This is what happens

When weak, gutless pathetic presidents are allowed to screw things up.  Or in other words, every time America has allowed a Democrat to infest the Oval Office.  Johnson screwed us into Viet Nam, and then did everything he could do to get us to lose.  Carter twiddled his thumbs as the Middle East fell apart.  Clinton screwed up Somalia, and allowed thousands to be slaughtered in Rwanda.  And Obama has probably done more to make things worse in the Middle East than Carter could even dream of.  He pissed away his chance to support the Iranian people in 2009.  He pushed out Hosni Mubarak in Egypt, and then supported the jihadi Muslim Brotherhood.  He drew his red line in the sand of Syria, then erased it, then drew it again, then erased it again, and finally begged Vladimir Putin to take over.

He pulled us out of Iraq without any concept of the consequences of his actions.  Like, say, 1,500 innocent people being slaughtered by ISIS.

Hell yes I'm laying this at his feet.  Obama ignored his military commanders.  Obama ignored al-Maliki, back when Maliki wanted the US to keep a force there.  Obama ignored the Iraqi parliament, who didn't want the USA to leave.

The decision to completely pull out and abandon Iraq is, was, and always will be entirely Obama's decision.  Therefore, the reactions to his decision will always be Obama's as well.  And as Iraq descends into chaos, and civilians get slaughtered by terrorists, we need to remember that this could have been prevented, but Obama allowed it to happen.

It's always worse

Every time you learn more about how badly Obama has fucked things up, it always gets worse.

While the policy process in Washington was frozen, U.S. intelligence analysts still filed their warnings about major weaknesses in Iraq’s military. Both the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency have issued reported analysis for nearly a year warning that Iraq’s military would not be able to stand up against a sustained campaign from ISIS.

So this weak, gutless, pathetic piece of shit in the Oval Office has been warned over and over for years about ISIS, and did nothing.  NOTHING!

Obama has thrown away every sacrifice made in Iraq.  And he did it because he's too pathetic to do anything else.

Aaaaaand, here we go

Every Caliphate needs it's leadership. and every leadership needs a communications network.  So we listen in on what they're saying, where they're going, and instead of sending a couple of divisions over, we just send bombers.  High altitude bombers, with GPS-guided JDAMS.

Boom.  The more leaders they move up, the more JDAMS we drop.  Don't just level the house.  Don't send in snipers.  Level the entire friggin' village.

I'm done being nice.  And we all know that Obama the petulant bitch doesn't have what it takes to win a war in Iraq.  Hell, he was handed a safe, stable country and fucked that up.  He certainly wouldn't be able to fix the mess he created now.  So I don't want to see any more US lives lost in Iraq until we have leadership that actually A) wants America to win as Obama doesn't and B) has the guts it takes to make the proper decisions, as Obama doesn't.

The Predictable Result of Running Away

al-Qaeda takes Mosul.

Which means that al-Qaeda is now in control of a sizable chunk of Iraq.

Obama the gutless dipshit has thrown away every single life that was lost in Iraq.  Thrown it away for political purposes, just like he threw away the lives in Benghazi for political purposes.  Imagine if Roosevelt had run away from Germany while the Nazis were still around, and then the Nazi army had retaken Munich, or Leipzig.  If Obama had actually SPOKEN TO THE IRAQI GOVERNMENT before he pulled out every last US troop, or make arrangements to keep a small force there as backup, I'm willing to bet that al-Qaeda would have been stepped on like a bug when it started popping it's head back up.

We had already proven that the Iraqi forces could beat the terrorists when they had the US standing behind them.  By the time we left, we weren't even going out on many missions; we provided support for the Iraqi troops who did so.  And al-Qaeda was on the run.

This is just another example of how badly Obama has screwed things up.  He's the anti-Midas.  Everything he touches turns to shit.  He's an incompetent, weak, gutless, narcissistic, egomaniacal, pathetic buffoon.  And we have even more of him to look forward to in the future.  We haven't hit bottom yet.  That stuttering clusterfuck of a miserable failure is still in office; we have a long ways down to go.

What the fuck did they think would happen?

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

How to win a war

Well, you start like this:

I respect the chain of command. I know that the Joint Chiefs and the Pentagon have some concerns. One is about the Army and Marine Corps and the impact of the war on them. And the second is about other contingencies and the lack of strategic response to those contingencies.

