do the opposite would have helped him much more at home.

ISIS sees the opportunity to expand their gains and the new caliphate by enlisting the aid of the disgruntled Jordanian youth while also provoking Israel into a regional war they would have a hard time winning. If even a small part of the kingdom falls, the Egyptians and Libyan Islamist's would quickly begin putting pressure on Israel and they will find themselves with pressure coming from the north, east and south. The fact that ISIS is Sunni means that they will gain quite a bit of help from many in Wahhabist Saudi Arabia whose leadership scared to death of the Shiite regime in Iraq but even more afraid of instability at home.

Meanwhile, President Obama has pledged that he will "aid" Jordan but doesn't quite spell out what that aid will mean. Is it weapons? Training? Boots on the ground? Perhaps we send over "advisors"?

And what of the Israeli's? How much assistance can they possibly give? The second they send any the Islamist's will score a major propaganda coup. Imagine the anger of disaffected Jordanian and Arab youth when they read communique after communique saying that the Abdullah monarchy needs to get assistance from the hated state of Israel. That will be the biggest recruiting assistance they could ever hope to have.

The only way to stop ISIS is to help Jordan seal their borders. Iraq is lost thanks to diplomatic bumbling by Obama and he is already working on arming those in Syria who wish us harm. If Jordan goes down, we will be facing not only death and destruction on a biblical scale but a middle east that is so transformed as to be unrecognizable from what it was a decade ago.

My guess is that we will offer them arms and training but not even consider shoring up their defenses with men. Obama does not have the stomach to engage in another war and will be content to leave this mess to his successor. Plus he can give a big "screw you" to Israeli PM Netanyahu who has dared on numerous occasions to call out Obama for his fecklessness. Meanwhile, millions of citizens of an ally we've needed throughout the years will suffer and the prestige and trustworthiness of the US will take another major hit.

Yes, many will blame Bush and Cheney but the US had a chance to stop this onslaught when it started in Syria but chose the wrong side. Obama believed that just by the sheer will of his personality that insurgents would overthrow the regime of Bashar Assad and then become friends of the US. The fact that the exact opposite happened in Egypt and Libya didn't teach him a lesson he would have been smart to recognize.

The Vindication of George Bush Continues

President George W. Bush was ridiculed for his idea that democracy in Iraq could take hold, flourish and spread. The liberal intelligentsia scoffed at the redneck cowboy from Texas and his un-nuanced line of thinking. In their minds, the only way to get any change was through negotiations (now it's unconditional negotiations). This in spite of the fact that Ronald Reagan proved the exact opposite 20-odd years ago.

Here's the proof that Bush was right:

Regardless of whether the current Iranian regime survives the uprising it provoked with its sham election, the events in Tehran are the latest affirmation of a pretty darn happy fact:

The first year of the post-Bush era is turning out to be a triumphant one for neoconservatism.

It is deliciously ironic that a doctrine America supposedly rejected, even though few really knew what it was, has emerged as a set of principles no one seriously questions as the world evolves to prove its wisdom. Indeed, in order to escape the political firestorm that nearly engulfed him this week, President Obama had to finally give in and talk like a neocon.

The liberal establishment and some conservatives laughed at Bush for his inane concepts, concepts that have borne fruit. Here's the gist:

...Now let’s deal with the one actually pursued by the administration of George W. Bush with the support of publications like The Weekly Standard and Commentary. The real neoconservatism simply held that the United States should support the advance of freedom and liberty throughout the world, wherever it can. It further posited that freedom and liberty are the God-given birthright of all people, and that – given the opportunity – people will always choose to be free. It further posited that when people become free, others see it, envy it and want it too.

