Navigation

DISSENT!

Defend Israel

The Patriots Call
The Black Robe Regiment - The Patriots Call

Democrats party of Racism
Racism of the Democrat Party
Herman Cain - The DNC has BRAINWASHED most of the Blacks of this Nation
Racism - the Nemesis of the Democrat Party
Democrats invented racism and democrats HATE all blacks
The Snooper Report articles on Democrat invention of racism

The March on DC
Callin’ All the Clans Together
Sick and tired - marching towards the Constitution of the United States
We. Are. Finished. With.  DC.
We. Are. Finished. With. DC. - Addendum Part 1

Civility: The Leftinistra Own None Of It
Civility: The Leftinistra Own None Of It Part 2(?)
Civility: Leftinistra Own None Part Three
Obama, Civility and The Clansmen of Dumb
Brain Dead Leftinistra: Their Stoic Civility
Libtards Have No Class - Civility Escapes Their Brain Deadness
The States Will Be the Next Battlefield in the Fight Over ObamaCare
War Is Coming: Blood On Our Own Streets - Thanks Democrats
Civil War…
We Are In The Midst of Chaos and Civil War
Live Free Or Die
Live Free Or Die Trying
State’s Sovereignty or Live Free Or Die
Live Free Or Die - The Movement Marches On
The Country Surrounds The City

When They Came
Is The Left Still “Proud To Be a Left-Wing Extremist”?
Be It Known - Attention Unconstitutional Congress
Obama: One Big Ass Mistake America
Do Birthers Rock and Roll or Stop and Drool?
Good vs Evil…It Is Your Choice
I Apologize For My Nation
Obama’s Civilian National Security Forces (CNSF)
Obama’s Brown Shirts - Civilian National Security Forces
What Is It About The American Liberal?
The Plan To Destroy America
Another Soldier Has Been Given the Haditha Treatment!
Callin’ All The Clans Together
Callin’ All The Clans Together Show
A History of the List of 45
Constitutionality: The Movement
Vindication: Iraq’s Saddam and Al Qaeda Links Revealed
Redefining The Center or the Moderate
The HIC (Hoax In Charge) Going To Copenhagen
We Didn’t Start This Goddamn War!

Copy Cat Frauds of the IAVA

Contract With America
Snooper’s Declaration of Independence
Thanks Obama

Contract From America

Timothy McVeigh
Thoughts To Ponder and Reflect Upon
Snooper Report Vindication: Al Qaeda, TWA Flight 800 and OKC Bombing
Clinton alludes to 1995 bombing, says words matter

Missing 13th Amendment
TITLES OF “NOBILITY” AND “HONOR” - The Missing 13th Amendment

The Coup
Military Coup Against Obama

The United States Constitution
Our founding document wasn’t set in stone for a reason

Deepwater Horizon
Did Hugo Chavez Sink the Deepwater Horizon Oil Platform?

MSLSD Lies
The New Right

Arizona Rising

Texas Wars

This is pretty much a bunch of crap, FYI.
Editor's Choice


REFERENCE MY NEW WEB SITE

Snooper Report dot org

CHRISTIAN WEB SITE





SEARCH HERE


Powered by Squarespace

1980

1984

Wake Up GOP

This is pretty much a bunch of CRAP, FYI HINT: “MOSTLY TRUE” is a “MOSTLY FALSE” deal which means “MOSTLY TRUE” is a LIE.

Entries in GWOT (8)

Saturday
Feb212009

Obama Secretly Approves Shari'a Law For Pakistan (with video)

Here's some great news.  After Sufi Muhammad was set free for renouncing violence, he has returned to the field to promote Global Jihad and to install Shar'ia Law throughout the world.  He was jailed for sending thousands of volunteers to Afghanistan to fight the U.S.-led invasion in 2001.

On 2.16.09, the New York Slimes reported that Pakistan had made an agreement with the Taliban (forced from power in Afghanistan) to create Shar'ia Law in seven States in the wastelands in Pakistan.  Once this was agreed upon, Sufi Muhammad immediately began a campaign to spread Shar'ia Law even farther.

Other political leaders stated that this agreement was not acceptable.

[...] The concessions to the militants, who now control about 70 percent of the region just 100 miles from the capital, were criticized by Pakistani analysts as a capitulation by a government desperate to stop Taliban abuses and a military embarrassed at losing ground after more than a year of intermittent fighting. About 3,000 Taliban militants have kept 12,000 government troops at bay and terrorized the local population with floggings and the burning of schools. [...]

