Why I'm Against US/Libyan Intervention

I've been against the bombing of Libya before I was against it.

I'm completely confused and alarmed by the seemingly haphazard insanity that Mr. Obama's approach to this particular situation, the way it's transpired, and what the long term implications are and will be.

I have, amazingly, more than one reason for my opinion.

First off, the lazy Susan of the political game has now completely turned back to the Democrats. Now they are the war-mongers. Even the biased main stream media feeds are thumping their fists into their anchor desks making wild rationals that their Commander in Chief is right -- and that multinational intervention in an oil-producing Arab country, without prior congressional approval or majority public support is A-OK. But even eight years ago, George Bush got the support of Congress - he made the Democrats sign off on it before he went in. He even had the UN support, if by only the stack of resolutions and declarations.*

*Note that prior to 2002, the UN Security Council had passed 16 resolutions on Iraq. In 2002, the Security Council unanimously passed Resolution 1441: offering Iraq under Saddam Hussein "a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations" that had been set out in several previous resolutions.

And let's also note this is while we're still engaged in that war - and Afghanistan, now this is going on while we're racking up deficits. Who's paying for it? The Arab League? What's amazing is that the media and folks who I consider "Progressives" are actually saying, “my president, right or wrong,” styled gibberish that they were falling all over themselves to mock eight short years ago.

And then there's General Joe Biden and Mr. Obama themselves. Joe and Mr. Obama were the quickest to get on a milk crate to yell that George W. Bush’s antiterrorism policies and wars in Afghanistan and Iraq was more partisan than principled. Mr. Obama was against, "stupid wars." But Mr. Obama, as President, not only embraced but also expanded the tribunals, preventive detentions, renditions, Predator attacks, intercepts and wiretaps, he also hasn't closed Guantanamo Bay.

Take it a step further - now he can preemptively attack an Arab oil-exporting country without fear of his base, Hollywood, threats of congressional cutoffs, MoveOn.org “General Betray Us”, Cindy Sheehan, or the main stream media. In short, Obama has effectively and determinately ended the antiwar movement. Of course, this author would say that none of the anti-war movement had any affect on the current wars anyway. Why? Well, one, we're engaged in three active shooting wars right now! But more importantly is that it's my contention that as long as the US military remains a volunteer Army, the argument that, "they signed up for it," will prevent any real passion or 'skin-in-the-game' for the general American public.

PS - Iran, Syria, and even North Korea. Just a suggestion - but you better watch your ass.

Then there's Europe. It's been the European role to egg America on to fight their enemies and turn their head and complain that the Cowboy Policeman is an aggressive thug. It's their PR move to look like they're above it all.

But in this one, even the French got into it before the US. I'm sure the oil and all their dealings with Quadaffy have something to do with it. But the dynamic of NATO calling the shots, while 90% of NATO is American, but America doesn't want to play -- is baffling. It's against character.

Don't worry, I'm sure they'll still slap the 'Imperialism' logo on this thing if it goes south. Funny thing with these good intentioned 'kinetic military actions' is that they almost ALWAYS do.

And what, pray-tell, will happen when we don't intervene in the next protest movement in the Middle East? What about the other two wars in Africa - that are happening simultaneously? Sure they're civil wars, but don't we now have a moral obligation to protect the innocent civilians? How much will that cost?

I guess it depends if there's an oil field near the killing field.

If you want to be against this war, marching in the streets won't do it. You need to get off the oil. Stop driving so damn much, and quit buying plastic things.

This STRATFOR chart shows every energy and oil installation in Libya, offshore and on.
Every one is a European-owned entity.
[Click To Enlarge]

Boots and Bigger Threats

2,200 Marines Go To Libya, ‘What Happened to No Boots on the Ground’?

In all the reporting on the involvement of US Forces in Libya a report by WCTI Channel 12 News in New Bern, North Carolina seems to have gone by almost unnoticed.

Almost.