The primary action for the United States in all this is to support democratic movements. Somewhere along the line, critics came to conflate this with the U.S. invading other countries and forcing them to accept our form of government. In fact, the two invasions that occurred during the Bush Administration were exceptions to the rule of how neoconservative goals are best achieved. We invaded Afghanistan in retaliation for the 9/11 attacks because the people who ruled that nation were harboring our attackers. We invaded Iraq because Saddam Hussein was in violation of the terms of the Gulf War cease fire agreement of 1991, and the United Nations sure as hell wasn’t going to do anything about it.

Please read the entire, excellent piece.

The overarching fact is that it worked in Iraq. How well? Well enough that Shiite leader Grand Ayatollah Sistani slammed the mullahcracy in Iraq and may well pave the way for a successful overthrow of the oppressive junta in that nation.

Iran Attacks Inside Iraq; How Will Obama Respond

Seemingly small incidents carry huge clout in the Mideast. When I was in Kuwait after Desert Storm, we were schooled incessantly on the local customs and how generally every action meant something in the local culture. Whether it be the Persians or Arabs, actions and reactions carry weight that western cultures can't even begin to comprehend.

This is one of those moments:

Iranian aircraft attacked three villages inside Iraq over the weekend. The airstrikes — Iran’s first on Iraqi soil since the U.S. invasion — could complicate the Obama administration’s efforts to normalize relations with Tehran.

“The bombardments appeared to have targeted the Party of Free Life of Kurdistan (PJAK), an Iranian Kurdish separatist group which has launched attacks on Iran from rear-supply bases in the mountains of northern Iraq,” AFP reports. Iran has attacked the Kurdish group before, with artillery. But this is the first time the Iranians followed up, with assaults from the air.

“The incident comes a week after reports of a clash between Iranian police officers and suspected PJAK fighters in the country’s western province of Kermanshah,” Al-Jazeera reports. “At least 10 policemen and 10 fighters were killed in the gun battle.”

This is a direct slap at the Iraqi government and by extension at Obama. His response (or lack of) will have ramifications that could harm our long-term strategies in the region. A non-response will send the signal that we are backing away from our commitment to Maliki and the Iraqi nation in which case Ahmadinejad will be further emboldened.

The only response is to covertly execute a mission that lets Iran know that we will never stand by and allow them free rein to attack within another nations sovereign borders. Something that will embarrass the regime in such a way that they will not even disclose it in the same vein as the Israeli attack in Syria that was covered up by everyone. Perhaps we take out one of their anti-aircraft radar installations or some other such action that will send a clear message.

I can't say I'm even remotely confident that Obama will authorize such a thing but one can hope.

Granted, the Kurdistan issue is one that concerns Iran, Iraq and Turkey but Iran clearly broached Iraq's border and that can't go without some response. As Uncle Jimbo notes, we own the airspace so we may have allowed this to occur but that seems doubtful.

The simple scenario is: today Kurdistan gets attacked, tomorrow the Straits of Hormuz are blocked unless we act quickly and decisively.

Monday Night News and Notes

Awaiting the next episode in a good year of 24.

Here's what's up in the world:

-The markets tanked, oil is up, the dollar fell and I got a damn flat tire on the most-heavily traveled road in North Jersey. All in all a pretty shitty day all-around. The Obama Effect kicked in as the markets started teetering after he met and discussed small business, gained some traction and then dove.

-What's the bet that Obama agrees?. I'm saying he will in the interest of saving us from something that has never been scientifically proven:

The world's wealthiest nations should be responsible for China's pollution coming from exports, Chinese officials said Monday amid talks with the United States on how to combat global warming.

-Instead of appearing on Leno to divert the public's attention from his failed policies, perhaps The One can refocus on al-Qaeda and the as yet un-won War on Terror.

-Name that party! Fumo showed that Chicago Dems are a bunch of pussies when it comes to graft.

-Iraqi's are more confident in the future than we are. I blame Bush.

NCAA predictions tomorrow or Wednesday. I like Villanova but that may be just the hometown bias coming out.