I want Dave to know that I want him to win. That’s the mission. He will have as much force as he needs for as long as he needs it.

When he feels he wants to make further reductions, he should only make those reductions based on the conditions in Iraq that he believes justify those reductions. These two concerns that we are discussing back here in Washington — about contingency operations and the needs of the Army and the Marine Corps — they are not your concerns. They are my concerns.

I do not want to change the strategy until the strategy has succeeded. I waited over three years for a successful strategy. And I’m not giving up on it prematurely. I am not reducing further unless you are convinced that we should reduce further.

I honestly believe that President Bush was saddled with political flunkies instead of Military Generals when we took office. The Clinton administration favored ass-kissers and paper-pushers over actual military thinking, and thus the people who were promoted to the higher positions were those that could kiss ass and push paper around instead of plan for wars. THAT is why we were losing in Iraq.

But a good CinC realizes when things are working, and looks to fix them. For all of President Bush's faults, he wanted to win. No withdraw, not set an "end date", he wanted to WIN this war. And so he took the steps he needed to take.

Fault him on his domestic policies, but don't fault him for his leadership of the military.

Found via RNS.

More good news from Iraq

That the hyper-partisan, biased, worthless MSM in this country doesn't feel the need to report.

Two years ago, Anbar Province was the most lethal place for American forces in Iraq. A U.S. marine or soldier died in the province nearly every day, and the provincial capital, Ramadi, was a moonscape of rubble and ruins. Islamic extremists controlled large pieces of territory, with some so ferocious in their views that they did not even allow the baking of bread.

On Monday, U.S. commanders formally returned responsibility for keeping order in Anbar Province, once the heartland of the Sunni insurgency, to the Iraqi Army and police. The ceremony, including a parade on a freshly paved street, capped one of the most significant turnabouts in the country since the war began five and a half years ago.

Just think - if Obama had his way, Anbar Province would still be a violent hellhole, and Iraq would be worse off than they ever were under Saddam.

I'd love to say....

That American Special Ops were making headlines in Iraq. I really would. I'm proud of the US Army, and I brag on 'em as much as possible.

But this is even better:

Iraqi Special Operations Forces captured a senior Mahdi Army commander with "close ties" to Muqtada al Sadr's office in Najaf on June 19. Two other senior Mahdi Army commanders in Baghdad and Hillah were captured on June 20 and 21.

The people that the Democrat American Communist Party wanted to abandon from the moment we set foot in Iraq are now conducting Special Ops missions, and kicking ass.

The three arrests come as the Iraqi military is pressing its operation in the Mahdi Army stronghold in the southern province of Maysan. The Mahdi Army has surrendered the provincial capital of Amarah without firing a shot, and six senior Sadrists, including the mayor of Amarah, have been detained. Security has also tightened in the neighboring provinces of Wasit, Dhi Qhar, and Basrah.

This day would have never come if we had listened to the shrieking idiots of the Left. The Iraqi Military is proving it's worth in mission after mission. It hasn't been a perfect road to this point, sure. There've been some bumps along the way. But dammit, it's worth it. And it's damn near the only way to bring some stability to an area of the planet that has seen damn little stability in it's recent history. And to the defeatists, the nay-sayers, the people who wanted us to fail, who wanted us to pack up and go home, let me quote the good President Roosevelt to you:

It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again, because there is no effort without error or shortcoming, but who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, who spends himself for a worthy cause; who, at the best, knows, in the end, the triumph of high achievement and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat.—Theodore Roosevelt, Speech at the Sorbonne, Paris, April 23, 1910

My emphasis there. The Left wanted us to pack up and leave Iraq to the tender mercy of Iran. Yeah. That would have done a fat lot of good, right? We stay. We fight. We finish the job. We do what has to be done.

Or we suffer the consequences.

Too Awsome Not To Link

Ace of Spades HQ on the media's curious silence in Iraq.

We began by losing in Fallujah so badly our troops now say there are weeks that go by without hearing a gun shot. It's quiet there now... Too quiet.

We then lost Baghdad catastrophically. You can tell we lost because there are so few reports of mortar attacks hitting the Green Zone. The enemy won there by moving further and further out from the city. You know -- surrounding us.