The News channel reports that 2,200 U.S. Marines have been shipped off the Libya. Hold on now - that deployment doesn't jive with Mr. Obama’s steadfast insistence that there will be “no boots on the ground” in Libya.

On March 20 WCTI reported that the Marines were shipping out. About 2,200 Marines from the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit, or 26th MEU will take part. Their mission is to help end the violence directed at the Libyan people.

Oh. Good thing the Pentagon eliminated their amphibious transports that the modern Marines have no use for. Maybe they're just going so that they can keep singing their theme song? "To the Shores of Tripoli!?"

Read More, It's Canadian, eh.

Meanwhile, I wonder if we'll also be sending troops to a much more significant source of terror that's been aiming to actually harm the United States? Oh, didn't hear about that one, eh? Yeah, looks like the Unrest In Yemen Is A Major Setback For U.S. Counter-Terrorism Operations. Remember the UPS and FedEx bombs in toner cartridges? Yemen. Remember the Christmas Underwear Bomber? Yemen. Unrest and regime change in Yemen? Oh, oh, Shaggy.

Oh, and if that wasn't enough, Syria is also quivering on the brink of toppling over -- and while that sounds great, it's probably not great for the Western powers.

So we're engaging Libya. Missing Yemen and Syria. And of course the REAL fart in the car that no one's talking about is Saudi Arabia. Just how important is the Kingdom to the world of Big Macs and iPad2's? If you had to rank which country could be the greatest threat to the modern world's stability - Saudi Arabia should be on the top of your list. Arrogant leadership and oil producing power? Right there. Number 2? My answer would be Iran.

Where's Iraq on that list?

Bush Compared to Obama on War Planning

"Obama's defenders insist that what he did in starting the Libya war is not as bad as what President George W. Bush did in starting the Iraq war.

True: In some ways, what Obama did is worse." (reason.com)

The TL;DR:

"Bush made the case for removing Hussein over months. Bush got approval from Congress. Bush acted against a dictator who aspired to acquire nuclear weapons. He invaded a country of large strategic value. He stated plainly the purpose of the invasion.

Obama did none of those things. He rushed into a war, ignoring Congress, to punish a ruler who had abandoned his nuclear ambitions, in a country of peripheral importance."

And in a kind of similar related news... Only 17% Of Americans See President Obama As A Strong And Decisive Military Leader.

Maybe it's because he names his wars after crappy Asia records, and it's not a war - It's a Kinetic Military Action.

Obama's Change

Just four short years, the freshman Senator from Illinois said the following about using America's military force:

2. In what circumstances, if any, would the president have constitutional authority to bomb Iran without seeking a use-of-force authorization from Congress? (Specifically, what about the strategic bombing of suspected nuclear sites — a situation that does not involve stopping an IMMINENT threat?)

The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.

As Commander-in-Chief, the President does have a duty to protect and defend the United States. In instances of self-defense, the President would be within his constitutional authority to act before advising Congress or seeking its consent. History has shown us time and again, however, that military action is most successful when it is authorized and supported by the Legislative branch. It is always preferable to have the informed consent of Congress prior to any military action.

As for the specific question about bombing suspected nuclear sites, I recently introduced S.J. Res. 23, which states in part that “any offensive military action taken by the United States against Iran must be explicitly authorized by Congress.” The recent NIE tells us that Iran in 2003 halted its effort to design a nuclear weapon. While this does not mean that Iran is no longer a threat to the United States or its allies, it does give us time to conduct aggressive and principled personal diplomacy aimed at preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

Uh, Mr. Obama? Call me silly, but doesn’t that statement mean that your own decision to authorize action against Libya is prohibited by Constitution?

I guess Change meant you Changed your mind?

Happy Monday!

Anger On The Streets: Unrest In Iran, Algeria, Yemen, Morocco And China

There are peaceful demonstrations being staged in Morocco but violence breaks out elsewhere in the Middle East and Chinese police crackdown on planned unrest

Thousands took to the streets of Rabat, Casablanca, Tangier and Marrakech in peaceful protests demanding a new constitution, a change in government and an end to corruption.

