Big War Update

Here is a rather large war update for you.  Some of these articles may be a bit old (I've been gathering links for over a week), but the info is still worth passing along.

Michelle Malkin helpfully created a chart that shows which terrorists support which Democrat candidate, but I've already mentioned that before.  Still, it's good to know who our enemies support, you know?

The Democrats, led by Nancy Pelosi, still refuse to reinstate the wiretapping program that will check out known terrorists outside U.S. borders in order to help their trial lawyer supporters.  The legal argument for refusing this measure was flimsy at best before, but a new ruling makes it even more so - a child pornographer was caught trying to carry illegal material over the border on a laptop, but the ruling stated that communications crossing our borders are no different (when it comes to warrantless surveillance) than an actual laptop or physical letter.  So, the Democrats are continuing to protect terrorists (and trial lawyers) despite the ever-increasing legal precedent to do so.  Thanks, Nancy & Co.  This is why the Democrats cannot be trusted with the defense of this country!

Here's a heart-warming story of an anti-war protester's true colors.  A man showed up at a reading for Laura and Jenna Bush's new children's book, and began heckling them for the President's actions regarding the war.  When some bystanders in the crowd told them to be quiet, the anti-war nut attacked, repeatedly hitting an 18-year old wheelchair-bound girl with cerebral palsy.  Wow - protesting the war by inflicting violence on innocent disabled child - what class.

Michelle Malkin also reports on a story of Al Qaeda and the Taliban getting 'punked' in Afghanistan.  Nice!

In total contradiction of the conventional wisdom that says America's position in the world is worse because of the war in Iraq, get a load of this:

THE US war in Iraq has strengthened its strategic position, especially in terms of key alliances, and the only way this could be reversed would be if it lost the will to continue the struggle and abandoned Iraq in defeat and disarray.

Surely the author of this sentence is on the ganja, you might say. Something a little weird in the coffee? It goes against every aspect of conventional wisdom.

But the author of this thesis, stated only marginally less boldly, is one of the US's most brilliant strategic analysts. Mike Green holds the Japan chair at Washington's Centre for Strategic and International Studies and was for several years the Asia director at the National Security Council. He is also one of America's foremost experts on Japan and northeast Asia generally.

Now, who should we believe?  The MSM -- who have a history of being anti-war, anti-American, and anti-Bush -- or one of the nation's leading experts on the politics of the area in question?  Duh.  Let's consider why...

The world works as well as it does–and, granted, that's pretty marginal–in large part because the United States guarantees the security of its allies. Places like Taiwan and South Korea churn out magic toilets and miniature automobiles knowing that the United States will respond to incursions and aggression with overwhelming and sustained force. So far, our defense of the fledgling Iraqi government has confirmed that arrangement.

America does what it says. If you have an American security guarantee–and I'm looking at you,Saudi Arabia and Pakistan–you don't need to build a nuclear arsenal. America honors its commitments, and the world keeps ticking–well, arrhythmically stuttering, anyhow–because there are big U.S. guns ready to retaliate against aggression. No better friend. No worse enemy. If America is backing you, you're golden.

This is peace through strength at work.

There is definitely a trend of laying the groundwork for an attack on Iran.  Iran continues to kill Americans in Iraq, our top military leaders say repeatedly that Iran is fighting a proxy war against the U.S. in Iraq, and captives from Iraq are actually being held by the Revolutionary Guard inside Iran.

One of the most important battles, the worldwide PR battle, is finally starting to show some real progress.  By showing that American and allied forces have the interests of Iraqis far more at heart than Al Qaeda does, more and more Muslims are questioning where the real evil lies.  This is the key to long-term victory, and the only thing that will really counter the brainwashing that goes on in the Muslim world.  Actions speak louder than words, and our military's actions are speaking volumes right now.

The city of Basra, Iraq's second largest city, has come alive again after a crackdown on black-garbed terrorists.  A surprise show of force by the Iraqi army pushed back another insurgency, allowing citizens to once again live in relative peace.

