COLLECTIVE MADNESS


“Soft despotism is a term coined by Alexis de Tocqueville describing the state into which a country overrun by "a network of small complicated rules" might degrade. Soft despotism is different from despotism (also called 'hard despotism') in the sense that it is not obvious to the people."

Wednesday, May 02, 2007

Finding our way out of Iraq will be a problem.

No safe way for U.S. to leave Iraq, experts warn

(CNN) -- Pulling U.S. forces from Iraq could trigger catastrophe, CNN analysts and other observers warn, affecting not just Iraq but its neighbors in the Middle East, with far-reaching global implications.

Sectarian violence could erupt on a scale never seen before in Iraq if coalition troops leave before Iraq's security forces are ready. Supporters of al Qaeda could develop an international hub of terror from which to threaten the West. And the likely civil war could draw countries like Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Iran into a broader conflict.

President Bush vetoed a war spending bill Tuesday precisely because the Democrat-led Congress required the first U.S. combat troops to be withdrawn by October 1 with a goal of a complete pullout six months later.

Bush said such a deadline would be irresponsible and both sides are now working on new proposals -- which may have no pullout dates.

A rapid withdrawal of all U.S. troops would hurt America's image and hand al Qaeda and other terror groups a propaganda victory that the United States is only a "paper tiger," CNN terrorism analyst Peter Bergen said. (Send us your reaction)

"It would also play into their strategy, which is to create a mini-state somewhere in the Middle East where they can reorganize along the lines of what they did in Afghanistan in the late '90s," Bergen told CNN.com.

It was in Afghanistan where Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda allied with the Taliban, and were allowed to run terror bases and plan the September 11, 2001 attacks against the United States.

Bergen says it is imperative that the United States not let that happen in Iraq.

"What we must prevent is central/western Iraq [from] becoming a Sunni militant state that threatens our interests directly as an international terror hub," he said.

Don Shepperd, a retired Air Force major-general and military analyst for CNN, agreed that Sunni Muslim fighters who support al Qaeda would seek an enclave inside a lawless Iraq likely riven along sectarian lines into Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish regions.

There would be "increasing attempts by terrorists to establish a training sanctuary in Iraq," Shepperd said.

That's one of the reasons why a fast withdrawal will not happen, whatever the politicians say, the analysts predict. (Watch why a radical Shiite cleric wants U.S. troops out )

"Everyone wants the troops home -- the Iraqis, the U.S., the world -- but no one wants a precipitous withdrawal that produces a civil war, a bloodbath, nor a wider war in an unstable Mideast," Shepperd said, adding that the image of the United States was important too.

"And we do not want a U.S that is perceived as having been badly defeated in the global war on terror or as an unreliable future ally or coalition partner."

Shepperd, a veteran fighter pilot of the Vietnam War, has served as a CNN analyst of the Iraq war since it began. Bergen was one of the first Western journalists to ever meet with bin Laden, and is considered a leading authority on al Qaeda.

Shepperd said Iraq's neighbors would be drawn into the all-out civil war likely if U.S. forces left too quickly. Iran could move in to further strengthen its influence in southern Iraq; Turkey likely would move against the Kurds in the north; and Saudi Arabia would be inclined to take action to protect Sunnis in western Iraq, he said.

The oil sector could also get hit hard, with Iran potentially mining the Persian Gulf and attempting to close the Straits of Hormuz, putting a stranglehold on oil flow, Shepperd says.

"Oil prices would skyrocket," he said -- perhaps soaring from current prices of about $60 a barrel to more than $100 a barrel, with consequent rises at the gas pump.

And that could bring further trouble, Shepperd added. "Saudi Arabia will not allow increasing Iranian dominance to endanger its regime and oil economy."

On top of that, Iran could speed up its nuclear ambitions, causing a "daunting and depressing scenario" of a nuclear arms race in the Middle East with Saudi Arabia, Syria, Egypt and Turkey trying to get a nuclear bomb, Shepperd says.

Observers such as Jon Alterman, director of the Middle East program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, say a wider Mideast conflict could be avoided.

But Alterman also fears that an Iraq left without U.S. support could turn into a center for international terrorism and a proxy battlefield for regional powers like Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia.