Sunday's protests were a test for King Mohamed VI's regime, which boasts that it is more liberal and tolerant than other countries in the region that have seen violence and revolution. But there's a bandwagon rolling - and it's now or never Read more ....

Meanwhile in the Middle East, Bahrain opposition groups mull response. Bahrain protests continue on ninth day. Iran warships to begin Suez Canal passage Tuesday. Not that this is anything to worry about... And speaking of Iran, their security forces quelled opposition protests in Tehran. Iran's forces battle protests nationwide. Yemen's Saleh says won't be forced out by "anarchy". Iraq: Bomb kills police in Shia shrine city of Samarra.

In Asia, China calls for domestic unrest to be defused. 'Jasmine' protests in China fall flat. Afghan police: At least 30 killed in suicide blast. 'Diplomatic surge' to help end Afghan war, Clinton says. Nepal caught between China and India.

In Africa, they're crushing Libya's revolt. Protesters and security clash in capital. So the protests focus on Tripoli as demonstrators set public buildings on fire. Thousands demand change in Morocco. Bodies found after Moroccan protests. Burned bodies found after Morocco protests - minister. Sudan's Omar al-Bashir 'will not seek re-election'. Uganda election: Yoweri Museveni wins fresh term, despite claims of fraud. DR Congo colonel Kibibi Mutware jailed for mass rape.

In Europe, Hamburg rout bodes ill for Merkel in election year. 7 soldiers shot dead in Azerbaijan. Estonia calls for nationwide mourning after fire kills 10 children. Iceland president forces new Icesave referendum.

And in the America's -- Ciudad Juarez sees 40 killed in violent weekend. 12 taxi drivers, fares killed in Mexican resort. Gov't shutdown threat looms over U.S. budget fight. Tar sand row threatens Canada-EU trade deal. Thousands of Aristide backers march in Haiti.

The War on Terrorism, an Al-Qaida figure believed killed in US drone strike. I wonder if he was #2? Increased U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan killing few high-value militants. Pakistan intelligence says US gunman is CIA.

And finally, Oil rises most in three weeks, gold reaches $1,400 on Mideast; stocks drop. EU, oil companies prepare Libya evacuations. Chinese telecom giant calls off US deal.

So - what, sorry, what were you complaining about? The weather? Your commute this morning? Yeah. That sucks.

Thanks to War News Updates for the content.

Iraq Defector Admits To Lying About WMDs In Iraq

The defector who convinced the White House that Iraq had a secret biological weapons programme has admitted for the first time that he lied about his story then watched in shock as it was used to justify the war.

• Man codenamed Curveball 'invented' tales of bioweapons
• Iraqi told lies to try to bring down Saddam Hussein regime
• Fabrications used by US as justification for invasion

The defector who convinced the White House that Iraq had a secret biological weapons program has admitted for the first time that he lied about his story, then watched in shock as it was used to justify the war.

Rafid Ahmed Alwan al-Janabi, codenamed Curveball by German and American intelligence officials who dealt with his claims, has told the Guardian that he fabricated tales of mobile bioweapons trucks and clandestine factories in an attempt to bring down the Saddam Hussein regime, from which he had fled in 1995.

Read more ....

Geography Failure

Dear Jimmy's geography teacher -
Yes, Jimmy seemed to have mad skillz with the Photoshop.
He probably took the red eye out of your kid's birthday photos - and you let him pass because he did a nice job. But, look at what Jimmy's done... yeah, first off Jimmy's working for Fox News. I guess your passing him got that high school diploma needed to get into the graphics department at the network.
He's moved Egypt to where Iraq should be - and the fact that no one caught that is odd -- but come on? You make new maps every day over there, or can you re-use one every so often? America's only been engaged in the region since -- well, that Marine's song -- how's that go? "Shores of Tripoli?"
Okay, so a hard drive crashed. I get that - but you can’t use the Internet to get a map like we do at Blasphemes?
How does this sort of thing happen on a network in the first place? Kind of makes me wonder what else those guys are just 'whipping up' over there.