Another Blow to al-Qaeda: Iraqi Elections Peaceful

Peaceful polling in Mesopotamia:

BAGHDAD — Iraqis passed through security checkpoints and razor-wire cordons to vote Saturday in provincial elections that are considered a crucial test of the nation's stability as U.S. officials consider the pace of troop withdrawals. There were no reports of major violence.

Polls closed at 6 p.m. (10 a.m. EST) on Saturday — an hour later than planned — after millions of voters cast ballots for influential regional councils around most of Iraq.

Officials said counting would begin Sunday with preliminary results not expected before Tuesday.

There was a shooting and some sporadic violence but no more than Detroit on a typical election day.

This is a severe rebuke to al-Qaeda as free and peaceful elections are the antithesis of what AQ wants, They thrive on chaos and slither in to fill voids. Elections fill voids and thus keep the jihadi's marginalized.

A good day all around for supporters of democracy and freedom. I guess the new President is not among them. Don't expect to read about this in tomorrow's papers.

The Bush Legacy: Iraqi's Go to the Polls

You haven't heard much in the MSM because they've essentially stopped reporting anything from Iraq save a large bombing. Even when they do report about it, it's with a negative spin. They're pissed that George W. Bush had the nerve to order the surge and give Gen David Petraeus the tools needed to win. They wanted a loss and once it appeared we were victorious, all reporting stopped.

The Iraqi's are returning to the polls for provincial elections for the first time in four years. Expect much different results this time as the majority Sunni population will be out in force whereas last time they boycotted the elections.

Baghdad: Iraqis went to polls on Saturday to vote in the country's provincial elections, with a massive participation from Sunni Arabs and women, a candidate told Gulf News.

Ammar Al Zobaie, a Sunni Islamic Party's candidate in Fallujah, said many Sunni Arabs participated in the elections.
"Sunni Arabs [want] to redress the harm suffered by the Sunni cities because of their non-participation in the previous elections in 2005, which led to the suspension of development projects," Al Zobaie said.

Note I had to link to Gulf News to get any type of positive spin.

Another report, this one from Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, shows the exuberance of the Iraqi people:

A correspondent for RFE/RL's Radio Free Iraq, Adel Mahmoud, reported from Baghdad that spirits among residents and voters were "very high" around midday, with sunny skies contributing to the possibility of a high turnout in a vote that is seen as a bellwether for the national mood and a possible breakthrough in local governance for Iraqis.

Mahmoud said sectarian tensions that plagued the last vote were not in evidence and "the general atmosphere is like some kind of festival."

Our men and women who serve valiantly deserve the credit for this historic day. Their hard work, day in and day out, has given birth to a vibrant democracy in a place where one never existed before.

Congratulations to the Iraqi's as well.

US Hands Over Control of Green Zone to Iraq

A great day and one that was never imagined a year and a half ago:

BAGHDAD (AP) — The United States handed over control of the Green Zone and Saddam Hussein's presidential palace to Iraqi authorities on Thursday in a ceremonial move described by the country's prime minister as a restoration of Iraq's sovereignty.

At a ceremony marking the transition, Nouri al-Maliki said he will propose Jan. 1 be declared a national holiday to commemorate what he called "Sovereignty Day" — the day Iraq took the lead in security away from U.S. forces, regained control of its airspace and reclaimed a wide swath of Baghdad's heavily fortified Green Zone.

The area that became known as the Green Zone on the west bank of the Tigris River was occupied by the United States shortly after the 2003 U.S. invasion and walled off from the rest of the city.

Until Wednesday, Saddam's former palace formally served as the U.S. Embassy and headquarters of the U.S military in Iraq. Thursday's palace handover was mostly ceremonial, as most U.S. diplomats and military officials long since moved to a new embassy building on the other side of the Green Zone, which is also known as the International Zone.

A great day indeed. Thanks to the men and women of our military, Iraq is becoming quite stable and is only the second democracy in the entire Mideast and one that may spur further democratic movement in Lebanon, Jordan and perhaps even Egypt.