We then lost in Basra so dreadfully it apparently simply vanished from the map entirely, perhaps sucked into another dimension through an interplanar vortex.

Next up we lost in Sadr's last bastion of power -- the slum he's named for -- which you can see by fact that the Iraqi Army is now patrolling the streets and conducts house-to-house searches for weapons. But we lost, because two concessions were made to the Sadrists -- "light weapons" (pistols, rifles) could be kept, one per person, and no US troops would accompany the IA. That last point really stung us, because you know our boys are heartbroken that the IA gets the glamor duty of patrolling this slum. Glory denied; a brilliant psyops tactic to crush the spirits of our troops.

Anyone who reads this blog knows my opinion of the MSM: They are nothing but bought and paid for whores, nothing but a propaganda organ for the Democrat American Communist Party.

Now, prove me wrong.

Ace of Spades

Has a few stories of American Heroes
Sgt. Merlin German (USMC)
Master Sgt. Brendan O’Connor (USA)
Pfc. Monica Brown (USA)

Dead Jihadis

Are always a good thing. This video was taken by an Apache through it's thermal sights. No shots were fired from the Apache. Is it wrong that I watch this video and giggle? Slightly NSFW due to language.



That's karma right there.

Missile strike in Sadr City (Video)

(Video)

CNN's Barbara Starr looks at Defense Department video of targeted missile strikes in Sadr City against insurgents.

CNN does war porn?

She even admitted Iran was supporting the Iraqi insurgents...
Cross Posted at DANEgerus

Close Air Support

The audio is hysterical.(content warning, language!)

F-16 .................... $21,000,000.00
Smoke grenade .................... $1.16
Camcorder from Best Buy ........ $249.99
The audio track on this clip ... Priceless

Michael Ledeen : Al Qaeda Shattered, Scrambles to Kill More and More

More good news from Iraq. Just look at all the AQI leaders that have been rounded up. What? You didn't notice? Can't imagine why...

Cross Posted at DANEgerus

Iraq vs. Congress

I have to admit, this kind of made me laugh, until I realized that Congress' failure to do a damn thing worthwhile can and will affect this country negatively for quite some time.

As I see it there are 5 completed areas of legislation that have been addressed by the Iraqi Parliament. The other 13 areas are in various stages of progress, but all indications show that plans, implementation and accountability are in place to properly scale each for Iraq.

The Democratic Party coming into power in 2006 had set 6 benchmarks for themselves and have not accomplished a single one, with the first being the most important:

1) Honest Leadership and Open Government

Iraq is, apparently, doing much better with two major ethnicities and a host of minor ones, tribal governments, multiple parties, two major religious sects and a host of minor ones, and having to work their way out of decades of dictatorship and come to means to work things out according the rule of law inside their Nation.

The US Congress can't find anyone that will actually lead it in an honest fashion nor promulgate openness in appropriations, oversight, or even keep to its Oath of Office. Unlike Iraq, the US Congress cannot even pass a budget on time nor pass any major legislation with regards to US security.

It is a failure.

Yer damn skippy it's a failure. And it will continue being a failure while we have the same communists, bureaucrats, hanger-ons, parasites, and other assorted teat-suckers who have been infesting Capitol Hill for decades still sitting in a position of power.

But to get them kicked out, we have to convince the dipshits who keep voting for them that they need to be kicked out. And how can you teach someone that doesn't want to learn?

Found at Ace of Spades.

Whoa.... somebody from HOLLYWOOD said that?

Then it must be even more obvious than I thought!

In Baghdad, I spoke with Army Gen. David Petraeus about UNHCR’s need for security information and protection for its staff as they re-enter Iraq, and I am pleased that he has offered that support. General Petraeus also told me he would support new efforts to address the humanitarian crisis “to the maximum extent possible”—which leaves me hopeful that more progress can be made.

My visit left me even more deeply convinced that we not only have a moral obligation to help displaced Iraqi families, but also a serious, long-term, national security interest in ending this crisis.

Today’s humanitarian crisis in Iraq—and the potential consequences for our national security—are great. Can the United States afford to gamble that 4 million or more poor and displaced people, in the heart of Middle East, won’t explode in violent desperation, sending the whole region into further disorder?