Meantime, Jimmy, yeah, go find your geography teacher and get a refund from him.

WMD in Iraq Was True, but Only Because Wikileaks Said So

One surprising development with the newest WikiLeaks information dump has been how many liberals are now willing to admit that Gulf War era WMDs were found in Iraq. For years, many folks not only denied that WMDs had been found in Iraq, they openly mocked people who said otherwise.

So now that WikiLeaks has released the information, they finally believe it and are producing articles like this...

WikiLeaks Show WMD Hunt Continued in Iraq With Surprising Results

By late 2003, even the Bush White House’s staunchest defenders were starting to give up on the idea that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

But for years afterward, WikiLeaks’ newly-released Iraq war documents reveal, U.S. troops continued to find chemical weapons labs, encounter insurgent specialists in toxins, and uncover weapons of mass destruction.

An initial glance at the WikiLeaks war logs doesn’t reveal evidence of some massive WMD program by the Saddam Hussein regime — the Bush administration’s most (in)famous rationale for invading Iraq. But chemical weapons, especially, did not vanish from the Iraqi battlefield. Remnants of Saddam’s toxic arsenal, largely destroyed after the Gulf War, remained. Jihadists, insurgents and foreign (possibly Iranian) agitators turned to these stockpiles during the Iraq conflict — and may have brewed up their own deadly agents.

Oh, and the Iranian involvement in Iraq and also Afghanistan has been substantial... even the NY Times ran an article on that today. Afghan Leader Admits His Office Gets Cash from Iran

Wikileaks other Shoe Drops

A close analysis of the 391,832 documents helps illuminate several important aspects of this war:

¶ The deaths of Iraqi civilians — at the hands mainly of other Iraqis, but also of the American military — appear to be greater than the numbers made public by the United States during the Bush administration.

¶ While the abuse of Iraqi prisoners by Americans, particularly at the Abu Ghraib prison, shocked the American public and much of the world, the documents paint an even more lurid picture of abuse by America’s Iraqi allies — a brutality from which the Americans at times averted their eyes.

¶ Iran’s military, more than has been generally understood, intervened aggressively in support of Shiite combatants, offering weapons, training and sanctuary and in a few instances directly engaging American troops.

¶ The war in Iraq spawned a reliance on private contractors on a scale not well recognized at the time and previously unknown in American wars. The documents describe an outsourcing of combat and other duties once performed by soldiers that grew and spread to Afghanistan to the point that there are more contractors there than soldiers.

The Iraqi documents were made available to The Times, the British newspaper The Guardian, the French newspaper Le Monde and the German magazine Der Spiegel on the condition that they be embargoed until now.

Geoff Morrell, the Defense Department press secretary, strongly condemned both WikiLeaks and the release of the Iraq documents. “We know terrorist organizations have been mining the leaked Afghan documents for information to use against us and this Iraq leak is more than four times as large. By disclosing such sensitive information, WikiLeaks continues to put at risk the lives of our troops, their coalition partners and those Iraqis and Afghans working with us.”

Read the full Pentagon response »

Would-Be Terrorist's Bully Pulpet

"Brace yourselves, because the war with Muslims has just begun," 31-year-old Faisal Shahzad told a federal judge. "Consider me the first droplet of the blood that will follow."

"We are only Muslims trying to defend our religion, people, homes and land, but if you call us terrorists, then we are proud terrorists and we will keep on terrorizing you until you leave our lands and people at peace."

U.S. District Judge Miriam Goldman Cedarbaum said,"You appear to be someone who was capable of education and I do hope you will spend some of the time in prison thinking carefully about whether the Quran wants you to kill lots of people."

Shahzad responded that the "Quran gives us the right to defend. And that's all I'm doing."

The judge cut him off at one point to ask if he had sworn allegiance to the U.S. when he became a citizen last year.