This move is symbolic but most from this point will be until we leave. We've trained the Iraqi's to defend themselves and police their own nation and they've moved quickly toward that goal.

Monday Evening News and notes

It's cold...correction, damn cold in the Northeast. Stay inside, drink a nice adult beverage and peruse these links.

Ace finds this gem: The Iraqi murder rate is lower than it was under Saddam and a whole lot lower than it is in the good old US of A.

The scepticism about global warming is increasing every day.

Human Events names Gov. Sarah Palin Conservative of the Year and deservedly so.

China and India feel the sting. US spending decrease hitting them hard.

Via my Father-in-Law (who should start a blog): Shariah Law, the bailout and AIG.

The MSM always crows that they are better than bloggers because they have checks and balances plus excellent editors. Apparently the NY Times laid those folks off.

Update: Bush confidante Ed Gillespie spells out the facts about the Bush years.

Shoe Throwing Egyptian Reporter Allegedly Beaten, al-Sadr Supporter

The reporter from Egypt who threw his shoes at President Bush was allegedly shown some rough treatment by the Iraqi's. Not even remotely surprisingly, the lefties took it as complete Iraqi repudiation of President Bush's authorization and subsequent winning of the war.

Also not quite too surprising is the guy is a supporter of the once powerful, now impotent Moqtada al-Sadr.

Now I'm not supporting any rough treatment or as the lefties label it "torture" of any person but I find it interesting that those who label it torture lump us in with the Iraqi's when it is clear that any beating he endured happened at an Iraqi facility and then he was transferred to an American facility later and reportedly treated at an American hospital. I'm sure he was not treated the slightest bit poorly by Americans.

There are many Arabs who have great hatred for America because of our support of Israel, our support of democracy and our ousting of Saddam. I understand that completely. However, to paint one reporter's actions with the feelings of a newly free nation is ridiculous beyond words. Clearly the guy is sympathetic to al-Sadr, a man we proved a coward (and called out by Condi Rice for being one) by repeatedly chasing away to Iran and a man who we beat and disgraced in front of his entire nation.

Liberals will never, ever concede the point that we have left Iraq with greater hope and more freedom than they ever would have attained had we left Saddam in power. Sadly, they once again want to believe the worst about America then give us the benefit of the doubt. They are not anti-American, they're just on the other side.

Update: Great point:

Because would an Iraqi journalist have ever thrown a shoe at Saddam Hussein, and if so, would he have ever again needed two shoes?

Via Tim Blair.

What You Should Be Reading Instead of Me

Good stuff from around the Web:

Imported drugs are not the answer and could be a catastrophe. A must read.

PETA wants vegan cafeteria in a proposed gay school. What the hell would the cafeteria ladies in that place look like?

Israel laments a possible Obama win.

Compare and contrast: Palestinians support Obama, Iraqi's support McCain. It's amazing what freedom from tyranny does to ones preference.

What was the most-watched political-related ad on You Tube this election season? This was, with 11 million hits and it should make Obama ashamed:



Thank you for your service and sacrifice, brother.

Iraq May "Set Timetable" On US Withdraw

I tend to think it's only Nouri al-Maliki flexing his newly formed muscles and feeling his oats. Like a teenager who receives his first paycheck and tells his dad he doesn't need him anymore, Maliki doesn't seem to understand just how fresh his victories are and how Iran will not go away tomorrow or next year. Ahmadinejad will rekindle the insurgency and stoke the Shia's fires.

On the west he will have to deal with the Saudis who don't want a stronger Iran and will fight the Iranians through proxies. In other words, they need to have a sizable contingent of US forces in-country for the foreseeable future.

Again, it's only bluster and the talk that we will be forced out is the Iraqi's way of getting better terms for the status of forces agreement being debated as we speak.