Back in May of 2008, this process began its long trek of realization as reported by MEMRI.

Click to read more ...

Monday
Jan262009

Read This and Curse

Damnation be upon the corrupt cretins who set this SandMaggot free! No terrorist should ever be incarcerated and released; all should be ushered into Hell.

One News Now

 

The article details the evil activities of a terrorist who planted three bombs in N.Y.C.; how long and difficult was the effort to capture him, and the other bombs he planted. Now he is about to be released after serving half his sentence. There is no doubt that he will resume making and planting bombs.

I am disgusted. I am about to express my disgust to President Obama, my Representative & Senators.  I urge you to go to the web site of Congress.org and follow suit. Once is enough!!!

Saturday
Jan242009

Waky Paki Policy

NTI’s Global Security News Wire reported on a presentation by three members of the Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation and Terrorism to the House Armed Services Cmte.

The article includes a link to the Commission’s Dec. ‘08 report, a 161 page .pdf file.  The following quote is from the Executive Summary, occurring on
page xxiii of the report  [pg. 24 of the .pdf]. [The main Pakistan section runs from pg. 94-104 of the .pdf and includes more recommendations.]

RECOMMENDATION 6: The next President and Congress
should implement a comprehensive policy toward Pakistan that
works with Pakistan and other countries to (1) eliminate terrorist
safe havens through military, economic, and diplomatic
means; (2) secure nuclear and biological materials in Pakistan;
(3) counter and defeat extremist ideology; and (4) constrain a
nascent nuclear arms race in Asia.

  1. Military action is the only possibility because Islam is doctrine driven; Jihad is not a function of economics or diplomacy, it is mandated by Islamic law.
  2. The perfect impossibility. The ISI is heavily infiltrated by Mujahideen.  The country is more than 80% Muslim.
  3. There is no extremist ideology, there is only Islam. Countering Islamic doctrine is difficult and untried. Any attempt to do so will increase violence in the short term and would likely result in overthrow of the regime by Mujahideen. Certainly the regime will not participate in and will vigorously oppose such a campaign.
  4. No hope in Hell; that genie is out of the bottle already.

U.S. policy should “focus on building the institutions that will stabilize the country and begin to drain off some of the enmity that is currently being evinced toward the U.S. and Western culture, generally,” Graham said.

That means emphasizing “soft power,” including diplomacy, culture and education, according to Graham and Talent.

No institution can stabilize Pakistan. Neither can enmity toward the West be drained off.  It is first necessary to remove Islam from the equation by inducing mass apostasy among the citizens of Pakistan. See pt.3 above.

Muslims do not want our culture or education; they hate us, our culture and our education. Islam is their Deen and they don’t want anything else.

Friday
Jan232009

Obamination: Hypocrisy & Deceit

I commenced my dissection of President Obama’s Inaugural Address with his message to Muslims. In this episode, I return to excerpts
From the President’s Prepared Remarks, as published by the Miami Herald.

Our nation is at war, against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred.

On this day, we gather because we have chosen hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord.

On this day, we come to proclaim an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn out dogmas, that for far too long have strangled our politics.

We remain a young nation, but in the words of Scripture, the time has come to set aside childish things.

Starting today, we must pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, and begin again the work of remaking America.

We will build the roads and bridges, the electric grids and digital lines that feed our commerce and bind us together. We will restore science to its rightful place, and wield technology’s wonders to raise health care’s quality and lower its cost. We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories. And we will transform our schools and colleges and universities to meet the demands of a new age. All this we can do. And all this we will do.

The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works - whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified.

As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals. Our Founding Fathers, faced with perils we can scarcely imagine, drafted a charter to assure the rule of law and the rights of man, a charter expanded by the blood of generations. Those ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for expedience’s sake.

And so to all other peoples and governments who are watching today, from the grandest capitals to the small village where my father was born: know that America is a friend of each nation and every man, woman, and child who seeks a future of peace and dignity, and that we are ready to lead once more. Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions. They understood that our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead, they knew that our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint.

  • Our nation is at war, against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred.

That sentence does not fit in with those which follow it. He fails to elaborate, without naming the enemy, without specifying the theaters of war or evaluating the status of the war effort.  Why did he raise the issue of war so briefly only to drop it to hint at his Socialist agenda? The objective clause is problematic because it exemplifies an effort to distract us and divert our attention from the identity & nature of the enemy.