"I did swear, but I did not mean it," Shahzad said.

In his address to the court, he said Osama bin Laden "will be known as no less than Saladin of the 21st-century crusade" — a reference to the Muslim hero of the Crusades. He also said: "If I'm given 1,000 lives, I will sacrifice them all."

Shahzad smirked when the judge imposed the life sentence. Asked if he had any final words, he said, "I'm happy with the deal that God has given me."

Brace Yourself

In what is rumored to be "the biggest leak of military intelligence that has ever occurred," the whistleblower site WikiLeaks is preparing to reveal hundreds of thousands of documents pertaining to the Iraq War. Iain Overton, the editor of a journalism nonprofit in London, told Newsweek he's working with WikiLeaks and other media organizations to process, digest, and publish the information. Here's what's buzzing about the upcoming intelligence leak around the Web:

• This Will Be the Biggest Dump Ever, writes Kim Zetter at Wired: "Pfc. Bradley Manning, who has been charged with improperly downloading and leaking classified information, disclosed to a former hacker in May that he had given WikiLeaks a database covering 500,000 events in the Iraq War between 2004 and 2009. Manning said the database included reports, dates, and latitude and longitude of events, as well as casualty figures. A leak of this sort would vastly dwarf the cache of about 75,000 documents that WikiLeaks published in July from the Afghanistan War. That cache involved field reports from analysts who compiled information from informants and others on incidents and intelligence."

• This Will Probably Contain Info on Detainee Treatment, writes Mark Hosenball at Newsweek: "The Iraq material portrays U.S. forces being involved in a 'bloodbath,' but some of the most disturbing material relates to the abusive treatment of detainees, not by Americans but by Iraqi security forces."

• They'll Try to Prevent Casualties, writes Gautham Nagesh at The Hill: "Overton said his organization is taking seriously U.S. complaints that the Afghanistan leaks have put lives in jeopardy, which is why they are reviewing all reports first for sensitive information rather than posting the raw material. He said WikiLeaks's media partners have agreed to make financial contributions to WikiLeaks to 'help meet productions costs.'"

• A Number of Media Sources Will Get Exclusives, writes Tim Edwards at The First Post:

Iain Overton, editor of The Bureau of Investigative Journalism, which is working with WikiLeaks to identify specific stories among the documents, told Newsweek that each of the organisations involved this time will come up with its own angle on the material, because "everyone wants their exclusive". He adds that the tranche of documents will be around three times the size of the Afghanistan leak.

• Bringing in the MSM Is a Smart Strategy, writes Michael Collins at The Agonist: "It guarantees maximum publicity. It takes a great deal of heat of Wikileaks as the prime malefactor in the eyes of the national security state. It also impresses on the leaks the imprimatur of the mass media, lending it immediate gravitas."

Sources

• Releasing Iraq War Docs Gautham Nagesh, The Hill
• The Collaborators Mark Hosenball, Newsweek
• Massive Cache Kim Zetter, Wired
• The Leaks Tim Edwards, The Week
• http://www.theatlanticwire.com/opinions/view/opinion/The-Web-Braces-for-Biggest-Wikileaks-Dump-to-Date-4992/
  

Difference of Perspective

Cardinal rule broken, don't put the funny one first.

Venezuela More Deadly Than Iraq

Big story in the New York Times, wondering why Hugo Chavez's Venezuela ha a higher death count than Iraq...

Off the bat, it's a socialist regime - law and order is the last order of business.

Hugo's answer to the photos of death and funerals? No more photos of death and funerals. Seems like an easy sweep under the rug, doesn't it?

I think US'Mericans take their liberties for granted. Most US'Mericans can't even grab the concept of an overly oppressive government on one hand -- controlling media and nationalizing industries whenever they see fit, and ignoring their other governmental duties - such as defense and general security...

Hold on, the more I read this article -- it sounds an awful lot like the City of Chicago, doesn't it?

You know who else is from Chicago? Discuss.