"All the surrounding countries would think their interests are much better maintained not by directly sending troops but by continuing to send money and weapons to the people fighting that war," he said.

"In my judgment, it would take decades for such an insurgency to quiet down."

There are 120,000 Iraq soldiers now classified as trained by the U.S. military in Iraq, along with 135,000 police force members. But the head of the Iraqi ground forces, Gen. Ali Ghiran-Majeed, recently told CNN that some of his soldiers don't even get paid, and that on any given day one quarter of the force is on vacation.

For U.S. troops on the ground, the idea of withdrawal is vexing.

"I think it would cause a huge vacuum that the enemies of Iraq -- enemies of the government -- would take advantage of," said U.S. Brig. Gen. Dana Pittard, the commander of the Iraq Assistance Group.

Staff Sgt. Matthew St. Pierre is one U.S. soldier who's come to the conclusion the United States cannot win the war, but he says he also fears the consequences of withdrawal.

"We are the buffer right now and when we pull out, the people who support us are going to feel the wrath, and the people who are against us ... they're going to ultimately win. And I think that's unfortunate," he said.

That is a prognosis that concerns many, though Shepperd sees a viable solution for Iraq, albeit one with a U.S. presence there for years to come.

"Done properly we should be in Iraq for years, not in a combat [role], but an embedded advisory role," he said.


55 comments:

  1. "... Staff Sgt. Matthew St. Pierre is one U.S. soldier who's come to the conclusion the United States cannot win the war, but he says he also fears the consequences of withdrawal.

    "We are the buffer right now and when we pull out, the people who support us are going to feel the wrath, and the people who are against us ... they're going to ultimately win. And I think that's unfortunate,"


    Only the kool-aid drinkers are hanging on faith in a military victory. From a Staff Sgt. to General P, the consensous is the same.
    We can't win, in Iraq, militarily.

    The politics of DC is beyond the current Administration's management capacity, let alone attempts to micro-manage the Iraqi Parliament and it's work output.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Who is on the dumb end of that stick.

    ReplyDelete
  3. ERBIL, Iraq: Kurdish and Sunni Arab officials raised major concerns on Wednesday over issues related to a national draft oil law, throwing the future of the law into question at a time when the Bush administration is pressing the Iraqi government to push through the legislation as soon as possible.

    The concerns could stall passage of the oil law even before the law has been sent to Parliament for debate. President George W. Bush is prodding the Iraqi government to enact the law in hopes that its principle of fair revenue distribution will help lay the groundwork for a real power-sharing agreement between the country's feuding ethnic and sectarian factions. Passage of the law is also critical to encouraging foreign investment in Iraq's struggling oil industry.

    The draft law was approved by the cabinet in late February after months of negotiations among the main Shiite Arab, Sunni Arab and Kurdish political blocs. At the time, the White House praised the endorsement as a major indication that the country's rival political factions can reach agreement on crucial issues. Three legislators said Wednesday that Parliament had yet to receive the law for discussion.

    In Erbil, the capital of Iraqi Kurdistan, a spokesman for the regional government said in an interview that a provision that the Shiite-led Oil Ministry quietly bundled with the draft law in late April had caused intense concern among the Kurds.

    The provision, introduced by the Iraqi oil minister, Hussein al-Shahristani, at an industry conference in Dubai last month, essentially gives vast control of management of discovered oil fields and related contracts to a central state-run oil company to be founded after passage of the law.

    ReplyDelete
  4. "We are worried about these ideas put into the annexes," Salih said. "It worries us a lot."

    Salih said no Kurdish representatives were present in Dubai when Shahristani, a conservative Shiite, introduced the provision.

    The provision is part of four so-called annexes that are to be debated with the draft oil law in Parliament. The annexes concern technical matters and must be approved by Parliament with the draft law in order for the law to be passed. Any objection to one or more of the annexes stalls passage of the law.

    If the law and the annexes go to a vote before the Parliament, a rejection by the Kurdish bloc alone, which holds 58 of 275 seats, would not doom the law. But the Parliament operates by consensus, and it is almost certain that no law regarding oil would be passed without the approval of the Kurds, who have been intensely engaged in tough negotiations over the draft oil law and over measures related to oil in the Constitution.

    The new concerns raised by the Kurds means more rounds of talks will have to take place before the law is even close to being endorsed by Parliament.

