Afghanistan
The real story about Afghanistan is not the actual events happening there, but rather the blatant mis-reporting of those events by the Western media. Ray Robison shares a number of facts on the ground that you likely haven't heard amidst all the doom-and-gloom reports which range from severely misleading to patently false. NATO has seen great gains in the country, and the Taliban are being forced into a very small piece of wasteland. One example: "In 2007, 70% of security incidents were confined to 10% of Afghanistan's 398 Districts. These districts contain less than 6% of the Afghan population." Some other facts:
- The Afghan Army is growing in size, experience, and leadership capabilities.
- A recent study found that 90% of the Afghan population trusted the countries military force.
- More than 4,000 km of roads have been built where only 50 km existed in 2001.
- 2,000 schools were built or repaired in the last five years and around 6.4 million children (including 1.5 million girls) are now in schools.
- In 2001, 8% of Afghans had access to some form of healthcare. Now more than 80% of the population has access to medical care.
- Afghan public support for international involvement in Afghanistan remains high with around 70% of Afghans supporting the presence of international forces.
- The majority of Afghans believe their country is going in the right direction and 84% support their current government (as opposed to 4% who would support the Taliban).
Iran
Lots of things going on in relation to Iran. Last month, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard attempted to gain control of Iraq's second largest city, Basra, using local Shiite militias as a Trojan horse. They failed. The gamble was based on the assumptions that the new Iraqi government wouldn't rise up against Iran, and that the U.S. forces wouldn't want to open a new front. Initially, it appeared to work...but Iraqi President Nouri al-Maliki led the charge in dispatching 30,000 Iraqi troops to take back the city. Showing incredible progress since its formation five years ago, the Iraqi Security Force won this large engagement with little U.S. support, proving their growing ability to secure the country. Casualties ran roughly 100:1 against the Iranian-backed rebels, and a senior Iranian commander stepped forward to finalize their surrender (a condition from Iraq to prove Iran's role in the battle). This could be considered the first battle between Iran and the new Iraq; if so, Iraq won hands down, though Iran wasn't able to use its air forces without risking open battle with the U.S.
Those events were just the icing on the cake to Iranian involvement in our war in Iraq, prompting the Bush administration to officially declare Iran as the biggest threat in Iraq now rather than Al Qaeda:
During their Washington visit, Petraeus, the top U.S. military commander in Iraq, and Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker barely mentioned al-Qaeda in Iraq but spoke extensively of Iran.
With "al-Qaeda in retreat and disarray" in Iraq, said one official who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak on the record, "we see other obstacles that were under the waterline more clearly. . . . The Iranian-armed militias are now the biggest threat to internal order."
A specific look at some of the testimony reveals the level to which Iran is involved:
Iran, Petraeus told the Senate Armed Services Committee, has "fueled the recent violence in a particularly damaging way through its lethal support of the special groups."
"President Ahmadinejad and other Iranian leaders" promised to end their "support for the special groups," said the general, but the "nefarious activities of the Quds force have continued."
"Is it fair to say that the Iranian-backed special groups in Iraq are responsible for the murder of hundreds of American soldiers and thousands of Iraqi soldiers and civilians?" asked Joe Lieberman.
"It certainly is. ... That is correct," said Petraeus.
The following day, Petraeus told the House Armed Services Committee, "Unchecked, the 'special groups' pose the greatest long-term threat to the viability of a democratic Iraq."
Translation: The United States is now fighting the proxies of Iran for the future of Iraq.
This appears to be the groundwork for a future potential attack on Iran, especially when coupled with some other details:
In early 2007, Nancy Pelosi pulled down a resolution that would have denied Bush the authority to attack Iran without congressional approval. In September, both Houses passed the Kyl-Lieberman resolution designating the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization.
Courtesy of Congress, Bush thus has a blank check for war on Iran. And the signs are growing that he intends to fill it in and cash it.
Israel has been hurling invective at Iran and conducting security drills to prepare its population for rocket barrages worse than those Hezbollah delivered in the Lebanon War.
Adm. William "Fox" Fallon, the Central Command head who opposed war with Iran, has been removed. Hamas and Hezbollah have been stocking up on Qassam and Katyusha rockets.
Vice President Cheney has lately toured Arab capitals.
And President Ahmadinejad just made international headlines by declaring that Tehran will begin installing 6,000 advanced centrifuges to accelerate Iran's enrichment of uranium.
The question remains whether or not Bush will pull the trigger. Sadly, the constant anti-war drumbeat of the MSM and Democrats will make it much harder to protect American troops and freedom, no matter how necessary it may be. And don't think it won't be necessary - a new report reveals that spy photos have discovered a new Iranian missile site that could be capable of launching long-range ballistic missiles that could reach targets as far away as Europe. Combine that with the news that Iran is continuing to ramp up their nuclear program, and we have a serious problem that cannot be ignored.
American Shame
Former President Jimmy Carter is planning to meet with Hamas. Yes, you heard that right. A former U.S. President is going to defy the current administration's policy (and every standard of American patriotism) to personally meet with Khaled Meshal, the exiled head of the Palestinian terror group. Critics are understandably livid:
"It's about par for the course from President Carter, demonstrating a lack of judgment typical of what he does," said John Bolton, former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations. "To go to Syria to visit Hamas at this point is just an ill-timed, ill-advised decision on his part."
"I'm not surprised that Carter would do this, as he has been supporting Palestinian extremism for many years," said Steve Emerson, director of the Investigative Project on Terrorism, a watchdog group.
Though Meshal met with Clinton officials in the 1990s, the Bush administration has sought to isolate Hamas, enforcing rigid sanctions on its government in Gaza and refusing to meet with its leaders unless it recognizes Israel and abandons terror.