Islam is the enemy. Islam’s canon of scripture expresses and its Imams inculcate hatred of all who do not submit to Allah’s writ exactly as they do. We are described as the “worst of living creatures“, will abide in Hell, the “worst of creatures“. Allah curses us and commands Muslims to make war on us.  President Obama perpetuates the lie spewed by his predecessors: the claim that our enemy consists of a tiny minority of radicalized extremists who belong to Al-Qaeda and similar organizations spawned by Al-Ikhwan Al-Islamiyya.  His assertion is far removed from objective factual reality.  Islam’s permanent war is sanctified by Allah’s Qur’an and codified in Sharia. 8:39 & 9:29 contain the eternal commands to fight. 9:123 reinforces them. They are codified in Book O, Chapter 9, Paragraphs 8&9 of Reliance of the Traveller. [Search for O9.8.]  Muslims are commanded to conquer the entire world for Allah and they have been  engaged in that conquest since 623.  Muslims who seek to live in peace without joining Jihad are not good Muslims; they are hypocrites whom Moe cursed and assigned to Hell.  Allah commanded Muslims to fight the hypocrites along with us.

  • On this day, we gather because we have chosen hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord.

The ceremony at which he spoke was not ad-hoc, it is a traditional part of our system of peaceful turnover of power by elected officials.

  • On this day, we come to proclaim an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn out dogmas, that for far too long have strangled our politics.

Here we have a prime example of a narcissistic, arrogant demagogue so confident of his ability to hypnotize his victims that he tells them in plain language what he has done to them. His was a campaign of petty grievances and false promises; the worn out dogmas of Socialism.

  • We remain a young nation, but in the words of Scripture, the time has come to set aside childish things.

Childish things like sense of dependency & a sense of entitlement? Those are part of his campaign pitch, how can he abandon them now?

  • Starting today, we must pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, and begin again the work of remaking America.

The statement is ambiguous and dangerously broad.  What is he talking about? Is he calling for a new Constitutional Convention to undo the Bill of Rights? Does he intend to increase the powers and thereby the dangers inherent in government?

  • We will build the roads and bridges, the electric grids and digital lines that feed our commerce and bind us together. We will restore science to its rightful place, and wield technology’s wonders to raise health care’s quality and lower its cost. We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories. And we will transform our schools and colleges and universities to meet the demands of a new age. All this we can do. And all this we will do.

That indicates physical infrastructure. Building roads and bridges requires vast sums of money and  years to plan and execute. It involves lawyers and engineers, skilled equipment operators, machinery and trucks, asphalt and cement production. How many years does it take to turn out an engineer, and what will he do with his degree when the roads & bridges are finished?  A massive make work project will result in shortages & inflation, not in new jobs.  It will balloon the national debt beyond control.

Electric grids & digital communications are private industries, not government monopolies. Does President Obama intend to nationalize them or to subsidize electric utility  & telecommunications companies?  Or does he intend to burden them with new, higher cost structures so as to drive them out of business or inflate the rates we must pay?

What is the “rightful place” of science? Who displaced it, when and how?  The technological wonders that improved health care are extremely expensive and increased the fixed cost structure of the industry, pushing up the cost of health care. How do you lower cost by more of the same? Who gets screwed in this process?

Sunlight and wind power can not replace hydrocarbon fuels for land transportation.  Solar cells are too expensive and not sufficiently efficient.  Issues of scope, scale, efficiency and cost are always overlooked  by dreamers & schemers peddling snake oil.

Everybody promises to wave a magic wand to transform the educational system; nobody fulfills the promises. In Chicago, President Obama’s buddy ran the school system into the ground instead of improving it.  There are problems involving money, and there are problems involving people, both administrators and unions. None of those problems are easily soluble. The most important factor is beyond the President’s control: the abilities and attitudes of the students.  So long as the students are focused on video games, movies,  the idiot box, beer, sex and drugs, you can throw all your money at the schools without improving the outcome.

  • The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works - whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified.

Take a long, cold look at the Constitution; where does it assign those tasks to the federal government?  This is part of the culture of  dependency & unreasonable expectations which got us into the present mess. President Obama seeks to expand the role and power of government, the result will be less liberty, less prosperity, increased poverty and reduced security.