Iraq War Capped

President Obama said today: "Major combat operations in Iraq have ended."

Mission Accomplished. Right?

But if you want to read what it actually means -I mean, if you actually read it, it means that 15,000 of the 65,000 troops there leave this month. The rest are there until the end of 2011.

Breaking Even

House Panel Rejects A Plan To Shift Detainees To Illinois (NY Times)

WASHINGTON — The House Armed Services Committee has dealt a blow to President Obama’s hopes to shutter the military prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, by unanimously approving legislation that would prohibit creating a detention center inside the United States.

The administration had asked Congress to approve about $350 million to buy and renovate a nearly empty prison in Thomson, Ill. The White House plan was to empty Guantánamo and transfer its detainees to Illinois — including 48 who would be held without trial as wartime prisoners. Read more

When Mr. Obama announced a year ago that that his first executive order was to close Guantanamo prison, I mentioned that I was very skeptical that such an order will be carried out. A year and a half later, with little fanfare, President Obama's fellow Democrats in Congress have killed this executive order.

But it doesn't matter since, due to a major court ruling -

Court Rules that No Habeas Rights For Prisoners In Afghanistan (LA TIMES)

Obama wins what Bush tried so hard to get... the right to hold suspects without judicial oversight at the Bagram air base.

The Obama administration has won the legal right to hold its terrorism suspects indefinitely and without oversight by judges — not at Guantanamo or in Illinois, mind you, but rather at the Bagram air base in Afghanistan.

In a 3-0 decision, the U.S. appeals court in Washington ruled for the administration Friday and said the Constitution and its right to habeas corpus does not extend to foreign prisoners held by the U.S. military in Afghanistan because it is a war zone. The judges dismissed claims from three prisoners who were taken to Bagram from Pakistan and Thailand and have been held for as long as seven years. Read more

Another milestone looming is the complete and total U.S. drawdown from Iraq is coming in August. Wonder if we'll hit that marker, or if they'll somehow find a reason to stick around?

Military Fills the Ranks

For the first time in more than 35 years, the U.S. military has met all of its annual recruiting goals, as hundreds of thousands of young people have enlisted despite the near-certainty that they will go to war.

The Pentagon, which made the announcement Tuesday, said the economic downturn and rising joblessness, as well as bonuses and other factors, had led more qualified youths to enlist.

The military has not seen such across-the-board successes since the all-volunteer force was established in 1973, after Congress ended the draft following the Vietnam War. In recent years, the military has often fallen short of some of its recruiting targets. The Army, in particular, has struggled to fill its ranks, admitting more high school dropouts, overweight youths and even felons.

BUT during the current budget year, which ended Sept. 30, recruiters met their targets in both numbers and quality for all components of active-duty and reserve forces.

"We delivered beyond anything the framers of the all-volunteer force would have anticipated," Bill Carr, deputy undersecretary of defense for military personnel policy, said at a Pentagon news conference. (MORE: Washington Post)

Now, here's a question... what will we do with all these good folks who are ready to serve?

No one had the heart to pull her away

If this doesn't make you tear up, you have no soul.

A family photo that shows a little girl beside her father and his fellow soldiers in uniform as they prepare to go to war has resonated well beyond the tight knit Bennethum clan.

Four-year-old Paige Bennethum really, really didn't want her daddy to go to Iraq.
So much so, that when Army Reservist Staff Sgt. Brett Bennethum lined up in formation at his deployment this July, she couldn't let go.

No one had the heart to pull her away.

The commanding officer allowed Paige to say goodbye as her dad prepared to ship off from Fort Dix.

Paige's mom Abby captured the moment with her camera and her aunt passed the image along to a Berks County, Pa. newspaper.

"I’ve had strangers looking me up online, sending me messages that they are touched by it ... offering a lot of support," Abby Bennethum told NBCPhiladelphia.