    ReplyDelete
  5. The Mortal Wound has been delivered:
    "j willie said...
    I witnessed the EB Haditha conversation. My take was, is and will remain exactly the same as Allen has described above. It's not the exact words that matter, its the tone and attitude, the character, that underly them. Doug, I don't know you, but I can say that your character as expressed in words strikes me as seriously deficient in honor.

    Your attempts to recast that conversation here only add to that impression.

    That Haditha conversation, along with the grating sound of that mockingbird that so relishes its own always unoriginal squawk, brought my days at the EB to an end.
    "

    ReplyDelete
  6. j willie said...
    What a pathetic, anti-American thread. There is only one pov tolerated by the EB - GWB stinks and America sucks. I now check in here about twice a week and don't post because other viewpoints than DR's are not welcome. DR, the verbal bully, fully supported by Doug and 2164. What a shitty blog this has become

    ReplyDelete
  7. I say if it's been good enough for us to be in Germany since the Visigoths, and in Korean since before kimchee then it's good enough for us to stay in Iraq.

    I mean we got troops deployed all over the globe, why not Iraq.

    And the real nagging question isn't Iraq it's the (bow our heads, speak in repectful tones)

    ISLAM,THE RELIGION OF PEACE and how it just keeps on keep'in on against all other religions. They ain't gonna leave us alone, I think many of us could agree on that.
    And given that one of the cardinal rules of combat is to fight on the ground of your choosing, I choose Iraq, not DC,LA, or Orange Park , Florida.
    Only the dead have seen the end of this war..they love death, we love life ....hard to reconcile those two.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I like your idea of giving them what they want.
    Get Possumtater on that,
    would ya?

    ReplyDelete
  9. If we were going to fight a war, habu, iraq would be a better locale than most. But to begin being policemen, before the war is over, is and was a deadly error.

    It would / will require a new mindset to be introduced into the military. It has become a top heavy bevy of bureaucrats.

    The next series of battles will not be set piece affairs. Just more Somalias and worse, Warizistans. We're not ready.

    ReplyDelete
  10. DR,

    You are on the dumb end of the stick. Like Sgt St. Pierre, you survey the landscape, quit and pronounce the results as "unfortunate".

    Well, bucko...that "unfortunate" result is gonna come out of that desert, come here and shut down your God-damned blog. So chew on that.

    Apparently you think America is omnipotent and our enemies get no vote. Or our enemies are idiots. Neither is true.

    We can disengage but our enemies will never stop. Fight and die there or fight and die here. Either way, we fight and die. That is our past and our future.

    Blame won't save you or your heirs.

    ReplyDelete
  11. While the US has not had this terrible a day, as did the Brits ...
    Upon discovery, the disciplined Zulu army immediately launched the assault in their "Horns and Chest of the Buffalo" formation, which used flank attacks (the 'horns') to spread the enemy's defences before crushing their centre in a frontal assault from the 'chest'.

    The British responded with a long line of guns outside their camp, meeting the charging army head-on. Their shooting inflicted heavy casualties on the central Zulu column, pinning them down and keeping British morale high. But British commanders were unaware of the outflanking Horns of the impi, which had already encircled the defenders, dooming them.

    The British were forced to retreat back to the camp, but they were outnumbered and outmanoeuvred, and began to run out of ammunition. The slaughter was massive, and the frenzied Zulu attack overwhelmed the nonetheless ardent defenders, who fought with bayonets and whatever weapons they could lay hands upon.

    Slaughter
    The British force was slaughtered nearly to a man. Of nearly 1400 British soldiers, only 55 survived -


    While a terrible day, the US has done as poorly, for a longer period of time. The Brits, at least, learned the lesson, by have the slaughter happen all at once. A bitter defeat in the field.

    The US in Iraq, hangs on without a single combat defeat, not many signifigant victories, either.

    Baghdad, still not secure, even though Major Combat Operations were declared over, Mission Accomplished, just four years ago.

    ReplyDelete
  12. A US commission on Wednesday recommended that Pakistan be kept on a list of countries violating religious freedoms.

    The US Commission on International Religious Freedom wrote in its annual report that nine other countries also be kept on the list: China, Eritrea, Iran, North Korea, Myanmar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan.