Erasing the Remnants of al-Qaeda in Iraq

When military historians digest the events of the War in Iraq and the greater Global War on Terror, they will undoubtedly rewrite the books that show how to beat an urban insurgency. For the last year and a half, US forces have changed to tactics that first flushed AQI out and then supplanted them with US and Iraqi troops who won the hearts and minds of the locals. Many battles were bloody and difficult and the names of those who fought and died should be household names if the media shills had documented the war with any type of fairness.

The strategy was honed by General David Petraeus and his excellent staff working in close concert with the Iraqi Army and Police after years of training by US forces. The result, cities that are controlled and secured by Iraqi's with increasingly less assistance from coalition forces. This strategy was documented perfectly by embedded civilian and author Michael Yon.

The Sunday Times of London has an excellent piece today describing the eradication of the last sizable contingent of al-Qaeda in urban Iraqi areas:

American and Iraqi leaders believe that while it would be premature to write off Al-Qaeda in Iraq, the Sunni group has lost control of its last urban base in Mosul and its remnants have been largely driven into the countryside to the south.

Nouri al-Maliki, Iraq’s prime minister, who has also led a crackdown on the Shi’ite Mahdi Army in Basra and Baghdad in recent months, claimed yesterday that his government had “defeated” terrorism.

“They were intending to besiege Baghdad and control it,” Maliki said. “But thanks to the will of the tribes, security forces, army and all Iraqis, we defeated them.”

The number of foreign fighters coming over the border from Syria to bolster Al-Qaeda’s numbers is thought to have declined to as few as 20 a month, compared with 120 a month at its peak.

...Major-General Mark Hertling, American commander in the north, said: “I think we’re at the irreversible point.”

That is about as clear a statement of our successes as you will hear from an American military commander.

Coalition forces have battled Iraqi's, Iranians, Arabs from throughout the region, the media portrayal of them in the US, accusations of murder from a sitting Congressman and the insipid drivel spewed by the anti-American leftist groups such as Code Pink and Moveon. They've beaten all comers and will leave Iraq victorious once the job is finished to the continued dread of those who wanted us humiliated and beaten.

I would love to see George W. Bush call out every single politician who questioned our military and their abilities to win against and insurgency that looked as if it would be impossible to contain just two short years ago. Senate Majority Leader Reid, Speaker Pelosi, Rep. John Murtha and the myriad other Democrats who became weak-kneed when leadership was needed and then threw our troops under the bus for political expediency should be made to feel the shame that they so righteously deserve. Obama's recent flip-flop-flip on Iraq is a great example of exploiting our hard-fought victory for pure political gain.

We are on the verge of winning what once looked unwinnable and securing a democracy in a region of the world that has never enjoyed one. We will be in Iraq for years or decades--just as we've remained in Bosnia, South Korea, Japan and Germany--but the hardest tasks are being completed as we speak.

This is a shining example of what American resolve can accomplish, too bad the media has failed in dramatic fashion to live up to their responsibilities and report the facts straight.

Killing Journalists for Best Results

Iraqi insurgents are developing online web-based presentations for aspiring snipers and Mujahadeen. They have been kindly translated and transferred to a Powerpoint slideshow by an American thinktank. Sorta gives a whole new meaning to the expression "Death by Powerpoint".

View the presentation here (obviously you should consider any career ramifications of clicking the above link).

A number of slides are interactive with the audience and quiz the trainee sniper on "who would you shoot first, and why". My 'favorite' was the last slide, where right after the Heavy Machine Gun operator, the sniper should shoot the journalist. Why?

"First, because the camera can be used as binoculars; second, it is the most difficult thing to hide the death of a reporter in Iraq."

It seems propaganda is as important to an Islamist sniper as accuracy with a firearm.

No News

Various blogs have observed that there is virtually no news coming from Iraq at the moment. One conclusion drawn from this, is that if the media can't find anything bad to report, America the free world must be winning.