What we cannot afford, in my view, is to squander the progress that has been made.

As for the question of whether the surge is working, I can only state what I witnessed: U.N. staff and those of non-governmental organizations seem to feel they have the right set of circumstances to attempt to scale up their programs. And when I asked the troops if they wanted to go home as soon as possible, they said that they miss home but feel invested in Iraq. They have lost many friends and want to be a part of the humanitarian progress they now feel is possible.

Well, let's hope SOMEONE hears it other than the choir.

I'm sure you've seen this

But I think it needs to be spread around so that EVERYONE can see the kind of evil that we're fighting in the war on terror. Al-Queda is now using mentally retarded women as suicide bombers. The bombs were remote-detonated, which means that these women either didn't want to do it, or they didn't even know what they were carrying.

Just how sick and twisted do you have to be in order to do this kind of thing? Does anyone want to blather on about how Bush is a terrorist right now? Please, blather that around me, and I'll hit you so damn hard you'll be shitting your teeth for a week. Because it's time for that kind of stupidity to become painful again.

Go read the whole thing.

You Might Be a Member of the Taliban or Al Qaeda if...

10. You refine heroin for a living, but you have a moral objection to beer.
9. You own a $300 machine gun and a $5,000 rocket launcher, but you can't afford shoes.
8. You have more wives than teeth.
7. You think vests come in two styles: bullet-proof and suicide.
6. You can't think of anyone you HAVEN'T declared Jihad against.
5. You consider television dangerous, but routinely carry ammunition in your robe.
4. You've been asked, "Does this burka make my ass look fat?"
3. You were amazed to discover that cell phones have uses other than setting off roadside bombs.
2. You've uttered the phrase, "I love what you've done with your cave."
1. You wipe your butt with your bare left hand, but consider bacon unclean.

And no... this can't be interpreted as anti-Muslim, unless you personally consider Taliban or Al Qaeda inseparable from, and representative of, the Ummah. In which case isn't that really your own personal issue?
;)
Too Harsh? Really?

Taliban Commits Mass Murder, AP Publishes Their Press Release

Cross Posted at DANEgerus

(D)ems enable Iranian nuclear weapons

The 'Cold War', or WWIII, saw a corrupt tyranny eventually collapse attempting to face down the American Republic. For all the frightening moments the morally bankrupt strategy of "MAD", or Mutually Assured Destruction, seemed to keep both sides in check until that unexpected, although in hindsight inevitable, collapse.

But I have a rhetorical question for you. Is a militant theological tyranny, such as that ruling Iran, rational enough to be held in check by MAD or are their pronouncements not rhetoric and indicators they will in fact continue to pursue an ever escalating proxy war against their perceived enemies?

This... is funny:Strangers on my flight
Why?

Will it be 'funny' when Iran's Hezbollah drives a nuclear weapon into East Jerusalem and levels that city making a fallout poisoned wasteland out of a city holy to Christians and Jews for thousands of years?

Because of the UN's IAEA enablement Iran is in fact only months away from deploying that first nuclear weapon:

Decision time for US over Iran threat

Iran has installed 3,000 centrifuges for enriching uranium - enough to begin industrial-scale production of nuclear fuel and build a warhead within a year...

How hard does the UN's IAEA and it's Egyptian head Mohamed ElBaradei work to enable Iran's nuclear weapons program?

The IAEA says the uranium being produced is only fuel grade (enriched to 4%)...

"only fuel grade"? Which UN's IAEA "knows" about a plant they are not allowed to inspect because the Iranians tell them so... even as the Iranians hand over plans for nuclear warheads they purchased from Pakistan's nuclear proliferator:
AQKhan?

A nuclear weapon is the only sort of warhead Iran's multiple-warhead rockets can usefully deliver.

I'm always annoyed when the MainStreamMedia propagates the lies of the terror supporting Mullahs by insisting on parroting the fraud that the Iranians are enriching Uranium for "peaceful purposes". Why? Why is it so obvious Iran is lying?

Iran has no generators, for converting nuclear plants energy to electricity, and no plans to buy any.

No transmission lines are being laid... past the anti-Aircraft emplacements.

Iran actually has no nuclear reactors to consume the fuel. Zero.

The Russian ones under construction obligate the Iranians to buy fuel from Russia.