    The commission called for Vietnam to be reinstated on Washington’s blacklist of countries violating religious freedoms, as other Asian countries including China and Indonesia also were sharply criticised for serious abuses.


    Religious Freedoms

    ReplyDelete
  13. No, I do not think the US omni potent. That being a conclusion unsupported by fact.

    In fact that the US is not omnipotent, while it's troops are in the field. Only when they are not.

    No policeman is omnipotent.
    Some Warriers have been, historicly.

    ReplyDelete
  14. It's easy, doug, stand to what you believe.

    Stand with the E3s or the O7s.
    I be with the EMs.

    Trying to get the Sunni of Iraq to accept a Shia Federal Bovernment, is lunacy. To think that the Kurds will allow an oil law to move forward, juvenille.

    The two month vacation has been on the books for a year, now the US takes notice. Without a/c, Bagdad is a hell hole, without electric there is no a/c. The Iraqi leave for the summer, go to Jordon, to the mountains, to electricity.

    ReplyDelete
  15. No cold Beer?
    Crap, I'd leave too!
    ---
    Here's another one of me defending the Marines.
    Allen proceeds in a later thread to lump Hugh Hewitt in with Me and Murtha.
    neat guy, that Allen.

    ReplyDelete
  16. That there link is the "Last of the Injuns Thread"
    ---
    Teresita said...
    The chick flick version would be "Lust of the Mohicans".

    ReplyDelete
  17. allen defends the Institution, right or wrong.
    Especially if it's Federal.

    All failure is misreported.
    The folks involved are "doing their best".

    Imagine twenty years of military life. The instituionalization that must occur. Especially in mid-range officers.
    Everyone needs to wait in line.

    Let's remember just who briefed Mr Murtha, Warner and that other Republican ex Marine Col., they all three pronounced the Haditha Marines "Guilty", after the briefing.
    That was Marines doin' the talkin', or Navy.
    Sure enough.

    At least the Brits equip their squadies with the apropriate police weaponry, flash bangs, as per Mr Yon's last offering, from Basra. That Iraqi success story.

    ReplyDelete
  18. :... when he revealed the existence of exculpatory evidence that appears to have been obtained by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) and withheld from the prosecutors.

    This officer, described by senior Marine Corps superiors as one of the best and most dedicated intelligence officers in the entire Marine Corps, was in possession of evidence which provided a minute-by-minute narrative of the entire day's action — material which he had amassed while monitoring the day's action in his capacity as the battalion's intelligence officer. That material, he says, was also in the hands of the NCIS.


    Who has an Agenda?

    What did "Time" magazine do, that the NCIS did not compound and amplify?

    Shot US in the foot, just as they are doing to those Marines in Afhanistan.

    It's shamefully PC

    ReplyDelete
  19. Geez, I FORGOT about the Afghan Marines, are they ever reported on?
    ---
    I always got the impression both in the Army and since that Ltc's were often the best, and usually smartest.

    Specially guys like Kurilla and Chesani that have been there a lot.

    ReplyDelete
  20. One of my links says they think Murtha got it from the top, Commandant Hagee.

    ReplyDelete
  21. There's a troubling and puzzling post by a Marine who was there at Simons.
    I'm not getting it.

    ReplyDelete
  22. DR,
    In some respects we have seen the Sunni/Shia blood feud a bit tampted down. Blood feuds in that part of the world, particularly between two ideological/religious factions is never gonna get fully resolved though. So forget "winning" even applying to that.
    But what we have seen as of late is more of an outside force from AQ via Iran keeping the car bombs going off. I don't think we can stop that either until we develop some new technology.
    But what we can do and must do is take Iran out of play. The cascade of ME countries that will demand nuclear weapons will escalate in the one region of the world where pulling the trigger is the first instinct.
    If we can show enough resolve to work on the redoubts plan, remove Iran from the equation, and become avuncular to the Iraqi's (albeit way away from the cities but still in country) I think there's a chance they will continue to have an elected government...
    but if they go on a two or three month vacation like they're discussing now I do not think anyone in this country will do anymore for then...not a thing.

    I think Israel and the US will take out Iran and possibly the US taking over the Iraqi oilfields. It's hard ball time all over again for another reason....Putin.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Tactically, most of the aQ stuff still moves through Syria, they report.
    Strategicly, you're on target.