There continue to be problematic alliances with Russia, however.  A recent shipment of nuclear material being sent from Russia to Iran was intercepted by a U.S. ally, Azerbaijan.  It has been held for several weeks while a determination is being made on whether or not such a shipment would violate the most recent U.N. sanctions on Iran.  Regardless of the result, this Russia-Iran alliance could spell big trouble.  I could very easily see Russia fighting a proxy war with the U.S. through Iran, much like Iran is fighting one with the U.S. through Iraq.  The difference, of course, would be that Russia has loads of nukes at their disposal.

Another topic that should be of great concern is that of Syria.  Last fall, I passed along the story of how Israel snuck into Syria to destroy a suspected nuclear facility.  Since then, more news has come out that proves Syria was in league with North Korea to develop nuclear weapons: the Mossad (Israel's version of our CIA) released video of North Koreans working at the plant.  More details here and here.  President Bush said that that information was intended to be a warning to rogue terrorist-sponsoring states (i.e. North Korea, Iran) to stop spreading nuke technology:

Mr. Bush did not explain why exactly the administration disclosed the information at this point, but the timing coincided with renewed efforts to persuade North Korea to abide by last year's agreement to acknowledge all of its nuclear activities. The North Korean activities include what administration officials assert are a still undisclosed program to enrich uranium and the sale of nuclear technology to countries like Syria.

"We also wanted to advance certain policy objectives through the disclosures, and one would be to the North Koreans to make it abundantly clear that we, we may know more about you than you think," Mr. Bush said at a White House news conference.

This strikes me as a very, very good move.  Not only does it send a very clear 'shape up' message to North Korea (who's been a problem in recent years), but it also sends a message to others like Iran and Syria that our intelligence capabilities are not quite as lame as they think.  And, it also shows a definite position of pre-emptive strength (as well as partnership with Israel), which is extremely good.  All of these details are icing on the cake.

Finally, Newsmax reports that Dennis Ross, an architect of the Middle East peace process, predicts Iran will have nuclear weapons by 2009:

"Once they cross that threshold, we're going to be in a different ball game. We have to approach this with a high degree or urgency. We're running out of time."

Not only did Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad vow to "wipe Israel off the map," but former Iranian President Mohammed Khatami has stated that it would "take only one bomb" to annihilate Israel, Ross told the gathering.

"Is that their intention?" he asked. "Can you ignore what they say?"

Very good questions!  Some interesting supporting details:

As Newsmax reported in mid-April, a leading member of America's Jewish community disclosed that a military strike on Iran was likely, and said Vice President Dick Cheney's recent trip through the Middle East should be seen as preparation for the U.S. attack.

The source also told Newsmax that Israel "is preparing for heavy casualties," expecting to be the target of Iranian retribution following a U.S. strike.

And Saudi Arabia is reportedly taking emergency steps in preparing to counter any radioactive hazards that may result from an American attack on Iran's nuclear facilities.

I once had a conversation with someone about preemptive attacks.  We danced around it for a while, and then I just came out and asked if she would be willing to let hundreds of thousands of Americans die in order to avoid a preemptive attack (meaning, we let them hit us first even though we could prevent it).  She said yes.  This is the key question, and her answer is the problem we face here in America.  Not surprisingly, she's a die-hard Democrat, and her mindset is not only completely ludicrous, but it is the precise justification for why we shouldn't allow Democrats to control our national defense: they will refuse to take action until thousands lay dead in the decimated streets (of course, given the actions of the last two Democrat presidents -- Carter and Clinton -- on terrorism and attacks, we might not retaliate even then).  I wish I would have asked her this follow up question: would you still allow it if your children and their families lived in the city that was destroyed?  I truly wonder what her answer would have been.  Maybe I don't want to know.

So, there are the latest developments on war in the Middle East.  Keep an eye on it - it all affects you one way or another!

There's my two cents.