Evil Pundit just reminded me of an old post which used to come in handy whenever I was annoyed at the media. Witness what happens to a pissant little reporter who tried to bignote himself to a soldier doing his job, and was subsequently subjected to what Evil pundit described as The Mother of all Smack-Downs. Fortunately EP archived the original report as the (gutless coward) reporter has since deleted it in shame.

The reporter certainly got what he had coming. I don't think I've ever seen so many comments to a single blog post, all entirely in agreement.

Links and Stuff

Cap't Ed finds tidbits the lazy (or unwilling) media didn't report about that Pentagon study concerning Iraq-al-Qaeda links.

The House leadership has agreed to a rare "closed session" to discuss and debate FISA.

The Chinese are cracking down in Tibet again. One wonders if all the libs sporting "Free Tibet" bumper stickers would support and armed insurrection.

It's amazing how many inconvenient Clinton facts are being retrieved from the memory hole. Does anyone believe we be reading stories like this if she was the nominee?

The State Dept. recognizes what us in the rightosphere have known for quite some time.

Woman wins annulment from spouse on false advertising charges. That must've been a real shocka when it got down to it.

Shocka! Violent Muslim Holiday Turns Violent

No, I never saw this coming:

BAGHDAD - Hundreds of thousands of frenzied Shiites beat their heads and chests in unison and whipped themselves with chains Saturday across Iraq to honor the martyrdom of one of their most revered saints. The processions were marred by violence with a deadly bombing in northern Iraq and clashes south of Baghdad.

The street battles between members of a messianic cult and Iraqi troops raged for a second day as the death toll from the fighting in two predominantly Shiite southern cities rose from 50 to at least 68.

The Religion of Peace (TM) continues to show why they are called that.

And to the AP, they are definitely not just "chains."

The War as Political Issue

Over the weekend, we saw the venerable Washington Post grudgingly admit that yes, we are making steady and measurable progress in Iraq and the strategies we've implemented are indeed working. General Petraeus has executed plans that have quelled much of the violence, turned the average Iraqi against al-Qaeda and is working to bridge the gap between Sunni and Shia. The good news is evident and the MSM will have to portray it as such although with the same scepticism noted in the WaPo piece.

Let's suppose that the good in Iraq continues into next year, what will be the political ramifications? The majority of the Democrat field have beased their campaigns on opposition to the war and the President's handling of it. The only Dem to support the war effort even tepidly is Hillary and she's simply doing that as a hedge. On the GOP side, most have supported the war effort with the glaring exception of wannabe candidate Ron Paul (The Keeper of the Constitution!). They've supported the troops and Petraeus' actions even at the risk of harming themselves should they win the nomination. If events continue as they have in Iraq and the American public further senses the momentum and begins to believe that the war is in fact winnable, what effect would that have on the various campaigns?

On the donk side, John Edwards has made much of the fact that Hillary has never "apologized" for voting to use force against Iraq while he has. He's ran on a platform of anti-war and has given a big, fat kiss to the hard left in hopes of garnering support. Barack Obama has been anti-war from the beginning supposedly as has Americas own Nobel Laureate, Al Gore. Now that they've staked out positions that are not ambiguous in the least, should the tenor of the public change, they would be caught in a position that would leave them wide-open for criticism. A GOP ad campaign painting the Dems as lacking trust in our military would write itself and the public would largely believe it.

The GOP candidates have supported our war effort with Giuliani, McCain, Romney and Thompson all lining up with Petraeus but their criticism of the President has been rough at times. They will have some excellent talking points on the stump should they gain the nomination.

Lastly, President Bush way well be vindicated for his strategy of luring the Jihadi's in to Iraq so we could fight them in one place and keep them out of the U.S. Of course the anti-warriors will never admit that but it would do well for GOP pundits to point out that this strategy has worked quite well. Through the last several years, Bush has been beaten by the liberal canard that his planning was flawed and his concept of luring Islamo-fascist fighters into a battle on our terms was unrealistic. It may well play out that he was exactly right in thinking it was a winnable situation.