    If Mr Bush does not firm up the committment, especially to Iraq and the region in general.

    It is not the size of the committment, really. It is how they are tasked. Fewer could do different things, than more.

    Otherwise, the Dems win in '08, that will usher in a fallback, for US.

    The GOP will fracture, Mr Thompson and Rudy, down to the wire. But the grassroots, Mr Yhompson can't win in NJ, nor PA.
    Rudy stands a chance, there.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Rudy may be our only chance.
    Lots of Pubs trash him for choice, though.
    Wish he would stress that he and his views won't have anything to do with it, being POTUS/CIC.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Habu,
    Maybe a public service campaign to get the word out that we can't really expect folk to stay in Friggin non-Frigid IRAQ when there's
    NO COLD BEER.

    Americans still have compassion, don't they?

    ReplyDelete
  26. Where the Nazi "Big Lie" Endures
    By Daniel Pipes
    FrontPageMagazine.com | May 2, 2007

    "If today's Arab anti-Israeli and anti-Jewish propaganda strongly resembles that of the Third Reich, there is a good reason." So writes Joel Fishman of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs in "The Big Lie and the Media War against Israel," an insightful piece of historical research.

    Fishman begins by noting the topsy-turvy situation whereby Israel is perceived as a dangerous predator as it defends its citizens against terrorism, conventional warfare, and weapons of mass destruction. A 2003 survey, for instance, found Europeans seeing Israel as "the greatest threat" to world peace. How did this insane inversion of reality – the Middle East's only fully free and democratic country seen as the leading global menace – come to be?

    continued....

    BIG LIE

    ReplyDelete
  27. It'll kill the GOP, Mr Thompson shows well, seems a reasonable man.

    Another man from TN, though I think he'd carry the state.

    The actor resume won't help, though the skills do. He can certainly deliver a line.

    Rudy, though, has a broader range of executive leadership. More importantly, he can refocus the US on the War.
    No one else will be able or want to. Rudy could fall short, but stands a chance. He knows who the "bad giys" are. The DC establishment will go for Mr Thompson, knowing Rudy has already dealt with a Saud Prince and blood money.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Rudy is the ONLY person that still has energy when addressing the WOT.

    I was shocked listening to him, realizing that all this complaining about defeatism ignores how
    defeatist
    GWB feels, and sounds, and IS, given that he is still selling the ROP, and sold his Stetson long ago.

    ReplyDelete
  29. And those damned ROE's Lawyers, and enemy Sanctuaries!

    ReplyDelete
  30. Simply sad people refuse to see the risks we're running up, there, and here on the border.
    See no evil.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Mr Bush selfportrayed as the "War President" and then the War goes poorly.

    The commanding General saying the US cannot win militarily, meaning that we have to manipulate the Iraqi politics?
    When we will not train Iraqi to mop a floor?
    Fix a generator?

    There is a grand disconnect, 'tween reality and hope.

    ReplyDelete
  32. We CAN'T train them to mop the floors:
    PC Code Violation.

    ReplyDelete
  33. csmonitor.com - The Christian Science Monitor Online
    from the May 03, 2007 edition - http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0503/p01s04-wome.html
    Sunni Muslim sheikhs join US in fighting Al Qaeda
    Iraqi tribal support is linked to drop in violence in Anbar Province.
    By Sam Dagher | Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor

    Ramadi, Iraq

    Amid fields of wheat and barley, dozens of armed men emerged along a dirt road leading to the fiefdom of the Bu-Fahed tribe in Hamdhiyah, an idyllic corner of restive Anbar Province, just north of Ramadi. "Welcome to our proud sheikhs. Down with terror," read banners on the road.

    Dozens of sheikhs and tribal elders in flowing gold-trimmed camel-hair cloaks, many clutching colorful worry beads, streamed into a conference hall. Each was frisked by tribesmen to guard against suicide bombs.

    The meeting looked to be a typical gathering, but its true purpose was for top sheikhs to issue an ultimatum: quit supporting Al Qaeda and turn in relatives belonging to the group.