  • As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals. Our Founding Fathers, faced with perils we can scarcely imagine, drafted a charter to assure the rule of law and the rights of man, a charter expanded by the blood of generations. Those ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for expedience’s sake.

Rights are only enjoyed by those who seize, hold and zealously enforce them.  It would be right for all men to be free & prosperous, without slavery, repression & discrimination. Unfortunately, the world does not work that way. Many parts of the world are ruled by tyrants, the people living there do not share our freedoms. They can’t until they seize them as our forefathers seized them from King George.  The idea that murdering Muslims have a right to maim and kill our servicemen and contest their capture & detention in our courts of civil law is the absolute peak of suicidal idiocy.  There is no right to make war on us and get off Scott free. They have neither signed nor complied with the Geneva Conventions.  The idea that terrorists should enjoy privacy in their communications just because one party to the conversation is in America exposes the suicidal insanity of its holders.  The President is erecting and knocking down a straw man.

  • And so to all other peoples and governments who are watching today, from the grandest capitals to the small village where my father was born: know that America is a friend of each nation and every man, woman, and child who seeks a future of peace and dignity, and that we are ready to lead once more. Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions. They understood that our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead, they knew that our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint.

Future of peace and dignity? Its ok if they seek war and rapine here and now, but we’re their friend and benefactor if they seek peace in the future? Yeah, wrong!  War is the condition while any part of the world is in Kuffar control. Peace will obtain after Islam completes total world conquest.  What was sturdy about our temporary alliance with Stalin?  Without power, we have no protection. If we have power but are unwilling to use it, we have no protection.  Old Harry had the power and the will to use it, so WW2 came to and end with victory over Japan.

This last quoted paragraph exemplifies President Obama’s hypocrisy. He was going to put away petty grievances and false promises. He expects us to forget that and accept his old campaign shibboleths.  When an enemy declares genocidal intent and attacks you, there is no role for restraint. Humility has no place in this debate. Our ideals are superior, our rights are superior and our force is superior. We have a right to defend ourselves and our way of life. Those who made war upon us must pay its penalties.

Thursday
Jan222009

Israel at War

The Jewish Press has a most excellent  oped piece by Rabbi Steven Pruzansky which I urge you to read. It is full of facts and well founded opinions based upon those facts. These samples should be sufficient to whet your appetite for more.

Israel’s greatest weakness is its lack of a plan for victory, which suggests to the world that the outcome of this war - the eighth war in Gaza since 1948 - should be yet another round of Israeli concessions and the resuscitation of the futile land-for-peace formula. Nothing that has occurred has stripped most Israeli politicians of the illusions that one can negotiate evil away; that all that is required for peace to erupt is a little more talk, a little more time, and another signed agreement; that rockets from Gaza can be stopped without Israeli boots on the ground; and that victory is not possible - the first war in history in which victory has been pronounced an impossibility.

Nonetheless, the party with the end game usually prevails over the party that dithers, fantasizes and projects its good intentions and nobility on a cruel and heartless foe - and it is this that bears reflection in the days and months ahead.

 

The enemy deserves a heavy and sustained blow for each rocket it launches - or will launch - against our brethren. Compassion for the cruel is one of the most harmful emotions in man, and guilt over the preservation of Jewish life in the face of a brutal and sadistic enemy - one that uses its own children as cannon fodder - is un-Jewish, foolhardy, dangerous and counterproductive.

Please click the link, read the entire article and share it as widely as possible.

Monday
Dec012008

Response to Jim Carroll's Comment

The following quote is from an email notification linked to a comment thread at Radar Site.
jim.carroll has left a new comment on the post "From Mumbai to the United States of America: Are Y...":
Mr. Carroll has raised important issues which deserve full answers which are not practical to post under the limitations of the comment format. I have inserted superscripts to denote those issues and linked them to my responses in the ordered list below.

Oy, vey.

Mr. Gardner, while I truly appreciate the spirit (and particularly the rage) that inspired this list, it frightens me.1

I can agree with Number One -- should have been done years ago.