"I think this [visit] undermines the U.S. policy of isolating Hamas," said Emerson. "I think this encourages Europeans to further dilute their sanctions against the Hamas government."
"When you put the prestige of a former president of the United States in a meeting with one of its terrorist leaders, you're giving it a legitimacy and currency it never had," said Bolton.
Jimmy Carter was disastrous as President, and he's become even worse as a former President. Rick Moran has more about Carter's 'peace' trip, including the following:
Hamas's latest peace offering was to send a gunman to a Jewish seminary and slaughter 9 innocent people. I'm sure Meshal and Carter will have a lot to talk about considering the former President's previous statements about Israel being the biggest obstacle to peace in the Middle East are perfectly in line with Meshal's own fantasies.
And I can't wait to see if he embraces and kisses that murderous thug President Assad of Syria while he is there. When last we left Baby Assad, he was busy murdering anti-Syrian Lebanese politicians - picking them off one by one like ducks in a carnival shoot. In this, he was assisting another group that Carter should really get to know - the jackals of Hezb'allah who have brought Lebanon to the brink of civil war with their obstructionist and dangerous policy of refusing to compromise on a host of issues including allowing a consensus candidate for President to take office.
The U.S. and Israel have both officially condemned the visit.
Palestine
Speaking of Palestine, how committed are they to peace with Israel? According to Peggy Shapiro, not very. Hatred for Israel is a central aspect of Palestinian life, right down to their children's textbooks that re-write history and TV shows calling for the destruction of Israel in bloody violence. Ariel Sharon once said that Palestinian education and propaganda are far more dangerous to Israel than weapons, and we need to understand that reality. Hugh Hewitt agrees, saying that "far too few Americans understand the depth and effort to dehumanize Jews". He suggests that the best counterattack is for U.S. forces to be on the ground, providing aid and security, demonstrating that there is a better alternative to the death and destruction offered by the extremists. He cites Iraq as a prime example, where U.S. troops are often greeted by children like rock stars. Per Michael Totten (an embedded reporter):
I stepped inside the school yard. Hundreds of children saw me and the Marines, and the whole place erupted in screams of excitement. It was as if Britney Spears or the guy from Coldplay had shown up. The volume was just extraordinary and I took a few steps back in surprise.
Now, which group of kids do you think is most likely to blow themselves up just for the honor of killing Americans?
Generally Speaking
1. Here at home, we have a related set of problems, with taxpayer-funded public schools teaching students radical Islam. Do you know what your kids are learning at school? People in Minnesota need to check a little more carefully. Maybe you should check your kids' schools, too. We have enough trouble with Islamic brainwashing in the Middle East; we don't need to compound it with Islamic brainwashing here at home.
2. Osama bin Laden may be America's 'public enemy #1', but who is the 'public enemy #1' of Islam? Raymond Ibrahim at NRO thinks it's Zakaria Botros, an Egyptian Christian who braves Islamic violence to convert Muslims right and left. Botros uses his television show -- in which both the Bible and the Koran are within reach -- to reach millions in the Middle East with his fiery personality. Issuing '10 demands' in response to highlight Islam's own radical demands on non-Muslims, he is considered responsible for the conversion of millions of Muslims annually. Relying on authoritative texts, he preaches about the inconsistencies and violent tendencies of Islam, and invites the establishment to respond. Apparently, they rarely do; when a response has been issued, it usually results in further humiliation and hypocrisy, which only adds to Botros' authenticity.
3. Right Truth reports on some HUGE breaking news in regard to the successful Israeli attack that destroyed a likely nuclear base in Syria last fall. The teaser:
An upcoming joint US-Israel report on the September 6 IAF strike on a Syrian facility will claim that former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein transferred weapons of mass destruction to the country...
For those of you who are long-time readers of my blog, this may seem like a familiar suggestion to you...I blogged about precisely that scenario months ago. When this report is finally released, it could give the Bush administration some final vindication of the whole WMD fiasco, and should prove to be a momentous news item. Indeed, Republicans should pounce all over this report and broadcast it far and wide in the run-up to the election. Watch and see if the MSM will try to bury it (of course they will), and if the new media and blogosphere will overcome the MSM blackout (of course we will).
4. A small change in the U.S. WMD retaliation policy could provide big ramifications for anyone who might attack the U.S. in the future. The Weekly Standard reports:
[T]he United States had recently adopted "a new declaratory policy to help deter terrorists from using weapons of mass destruction against the United States, our friends, and allies." This policy would threaten with retaliation "those states, organizations, or individuals who might enable or facilitate terrorists in obtaining or using weapons of mass destruction."
The key here is that it is no longer just an implied threat that those who participate will be held as responsible as the attackers - it is now policy. Deterrence is effective, and this new policy finally acknowledges that fact.
5. Regarding the war in Iraq, after receiving a recommendation from General Petraeus, President Bush has reduced the duration of Army tours from 15 months to 12 months, as well as suspended further troop withdrawals (after the currently planned ones are implemented).
This is very good news for the soldiers and their families, obviously. It will also be good for our military in general, as shorter tours mean fewer problems with retention, stress, and all the other consequences of war. Hopefully the situation on the ground will allow further troop reductions in the very near future (for the right reasons). We all want our troops to come home safely, but to drag them home without allowing them to complete their mission would be to insult them and all they have fought and bled for. The news of the Iraq Security Forces in Basra gives me hope that ultimate success is in the near future, hopefully even before Bush leaves office. Time will tell.
So, there's your war update - it was a big one, but it's a big world with a lot going on. Now you're aware.
There's my two cents.
No comments:
Post a Comment