Iran also doesn't have the technical capacity to clad the fuel rods, for use in a nuclear reactor, even if they could enrich fuel.

So only a liar would tell you that Iran isn't enriching uranium for the same reason Saddam Hussein was... which is why we removed almost 400 tons of Yellowcake Uranium and a couple of tons of partially enriched uranium from Iraq.

But that misleading statement isn't the only "BigLie" advanced by the UN's IAEA. They also invent excuses to delay action:

Against the fraught backdrop, a meeting of senior officials from the UN security council's five permanent members and Germany to decide on sanctions, planned for Monday, was put off after the Chinese delegation said it could not attend.

The critical meeting has been pushed back to later this month, giving time for the six-nation group's negotiator, Javier Solana, the EU foreign policy chief, to hold last-ditch talks with Iranian officials.

...

David Albright, a former UN inspector and now an independent nuclear expert in Washington, said ElBaradei appeared to be trying to put "a happy face" on a worsening situation. "The main issue is that Iran now has 3,000 centrifuges," he said. "The report doesn't even judge the quality of the information being offered, but it's clear it is giving minimal answers."

Micheal Goldfarb mocks the UN

Iran "Generally Truthful" on Nukes

Now the IAEA's report is out, and they find the Iranians to be "generally truthful." The Iranians had "accidentally" received blueprints for a nuclear warhead (as part of an illegal transfer of nuclear know-how), which were "accidentally" discovered by the IAEA, and we are still supposed to believe that (a) they aren't working towards a nuclear weapon, (b) they don't have other blueprints with which they weren't quite so careless, and (c) the IAEA's standard for compliance has always been "generally truthful." This wishful thinking can only lead to one conclusion--a nuclear Iran. And, while the use of force to prevent such an outcome is certain to be painful for all parties involved, diplomacy just isn't going to work, because the IAEA is all trust, and no verify.

Stanley Kurtz notes the MSM's complicity

Iran's 3000 Centrifuges

If you thought the press was burying news about the surge, look at what they’re doing to the nuclear news from Iran.

...

The New York Times has buried its story on page 12, while The Washington Post has gone deeper still, at page 22.

...

This confirmation of 3,000 Iranian centrifuges is a front-page story. There is simply no excuse for burying it, or for playing down its significance.

It isn't just the UN & the MainStreamMedia that enables Iran's proxy war criminals:

Video: Palestinian Terrorists Take Classes from the Red Cross

Wow. Talk about a mind-bending video. This slice of propaganda comes from the sanitized, slicked-up English version of Al Jazeera, as masked Palestinian terrorists attend International Humanitarian Law and First Aid training classes run by the International Committee of the Red Cross, and Al Jazeera tries to show us the human side of a gang of remorseless murderers. Without taking off the masks, of course.

But the lowest of the low... the most inexcusable element of the apeasement-enablement of Islamofascist terror has to be America's (D)emocrats. As KLo illustrates

From Pete Hoekstra

“Today’s vote is another unnecessary political stunt by Democrats in the House. Congress should focus on continuing to support America’s military and intelligence professionals as they work to improve security and stability, not micromanaging for political gain a very real struggle against radical jihadists.

“I want to bring the courageous men and women of our military home quickly and safely as much as anybody, but just as we are beginning to see tangible improvements in security in Iraq, now is not the time to burden the effort with the same old political maneuvers of the past—maneuvers that have already failed 40 times.”

Duane R. Patterson

Go Ahead, Democrats. I Dare You. Cut The Money For The Military.

The House of Representatives, in classic mob rule style, passed the "cut the money and run away" bill late last night, sending it along to Reid and the Democrats this morning.

But cutting the funds, by vote or delay, is only part of the strategy to force an American defeat to Iran's proxy warriors in Iraq:

US Democrats slam Iraqi government

"Every place you go you hear about no progress being made in Iraq," said Senate Democratic majority leader Harry Reid.

"The government is stalemated today, as it was six months ago, as it was two years ago," Reid told reporters, warning US soldiers were caught in the middle of a civil war.

"It is not getting better, it is getting worse," he said.

"worse'? Again... another "BigLie"...

Sweetness & Light notes the (D)efeaticrats are cutting funding by running:

Senate Dems Refuse To Fund Troops This Year

Once again Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer and the rest of the Democrats who are trying to force this issue are showing themselves to be traitors to this country, plain and simple.