I can agree with Number Two, only so far as deporting the non-citizens. We had this same issue back in WW2, where there were proposals to deport Americans of Japanese Descent back to Japan. Problem was, that included an AWFUL lot of 3rd and 4th generation Americans, most of whom didn't speak any Japanese and were culturally American.2

Numbers Three and Four, however, are the ones that make me weep for our country. I am a Roman Catholic. Years ago, before I was born, in my small Iowa town, crosses were burned on our church lawn. I grew up dealing with subtle but constant anti-Catholicism; and when I left that small town it was no longer "subtle but constant," it was just constant. 30 years later, and it's not gotten better or worse, it's just become more accepted. 3

Two years ago (close to three), the City and County of San Francisco Board of Supervisors passed a resolution that officially labeled the Catholic Church’s moral teachings on homosexuality as “hateful,” “defamatory,” “insensitive” and “ignorant.” When the City and County were sued for discriminatory rhetoric, the U.S. district court found in favor of San Francisco, saying the Church started it.4

I cannot believe that if tactics such as you propose (declaring Islam to be an enemy ideology) were enacted against Muslims, that a few years (or even months) down the road similar actions would not also be enacted against Catholics. Catholics, after all, hold their allegiance to the Vatican, a foreign government with values that are in direct opposition to American values. And once the Catholics have been taken care of, then all the smaller churches that hold non-governmentally-approved positions can be dealt with. Numbers Five through Nine become irrelevant at this point.5

The only way you could get me to even consider Numbers Three and Four is if you could come up with a constitutionally-solid test that would prevent future American governments from using that precedent to "deal with" troublesome groups.6

And by the way: if you really mean Number Nine, and are prepared to drop a couple of megatons of righteous wrath on Mecca and Medina, then you had blessedly better be sure the G_D really Is On Our Side. Because the firestorm of anger directed at us if we were to drop the bombs and succeed ("Well, if Allah exists, why didn't he stop the bombs?") would be NOTHING compared to what would happen to us if we should drop the bombs, and thanks to a 10-cent resistor on a circuit board...

... the bombs failed to go off, thus proving to the world that Allah exists, Allah has saved them, and Allah wishes every Muslim in the world to take revenge out on the Great Satan.7

G_D help us all.



  1. Are you frightened by Roger's rage or by the items in his list? An American who is not outraged by Islamic terrorism is either ignorant or morally defective. Rage is one component of the flight or fight response generically selected for survival of the species. There is no place to flee to beyond the reach of Islam. Fighting is the only option. The tactics and strategy to be used are the only questions. What is your answer to them? Our rage is caused by a specific institution which is attacking our lives and way of life: Islam. It is not directed at and does not affect innocent institutions not involved in genocidal attacks against us. Your fear of the list elements appears to be a token of paranoia.

  2. Internment of Japanese is an irrelevant diversion from the issue at hand. Citizenship is not a defense against treason & sedition. Islam is an alien ideology which negates our rights to life, liberty, property, freedom of conscience & free expression. According to its founder, our blood and property are not sacred to Muslims. Muslims are commanded to make war upon Jews & Christians, those nearest them first, then those at a greater distance. because Muslims are given dispensation to deceive Kuffar to advance the cause of Islam, no Muslim can be trusted.

  3. There is no parallel between resistance to Islam and anti-Catholicism. Islam is intrinsically inimical to our rights to life & property. Islam is under a permanent demonic command to make war upon us. Islam has declared open season on us until we become Muslims. Mosques, Madrassahs & Islamic Centers are the places where hatred is inculcated & violence incited.

  4. The argument is perfectly irrelevant. This is not about queers, it is about life and death; Islam's license to kill, enslave, rape & dispossess. Our objection is to Islam's attacks, not Catholic doctrines. Catholicism does not mandate genocidal war; Islam does.

  5. Islam is an enemy ideology which has declared and is prosecuting perpetual war. Catholicism is not analogous to Islam. Moe preached genocidal conquest; Jesus preached gentle persuasion. There is no moral equivalence. There is no good cause for seeking abolition of Christianity.

  6. The Constitution prohibits passage of laws prohibiting the free exercise of religion. It does not define religion and imposes no test. Islam should be specifically excluded from the umbrella of first amendment protection because it sanctifies and mandates perpetual conquest, genocide & terrorism. A constitutional amendment is required for this purpose. My petition demanding an amendment is explained in Outlaw Islam!.