    Like dominoes, tribes reeling from a campaign of killing and intimidation by Al Qaeda have been joining, one by one, the US-led fight against Al Qaeda in Iraq in this Sunni Arab province. Last month, US Gen. David Petraeus told Congress that violence was down significantly here and that the tribes were key to the transformation.

    On Tuesday, the tribes claimed a major victory: the death of Abu Ayub al-Masri, also known as Abu Hamza al-Muhajer, the leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq. While many are skeptical about the claim, the episode underscores the Iraqi government's eagerness to bank on the success of turning tribes away from Al Qaeda and the Sunni insurgency. But whether these new allegiances from tribes that once backed Al Qaeda will stick remains to be seen, say analysts.

    "I do not think it [the council of tribes against Al Qaeda] goes far enough to weaken other elements of the insurgency," says Zaki Chehab, political editor at the London-based Al Hayat newspaper. "There is also no clear commitment yet from influential tribes on how to deal with the Americans."

    But winning over the Bu-Fahed tribe was a coup. It had been one of Al Qaeda's staunchest supporters, and traces its lineage to the birthplace of the puritan form of Sunni Islam known as Wahhabism in the Saudi Arabian province of Najd. It formally threw its lot behind Sheikh Abdel-Sattar Abu Risha.

    Sheikh Abu Risha

    Sheikh Abu Risha is the force behind the so-called Al Anbar Salvation Council of tribes against Al Qaeda, which is now strongly backed by both the US military and Iraqi government, and it includes 17 tribes.

    It was Abu Risha who boasted on state TV Tuesday that his kinsmen killed the Al Qaeda in Iraq commander and seven of his cohorts – two Saudis and five Iraqis.

    "Our kinsmen in Taji clashed with Abu Hamza, and he has been killed.... There are witnesses, he has been killed," he said, referring to a town northwest of Baghdad. His announcement was then followed by songs praising the "glories of Anbar's tribes."

    The US military and the Iraqi government were unable to confirm Mr. Masri's death with the Interior Ministry, which said that it was working on retrieving Masri's body from the Taji tribes. A posting on a fundamentalist website denied it..

    Abu Risha's movement emerged last fall in what one sheikh described as the "Anbar Intifada," a reference to the Palestinian uprising against Israeli forces. In posters prepared by the US military in Ramadi, Abu Risha is shown with his rifle slung on his shoulder and looming large over small masked men (meant to represent Al Qaeda) fleeing in fear.

    Anbar's provincial seat, Ramadi, which Al Qaeda declared in October to be the capital of its so-called Islamic state in Iraq, is now firmly in the grips of US and Iraqi forces.

    US Capt. Jay McGee, intelligence officer with the 3rd Battalion, 69th Armor Regiment from Fort Worth, Texas, says that the motivation for the tribes to join the council is largely self-serving.

    "Everyone is convinced Coalition forces are going to leave and they are saying, 'We do not want Al Qaeda to take control of the area when that happens.' For them, Al Qaeda is a greater threat long term."

    Captain McGee's battalion is in charge of the area where the Bu-Fahed is located, and says that many of the tribesmen now joining Iraqi government security forces once fought with insurgent groups like the 1920 Revolution Brigades, Islamic Army, Mohammad's Army, and the Fatiheen Army.

    New fight for Bu-Faheds

    At the gathering in Hamdhiyah last week, tribal leaders took their place in rows of white plastic chairs in the presence of a handful US military officers.

    "The tribe has gone through its most difficult period. We have lost many dear sons. What complicates matters is that some of our same sons have embraced terrorists and carried out their orders," Sheikh Haqi Ismail al-Fahdawi told his fellow tribesmen.

    He told them that they must now encourage young men to join the Army and police and write to sheikhs from other tribes in Anbar to pressure them to hand over fugitives from the Bu-Fahed who were Al-Qaeda members and also use their families who remained behind as leverage.

    "The days of writs of forgiveness are over," he said.

    Another tribal notable, Hussein Zbeir, grabbed the microphone from Sheikh Haqi and spoke more bluntly about Al Qaeda's role: "If it was not for the coyotes among us, no one would have been killed, kidnapped, or bombed. You know who among you brought the Yemeni with the suicide vest."

    Sheikh Jabbar al-Fahdawi, a 30-something civil engineer, who is being groomed to assume the tribe's leadership, said in an interview that his brother and hundreds of his kinsmen were killed by Al Qaeda. He said 20 percent of his tribe had, over the years, been recruited by Al Qaeda, while an equal amount joined insurgent groups.