They are so desperate to try to make us lose a war that we clearly winning that they will do anything, even stab our soldiers in the back by denying them funding while they are on the battlefield.

These are Senators?

These are Americans?

James W. Ceaser

The Democrats' dilemma.

WILL ANY OF the Democratic candidates be able to summon the courage to concede an American victory in Iraq?

...

..."facts on the ground" now at least admit a trend leading to what might reasonably be called victory: a suppression of the insurgency; a steep reduction in the level of domestic, sectarian violence; the existence of a constitutional government not unfriendly to America; a gradual reduction of American force presence with diminishing American casualties; and the assurance for a period of a continued base of operations from which to handle other possible contingencies in the region.

But if this outcome "on the ground" can be called victory--and why should it not be?--there is a huge potential problem looming in our ability to acknowledge it.

Charles Krauthammer blasts another "BigLie" of the (D)efeaticrats:

Someone better tell Democrats

WASHINGTON - When the Democratic presidential candidates pause from beating Hillary with a stick, they join in unison to pronounce the Democratic pieties, chief among which is that George Bush has left our alliances in ruins. As Clinton puts it, we have “alienated our friends,” must “rebuild our alliances” and “restore our standing in the world.” That’s mild. The others describe Bush as having a scorched-earth foreign policy that has left us reviled and isolated in the world.

The Democrats are living in what Bob Woodward would call a state of denial. Do they not notice anything?

France has a new president who is breaking not just with the anti-Americanism of the Chirac era but with 50 years of Fifth Republic orthodoxy that defined French greatness as operating in counterpoise to America. Nicolas Sarkozy’s trip last week to the United States was marked by a highly successful White House visit and a rousing speech to Congress in which he not only called America “the greatest nation in the world” but pledged solidarity with the U.S. on Afghanistan, Iran, Lebanon, the Middle East and nuclear nonproliferation. This just a few months after he sent his foreign minister to Iraq to signal an openness to cooperation and an end to Chirac’s obstructionism.

...

...new British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, who noted “the great change that is taking place,” namely “that France and Germany and the European Union are also moving more closely with America.”

...

...relations with Australia are very close, and Canada has shown remarkable steadfastness in taking disproportionate casualties in supporting the NATO mission in Afghanistan. Eastern European nations, traditionally friendly, are taking considerable risks on behalf of their U.S. alliance. And ties with Japan have never been stronger.

A-J-Strata thinks

Tide Turning Against Democrats On Iraq

Calling for defeat in the face of victory is NEVER going to be a popular position.

And finally there is some puchback:

SecDef Gates cowboys up against the surrendercrat Congress

... it’s telling that Congress apparently doesn’t even understand how the DoD’s budget even works. Just what exactly is this Congress good for if it doesn’t even understand its most basic Constitutional role?

We need much more of this:

Video: Gen. Casey pwns Ted Kennedy

Everyone’s probably watching the Democrat debate, but here’s a clip that’s worth preserving. During budget testimony today, Army Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey faced off against Sen. Ted Kennedy. Kennedy snarked about the state of the military and asked sarcastically which enemy that it has faced has put the Army in the state that it’s in. Gen. Casey’s answer, more or less, is the Democrats who cut the military’s budget in the 1990s have put the Army in the state that it’s in.

NRO editors

Democratic Fantasyland

What was it that Hillary Clinton once said about the willing suspension of disbelief? For congressional Democrats, that line has gone from a put-down (of Gen. David Petraeus’s testimony before Congress) to a way of life. On Iraq, Democrats now live in a fantasy world. That’s why they can ignore the surge’s success and — after all we’ve learned over the last year — persist in trying to condition funding of the Iraq war on a drawdown of troops by the end of 2008.

...

As the political tide in Congress has ebbed away from the hard antiwar Democrats over the last year, their Iraq proposals have gone from dangerous, to contemptible, to — now — simply pathetic.

VDH on the (D)efeaticrats

Very Useful Idiots

Iraqis associate cynicism, even anti-Arabism not with hard-nosed Republicans, but with liberal, supposedly idealistic Democratic liberals, whose serial trashing of them is constantly aired in Iraq...