  7. Islam is doctrine driven, not grievance driven. Its doctrines are enshrined in the Qur'an & exemplified in Moe's Sunnah, to which I have linked in this blog post. Allah promised Muslims victory. In fact, the Arabic title of Surah 38 is Victory or Conquest. There is blessed good reason for testing & maintenance of our nuclear arsenal and for maintaining redundancy. So far, nukes have been used twice. Both worked, and to good effect. Any weapon is useless so long as the enemy believes we lack the resolve to use it on them. In fact, Islam can not be deterred because it seeks death as the ultimate ticket to a good seat in the celestial bordello. Islam must be destroyed; completely eliminated either by emancipating Allah's slaves or ushering them into Hell. When Islam can combine nukes with an effective delivery system, it will not hesitate. If we hesitate, we are lost.

Sunday
Jul152007

The Lame Excuse for Iraqi Benchmarks

Crocker and Petraeus speak some truths, if Senators are listening.

Thursday, July 12, 2007 12:01 a.m. EDT

Ryan Crocker, the U.S. Ambassador in Iraq, is a 36-year career diplomat who has served under seven administrations in Iran, Syria, Kuwait, Afghanistan, Lebanon and Pakistan. He's no partisan gunslinger. So it's worth listening to his views as Congressional Democrats and a growing number of Republicans press for a precipitous withdrawal from Iraq on the excuse that the Iraqi government hasn't met a set of political "benchmarks."

The Benchmark Excuse

 

The 'Benchmark' Excuse
Crocker and Petraeus speak some truths, if Senators are listening.

Thursday, July 12, 2007 12:01 a.m. EDT

Ryan Crocker, the U.S. Ambassador in Iraq, is a 36-year career diplomat who has served under seven administrations in Iran, Syria, Kuwait, Afghanistan, Lebanon and Pakistan. He's no partisan gunslinger. So it's worth listening to his views as Congressional Democrats and a growing number of Republicans press for a precipitous withdrawal from Iraq on the excuse that the Iraqi government hasn't met a set of political "benchmarks."

"The longer I'm here, the more I'm persuaded that Iraq cannot be analyzed by these kinds of discrete benchmarks," Mr. Crocker told the New York Times's John Burns in an interview on Saturday, referring to pending Iraqi legislation on an oil-sharing agreement and a relaxation of de-Baathification laws. "You could not achieve any of them, and still have a situation where arguably the country is moving in the right direction. And conversely, I think you could achieve them all and still not be heading towards stability, security and overall success in Iraq."

Mr. Crocker's comments are a useful reminder of the irrelevance--and disingenuousness--of much Washington commentary on Iraq. For proponents of early withdrawal, the "benchmarking" issue has provided a handy excuse to make the Iraqi government rather than al Qaeda the main culprit in the violence engulfing their country. A forthcoming Administration report indicating lagging political progress is certain to be seized on by Congress as it takes up a defense spending bill and debates an amendment ordering troop withdrawals by the fall. A proposal to mandate extended times between deployments (and thus force withdrawal) failed narrowly in the Senate yesterday, though not before winning the support of seven Republicans.

Nobody claims the Iraqi government is a model of democratic perfection, or that Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is the second coming of Lincoln. We advised the White House not to lobby against his predecessor. But Mr. Maliki's government is democratic and more inclusive than most reporting suggests, and it is fighting for its life against an enemy that uses car bombs and suicide bombers as its policy instruments. In an interview this week in the New York Post, General David Petraeus noted that while the performance of the Iraqi Army has been mixed, "their losses in June were three times ours." To suggest that Iraqis aren't willing to fight for their freedom is an insult to their families.

General Petraeus also noted that "the level of sectarian deaths in Baghdad in June was the lowest in about a year," evidence that in this key battlefield the surge is making progress. As a result, al Qaeda is being forced to pick its targets in more remote areas, as it did last week in the village of Amirli near Kirkuk, where more than 100 civilians were murdered. More U.S. troops and the revolt of Sunni tribal leaders against al Qaeda are the most hopeful indicators in many months that the insurgency can be defeated.

But that isn't going to happen under the timetable now contemplated by Congress. "I can think of few commanders in history who wouldn't have wanted more troops, more time or more unity among their partners," General Petraeus told the Post. "However, if I could only have one at this point in Iraq, it would be more time."

It's also not going to happen if Congress insists on using troop withdrawals to punish Iraqis for their supposed political delinquency. The central issue is whether the Iraqis can make those decisions without having to fear assassination as the consequence of political compromise. The more insistent Congress becomes about troop withdrawals, the more unlikely political reconciliation in Iraq becomes.