The picture took on a life of its own online this week. Abby says that suddenly, people were knocking on her door. "Literally overnight, there's all these people that just want to do anything they can," she says. Though she says her husband hasn't seen any stories about his family yet, he expects to.

For her part, Paige still remembers how she felt that day in July. Looking at the picture of herself – her dad now overseas – Paige remembers, "I didn't want to let go of him."

She calls the work he does transporting supplies across the Iraqi border, "just nice."

But that doesn't change her feelings.

"I just miss my dad right now," she says.

Sgt. Bennethum, 30, is expected home next July. Until then, Paige plans to help her mom take care of her little sister and a new baby that's on the way.

(thanks Vince Lattanzio for the source for this story - whom I completely cutn'pasted)

My Favorite Shrill Is Back!

My favorite shrill, anti-war poster, used napkin, Cindy Sheehan is back and trying to mess up President Barack Obama's vacation.

You all know that Sheehan was used to be the poster shrill by both the left and right, and she put up a tent near George Bush's ranch in Crawford, Texas.

On Thursday, she and a band of anti-war protesters turned up outside the media center used by journalists covering Obama's vacation on the well-heeled east coast resort island of Martha's Vineyard. Neat.

"The reason I am here is because ... even though the facade has changed in Washington DC, the policies are still the same," Sheehan told a handful of journalists, against a backdrop of her "Camp Casey" banner.

She told US peace activists to wake up and protest Obama's escalation of the war in Afghanistan, and complained that despite the president's anti-war stance, US troops remained in Iraq.

"We have to realize, it is not the president who is power, it is not the party that is in power it is the system that stays the same, no matter who is in charge."

"We are here to make the wars unpopular again," she said.

Wow. Looks like the left created a monster. They tossed her to the side after Obama won, but look at that, she's come back and is still on message.

Well, I'll at least admit that she's still holding to her convictions.
Which is more than I can say for any elected Democrat.

Obama's Nam?

Let me ask a simple question. If George Bush would have sent 25,000 additional troops to Afghanistan, what do you think the reaction would have been?

Then why is it when President Barack Obama announced his new strategy hasn't gotten a peep of a reaction? Obama's plan which has 'borrowed' to the point of plagiarism, Bush's successful "surge" strategy that quelled violence and tipped the balance in Iraq. Obama said the U.S. would send 21,000 troops, including 4,000 to help train the Afghan army and police.

Poor Afghanistan. It's been on the back burner for so long. Didn't we win that already?

Not so much, it seems.

Don't forget, Iraq was easier to report. A reporter could easily look out their window from their hotel rather than from the streets and 'ascertain' what the situation was. (link) Especially if they could spin it to make the Administration look bad.

Meanwhile, the Taliban - which has been operating in the sovereign nation of Pakistan continues to flex its muscles and spreading violence.

"Kabul is scarcely under siege, but it has turned from a city where [allied forces] and aid personnel could wander as tourists to one so filled with violence that the U.S. and foreign compounds have become the equivalent of a "Green Zone," according to a recent report from Anthony Cordesman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

So Obama has pledged to send hundreds of civilian officials to help improve public services and curb the country's reliance on opium production. Borrowing again from the Iraq playbook, the U.S. will try to peel away Taliban members who are committed to a paycheck, but not the cause.

Sure, Obama's surge isn't just guns - he's throwing some butter at them too. Just as important, the U.S. must set some clear benchmarks for progress, just as Bush did in Iraq. That means clear, measurable goals and regular public reports on progress. President Obama promises those benchmarks.

There will be 68,000 troops in theater by the end of the year— and there are some NATO forces there too - a force of about 32,000 non-American soldiers in Afghanistan.

When Obama attended a NATO summit he asked European nations for more help in Afghanistan. He got a finger back. Nearly all new NATO troops will be sent to provide security for Afghanistan's elections this summer and will not be permanently deployed.

Not to water down NATO's contributions—Britain, Canada and Australia, for instance—have fought hard and suffered significant casualties. But many other nations have set stifling limits on where and how their troops can be used, effectively removing them from fighting. Those troops, part of NATO's International Security Assistance Force, or ISAF, are so restricted that some American commanders sardonically suggest that those initials stand for "I Saw America Fight."