    "We have frozen the true resistance, and I told my followers to stop attacking the Americans. We consider the Americans to be our friends at the moment so that we can get rid of the extremists," he said adding that tribe fugitives guilty of killing must be tracked down and executed and their families banished from the tribe.

    He rolls up his sleeves to show deep scars from gunshot wounds he sustained in recent battles against Al Qaeda. "I left my work in Baghdad to come and free my tribe," he said.

    Soon thereafter, Abu Risha appears. He arrives in a motorcade of SUVs and police pick-up trucks bristling with machine guns.

    The door of one of the vehicles is flung open. Abu Risha emerges wearing dark wrap-around sunglasses and dressed in the finest tribal attire.

    He hugs Sheikh Jabbar who leads him by hand into the meeting. "Anbar is one tribe and our awakening will sweep through all of Iraq, God willing," he tells the Bu-Faheds.

    In an interview later, he proudly pulls out a pistol from a holster tied around his waist. He says it was given to him by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. His father and four of his brothers, he says, were killed by Al-Qaeda.

    Al Qaeda ties linger

    But throughout Anbar, the ties are still strong to Al Qaeda. Sheikh Hareth al-Dhari, who hails from one of Anbar's most prestigious tribes and heads the antigovernment Association of Muslim Scholars of Iraq, called on Osama bin Laden to intervene to stop the rift between Al Qaeda in Iraq and the local insurgency.

    He described men like Abu Risha as "agents and conduits of the [US] occupation."

    "I call on Sheikh Osama bin Laden in the name of the Islam for which he fights to intervene and to instruct Al Qaeda to adhere to the rules of proper jihad and to respect the people who had previously opened their arms to Al Qaeda," Mr. Dhari said in an interview Sunday with Bahrain's Akhbar al-Khaleej newspaper. Dhari's remarks indicated that the US and Iraqis still have much work ahead to fully dislodge Al Qaeda from all the Anbar tribes.

    "If he [bin Laden] has no influence over Al Qaeda in Iraq, then he must say it so that we can decide how to deal with those who have hurt our main cause, which is liberating Iraq," he said

    • Tomorrow: Can the US preserve success in Ramadi? Doing so means getting more tribes on board and spreading the formula to other parts of Anbar Province.

    ReplyDelete
  34. "If today's Arab anti-Israeli and anti-Jewish propaganda strongly resembles that of the Third Reich, there is a good reason."

    Vain hopes delude the senseless,and dreams give wings to a fool’s fancy

    ReplyDelete
  35. Time for a Global Warming Update
    --
    It's a religion!
    Just talk to the libs over at The Nation magazine.

    Be sure to get this one soon, it won't be available for free in a couple of days.
    New York Times,
    April 29th:

    "Carbon Neutral is Hip, but is it Green?"
    The New York Times wrote a piece exposing the fraud of this whole carbon offset program.

    The Financial Times was first to do this. I thought it would never hit the Drive-By Media, but it has. The article is devastating to the whole thing.

    ReplyDelete
  36. "Rudy, though, has a broader range of executive leadership. More importantly, he can refocus the US on the War.
    No one else will be able or want to. Rudy could fall short, but stands a chance. He knows who the "bad giys" are. The DC establishment will go for Mr Thompson, knowing Rudy has already dealt with a Saud Prince and blood money."


    I haven't seen anything to suggest that Guiliani would run the war any differently from the Bush Administration.

    He was the Mayor of New York during the attack - big deal. The entire city of New York was there and I doubt that their views are all that hawkish now that it's Bush's war, rather than America's.

    Anyone who saw it happen on T.V. has just about as much perspective to judge.

    At least with Thompson the Republicans would actually remain Republicans. Goldwater lost, but he at least gave the party a soul besides raw winning elections by going with the flow, regardless of where it takes us. The Rockefellers might have won, but then today we might be Canada.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Of course, when it came down to it, I'll probably vote for whoever the Republicans put up. We've got one shitty party and one shittier party. I'd rather pick 100 random voters out of the phone book, as the aforementioned WFB stated.

    Non-New York phone book, that is.