That said, it's becoming increasingly clear that the issue of reconciliation has become a smokescreen for American politicians who care for their own political fortunes far more than they do about the future of Iraq or the consequences of Iraq's collapse for U.S. interests in the Middle East. Here again, they could stand to listen to Mr. Crocker.

"You can't build a whole policy on a fear of a negative, but, boy, you've really got to account for it," he said. "In the States, it's like we're in the last half of the third reel of a three-reel movie, and all we have to do is decide we're done here . . . and we leave the theater and go on to something else. Whereas out here, you're just getting into the first reel of five reels, and ugly as the first reel has been, the other four and a half are going to be way, way worse."

Mr. Crocker is referring, of course, to the possibility of far nastier violence if the U.S. departs before Iraqi security forces can maintain order. Some will denounce this as a parade of horribles designed to intimidate Congress, but we also recall some of the same people who predicted that a Communist triumph in Southeast Asia would yield only peace, not the "boat people" and genocide. Those Americans demanding a U.S. retreat in Iraq will be directly responsible for whatever happens next.

Sunday
Jul152007

GWB On Benchmarks For Iraq

 

Benchmark Speech by GWB 7/12/07

THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. Thank you. Yesterday, America lost an extraordinary First Lady and a fine Texan, Lady Bird Johnson. She brought grace to the White House and beauty to our country. On behalf of the American people, Laura and I send our condolences to her daughters, Lynda and Luci, and we offer our prayers to the Johnson family.

Before I answer some of your questions, today I'd like to provide the American people with an update on the situation in Iraq. Since America began military operations in Iraq, the conflict there has gone through four major phases. The first phase was the liberation of Iraq from Saddam Hussein. The second phase was the return of sovereignty to the Iraqi people and the holding of free elections. The third phase was the tragic escalation of sectarian violence sparked by the bombing of the Golden Mosque in Samarra.

We've entered a fourth phase: deploying reinforcements and launching new operations to help Iraqis bring security to their people. I'm going to explain why the success of this new strategy is vital for protecting our people and bringing our troops home, which is a goal shared by all Americans. I'll brief you on the report we are sending to Congress. I'll discuss why a drawdown of forces that is not linked to the success of our operations would be a disaster.

As President, my most solemn responsibility is to keep the American people safe. So on my orders, good men and women are now fighting the terrorists on the front lines in Iraq. I've given our troops in Iraq clear objectives. And as they risk their lives to achieve these objectives, they need to know they have the unwavering support from the Commander-in-Chief, and they do. And they need the enemy to know that America is not going to back down. So when I speak to the American people about Iraq, I often emphasize the importance of maintaining our resolve and meeting our objectives.

As a result, sometimes the debate over Iraq is cast as a disagreement between those who want to keep our troops in Iraq and those who want to bring our troops home. And this is not the real debate. I don't know anyone who doesn't want to see the day when our brave servicemen and women can start coming home.

In my address to the nation in January, I put it this way: If we increase our support at this crucial moment we can hasten the day our troops begin coming home. The real debate over Iraq is between those who think the fight is lost or not worth the cost, and those that believe the fight can be won and that, as difficult as the fight is, the cost of defeat would be far higher.

I believe we can succeed in Iraq, and I know we must. So we're working to defeat al Qaeda and other extremists, and aid the rise of an Iraqi government that can protect its people, deliver basic services, and be an ally in the war against these extremists and radicals. By doing this, we'll create the conditions that would allow our troops to begin coming home, while securing our long-term national interest in Iraq and in the region.

When we start drawing down our forces in Iraq it will be because our military commanders say the conditions on the ground are right, not because pollsters say it will be good politics. The strategy I announced in January is designed to seize the initiative and create those conditions. It's aimed at helping the Iraqis strengthen their government so that it can function even amid violence. It seeks to open space for Iraq's political leaders to advance the difficult process of national reconciliation, which is essential to lasting security and stability. It is focused on applying sustained military pressure to rout out terrorist networks in Baghdad and surrounding areas. It is committed to using diplomacy to strengthen regional and international support for Iraq's democratic government.

Doing all these things is intended to make possible a more limited role in Iraq for the United States. It's the goal outlined by the bipartisan Iraq Study Group. It's the goal shared by the Iraqis and our coalition partners. It is the goal that Ambassador Crocker and General Petraeus and our troops are working hard to make a reality.