The New Iraqi Debate

Now that the Democrats suspect that the U.S. is not only not losing Iraq, but may well “win”—victory being defined by stabilizing the country with a radical cessation of violence—expect the critique suddenly to morph as well.

Moving the goalposts... again...

Also expect Democrats to find ways to exaggerate the aggregate costs (like counting the rise from 20-100 dollars a barrel for oil entirely due to the Iraqi war without notice of the new Chinese/Indian demand, unrest in Africa, and declining production from the UK to the US)...

No 'War for No Oil'?

...the US military has eliminated a large number of terrorists, insurgents and general terrorists since 2003. Given the noxious fumes of Vietnam-era “body-counts” we don’t mention this. But many of the sheiks suffered horrendous losses among their tribes to the US in the past four years that led to some demoralization and the simple absence of their more skilled and veteran fighters. So, when they weighed the odds—increasing oil-generated wealth on the one hand versus being mowed down by the US on the other—the choice was to join us.

In other words... America is winning and the American military is getting a lot better in spite of the (D)emocrat's claims and efforts.

But those distractions enabled Iran to develop nuclear weapons.

Cross Posted at DANEgerus

Then there's what's going on in Iraq

Surge Implemented, Violence Down.

— Violence in and around Baghdad is down 59 percent.

— Car bombs are down 65 percent.

— Casualties from car bombs and roadside bombs are down by 80 percent.

— Casualties from enemy attacks down 77 percent.

— Operations against Iraqi security forces are down 62 percent.

— Assassination attempts for sectarian reasons are down 72 percent.

Seems Osama lost his street cred by blowing the hell out of every man woman and child in Iraq who had the audacity to participate in a little self determination democracy style. Now he's apologizing and asking for a fresh start.

Nice juxtaposition with the TNR/Beauchamp shit and Code Pink and Ted Rall pictures below, eh?

RCOB

Reading this caused a red haze to fall over my vision....

WASHINGTON — A top Democratic congressman, saying Democrats "have had it with being maneuvered and jerked around" on the war in Iraq, offered a new approach Tuesday to change the course of funding for the ongoing war: A war tax.

Rep. David Obey of Wisconsin, chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, said he will not allow a bill to come for debate to provide emergency supplemental funds for the war and suggested Americans should be compelled to pay for it through a "surtax."

"The president isn't going to get a supplemental this year. I am not going to report a supplemental out" if it simply is a request for funds and not a change in direction for troops in Iraq," Obey said.

Obey suggested he is flexible as to what the change in policy proposes "so long as it represents real change and not camouflage."

The Democrat American Communist Party has been screaming for retreat and surrender before we even invaded Iraq! This is just another example of how the Democrat American Communist Party is trying to end the war without taking responsibility for the surrender.

Hey, I know how we can fund the war: STOP EARMARKING PORK BARREL PROJECTS, YOU SPINELESS FUCKING SHITHEAD!

Obey said the annual cost for the war — $145 billion — could be paid by a tax that would range from 2 percent for low and middle income folks to 12-15 percent for higher income households.

There's never been a tax that a Democrat American Communist Party member didn't love and support.

"This war is draining the treasury dry. ... There is a huge opportunity cost that is being paid by the same younger generation that is going to be asked to pay the bill because the president is paying for this war on the cuff," Obey said. "If you don't like the cost, then shut down the war."

I have no problem with paying for the war; it's all the government socialist boondoggles, ponzi schemes, corruption and fraud that I have a problem with.

Obey said he has no expectation that the majority leadership in the House would embrace a tax, but wants to try to force the president's hand for this "misbegotten" war. He said that the tax would address the cost of the Iraq war, which he described as "not an intelligent use of resources," and is not related to operations in Afghanistan.

Ah, the "misbegotten" war, the call of defeatocrats, surrender monkeys, cowards, and terrorist-enabling cockgoblins. Iraq is well on it's way to becoming a stable democracy, and the Democrat American Communist Party wants to run home, yanking the rug out from under Iraq's feet while they flee. Would it kill them to root for America once in a while?

Yes, I guess it would, seeing as how they're fighting against America's interests both at home and abroad.

They are such a gutless, cowardly group that they make me want to vomit. How on earth did this country ever fall so low as to elect these miserable parasites to Congress?