    ReplyDelete
  38. He did damn near get buried, and he watched his command center fall, and he knew a bunch of the victims.
    (unknown to Rosie, it was the Diesel Tank for his command center that brought WTC 7 down)

    Hard to imagine he wouldn't stumble on a better way than W, in light of what he did for Crime.
    Everyone considered that impossible, and many cities have yet to come close.

    ...and Bush Condi are COMPLETELY impotent, when not running us further into the ground.

    ReplyDelete
  39. "He did damn near get buried, and he watched his command center fall, and he knew a bunch of the victims."

    I don't know about the Command Center, but I do know that Guiliani got to the towers when it was already pretty much over. I know because my father, covered in ash (lower-case), watched his motorcade go through.

    He became a hero, because America wanted a hero. He did know a bunch of the victims, but so did a good number of New Yorkers. Politics is politics.

    I do like the fact he deal with the idiots before, as well as the smear machine when he was trying to enforce the law in New York. Already been called a fascist, so isn't going to crawl up into a ball.

    Frankly, I am not as sore at Bush as most people on this blog is, considering the circumstances. But given the local politics, you expect Guiliani to declare Islam a religion of war and start bombing Syria?

    ReplyDelete
  40. "Frankly, I am not as sore at Bush as most people on this blog is, considering the circumstances."
    ---
    Maybe because you share his language disability?
    ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  41. CNN.com - Collapsed Trade Center towers still dangerous ...

    New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani was in a building near the World Trade Center after the first tower's collapse. "We were trapped in the building for about 20 minutes because of the smoke and debris," Giuliani said.

    ReplyDelete
  42. "Maybe because you share his language disability?
    ;-)"


    As publik skool educated, at 2 AM in the morning, perhaps.

    So many compound clauses, it may just be, that I am turning into Desert Rat, I fear.

    As for the first building collapsing near him, I suppose I'd have to ask my father about it again. Hard to miss and confuse a motorcade, however.

    ReplyDelete
  43. On the other hand, looking a timeline there was a bigger gap than I remembered between the evacuations of the towers and their subsequent collapse.

    Still, I personally care more that Guiliani governed effectively in such a hostile circle as New York than his performance on 9-11. I also remember, I think, that his record was a bit more lukewarm on other issues than it was on crime.

    ReplyDelete
  44. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  45. HereI had plenty to say about LBJ, Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton.
    I disagreed with their policies.

    I thought JFK was reckless. I thought Carter a naive fool and Johnson dishonest.

    I thought Bill Clinton was smart enough but disagreed with his foreign policy.

    Why does George Bush deserve a pass? Does he strike one as a wise man? Is he contemplative? Does he listen to those who may know more than him?
    Do his peers throughout the world seek his learned counsel?

    Has he strengthened his political craftsmanship where his enemies fear and respect him?

    Have the diplomatic works and alliances of his predecessors been strengthened by him?

    Has he been a good steward of the military that was reconstructed over a generation?

    Has he strengthened the political party that trusted and selected him to represent them and their core values?

    Does he respect the immigration laws of the country he is sworn to protect?

    Sun-Tzu’s principles concerning negotiation and diplomacy state that political initiatives and agreements may be useful, but purposeful military preparations should never be neglected. The primary objective of every state should be to weaken enemies without actually engaging in armed combat.

    Does GWB measure up there?

    Personally I subscribe to the sentiments here:

    "In every country where man is free to think and to speak, differences of opinion will arise from difference of perception, and the imperfection of reason; but these differences when permitted, as in this happy country, to purify themselves by free discussion, are but as passing clouds overspreading our land transiently and leaving our horizon more bright and serene." --Thomas Jefferson to Benjamin Waring, 1801.

    I don't do:

    Jawohl, mein Führer!

    If that trouble you, any of you, I don't care.

    ReplyDelete
  46. I've been thinking about this one more and more:
    "Has he been a good steward of the military that was reconstructed over a generation?"

    That sucker's gonna be like the Ruskies 5 years ago, or us before WWII or worse, by the time they use it all up and spit it out, paying not one dime to build and maintain.
    More Immoral Behavior by Bush and Co.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Typically the "give me liberty or give me death speeches" have more luster when there's an actual gun pointed at your head.

    ReplyDelete