One senior European diplomat, speaking anonymously to the New York Times said, "No one will say this publicly, but the true fact is that we are all talking about our exit strategy from Afghanistan. We are getting out. It may take a couple of years, but we are all looking to get out." Hey, with Allies like that, who needs the Taliban?

But is Obama prepared to take the fight to Pakistan? There are eerie shades of Cambodia here. He should take heed. Can't win Afghanistan without taking out the Taliban hiding in Pakistan. But you can't just go in bombing Pakistan all willy-nilly. When he suggested it in the campaign, he damn near destabilized the entire government. Oh wait, he did destabilize the Pakistani government! And that thing was standing up as well as a game of JENGA in Michael J. Fox's house.

At least there's a strategy that doesn't say "EXIT" on it.
I hope the US and NATO has the will to see it through.

This isn't just America's war. It's civilization's war.

Blame For All the Blood Spilled in Iraq and Afghanistan

Al-Qaeda founder launches fierce attack on Osama bin Laden.

One of al-Qaeda's founding leaders, Dr Fadl, has begun an ideological revolt against Osama bin Laden, blaming him for "every drop" of blood spilt in Afghanistan and Iraq. (original)

By David Blair in Cairo 
Last Updated: 10:36PM GMT 20 Feb 2009

Sayyid Imam al-Sharif: The terrorist attacks on September 11 were both immoral and counterproductive, he writes

Sayyid Imam al-Sharif, AKA Dr Fadl, helped bin Laden create al-Qaeda and then led an Islamist insurgency in Egypt in the 1990s.

But in a book written from inside an Egyptian prison, he has launched a frontal attack on al-Qaeda's ideology and the personal failings of bin Laden and particularly his Egyptian deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri.

Twenty years ago, Dr Fadl became al-Qaeda's intellectual figurehead with a crucial book setting out the rationale for global jihad against the West.

Today, however, he believes the murder of innocent people is both contrary to Islam and a strategic error. "Every drop of blood that was shed or is being shed in Afghanistan and Iraq is the responsibility of bin Laden and Zawahiri and their followers," writes Dr Fadl.

The terrorist attacks on September 11 were both immoral and counterproductive, he writes. "Ramming America has become the shortest road to fame and leadership among the Arabs and Muslims. But what good is it if you destroy one of your enemy's buildings, and he destroys one of your countries? What good is it if you kill one of his people, and he kills a thousand of yours?" asks Dr Fadl. "That, in short, is my evaluation of 9/11."

He is equally unsparing about Muslims who move to the West and then take up terrorism. "If they gave you permission to enter their homes and live with them, and if they gave you security for yourself and your money, and if they gave you the opportunity to work or study, or they granted you political asylum," writes Dr Fadl, then it is "not honourable" to "betray them, through killing and destruction".

In particular, Dr Fadl focuses his attack on Zawahiri, a key figure in al-Qaeda's core leadership and a fellow Egyptian whom he has known for 40 years. Zawahiri is a "liar" who was paid by Sudan's intelligence service to organise terrorist attacks in Egypt in the 1990s, he writes.

I have often suggested that those in Al-Qaeda never picked up a history book, and have always underestimated the American ability to "over react" to foreign aggression, i.e. no one asked a Japanese person how that worked out for them. And even if you win or stalemate (Vietnam and North Korea) how well your country comes out of it. No, you're much better off letting the Americans blow you to hell, declare victory, and let the US rebuild your country for you. We love doing that. 

This story is interesting to me because, I had to read this story in an English newspaper, and two, ole' Doc Fadl has just echoed what I've said since Sept 11, 2001. Too bad it took him this long to figure it out. 

... and if you're worried he wrote this because he had an AK-47 trained at his gut, while it is possible, it's unlikely he would have typed 200 pages, and made it so personal.