Our top priority is to help the Iraqis protect their population. So we have launched an offensive in and around Baghdad to go after extremists, to buy more time for Iraqi forces to develop, and to help normal life and civil society take root in communities and neighborhoods throughout the country. We're helping enhance the size, capabilities and effectiveness of the Iraqi security forces so the Iraqis can take over the defense of their own country. We're helping the Iraqis take back their neighborhoods from the extremists. In Anbar province, Sunni tribes that were once fighting alongside al Qaeda against our coalition are now fighting alongside our coalition against al Qaeda. We're working to replicate the success in Anbar and other parts of the country.

Two months ago, in the supplemental appropriations bill funding our troops, Congress established 18 benchmarks to gauge the progress of the Iraqi government. They required we submit a full report to Congress by September the 15th. Today my administration has submitted to Congress an interim report that requires us to assess -- and I quote the bill -- "whether satisfactory progress toward meeting these benchmarks is or is not being achieved."

Of the 18 benchmarks Congress asked us to measure, we can report that satisfactory progress is being made in eight areas. For example, Iraqis provided the three brigades they promised for operations in and around Baghdad. And the Iraqi government is spending nearly $7.3 billion from its own funds this year to train, equip and modernize its forces. In eight other areas, the Iraqis have much more work to do. For example, they have not done enough to prepare for local elections or pass a law to share oil revenues. And in two remaining areas, progress was too mixed to be characterized one way or the other.

Those who believe that the battle in Iraq is lost will likely point to the unsatisfactory performance on some of the political benchmarks. Those of us who believe the battle in Iraq can and must be won see the satisfactory performance on several of the security benchmarks as a cause for optimism. Our strategy is built on a premise that progress on security will pave the way for political progress. So it's not surprising that political progress is lagging behind the security gains we are seeing. Economic development funds are critical to helping Iraq make this political progress. Today, I'm exercising the waiver authority granted me by Congress to release a substantial portion of those funds.

The bottom line is that this is a preliminary report and it comes less than a month after the final reinforcements arrived in Iraq. This September, as Congress has required, General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker will return to Washington to provide a more comprehensive assessment. By that time, we hope to see further improvement in the positive areas, the beginning of improvement in the negative areas. We'll also have a clearer picture of how the new strategy is unfolding, and be in a better position to judge where we need to make any adjustments.

I will rely on General Petraeus to give me his recommendations for the appropriate troop levels in Iraq. I will discuss the recommendation with the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff. I will continue consultations with members of the United States Congress from both sides of the aisle, and then I'll make a decision.

I know some in Washington would like us to start leaving Iraq now. To begin withdrawing before our commanders tell us we are ready would be dangerous for Iraq, for the region, and for the United States. It would mean surrendering the future of Iraq to al Qaeda. It would mean that we'd be risking mass killings on a horrific scale. It would mean we'd allow the terrorists to establish a safe haven in Iraq to replace the one they lost in Afghanistan. It would mean increasing the probability that American troops would have to return at some later date to confront an enemy that is even more dangerous.

The fight in Iraq is part of a broader struggle that's unfolding across the region. The same region in Iran -- the same regime in Iran that is pursuing nuclear weapons and threatening to wipe Israel off the map is also providing sophisticated IEDs to extremists in Iraq who are using them to kill American soldiers. The same Hezbollah terrorists who are waging war against the forces of democracy in Lebanon are training extremists to do the same against coalition forces in Iraq. The same Syrian regime that provides support and sanctuary for Islamic jihad and Hamas has refused to close its airport in Damascus to suicide bombers headed to Iraq. All these extremist groups would be emboldened by a precipitous American withdrawal, which would confuse and frighten friends and allies in the region.

Nations throughout the Middle East have a stake in a stable Iraq. To protect our interests and to show our commitment to our friends in the region, we are enhancing our military presence, improving our bilateral security ties, and supporting those fighting the extremists across the Middle East. We're also using the tools of diplomacy to strengthen regional and international support for Iraq's democratic government.

So I'm sending Secretary Gates and Secretary Rice to the region in early August. They will meet with our allies, reemphasize our commitment to the International Compact of Sharm el Sheikh, reassure our friends that the Middle East remains a vital strategic priority for the United States.

There is a conversion of visions between what Iraqi leaders want, what our partners want and what our friends in the region want, and the vision articulated by my administration, the Iraq Study Group and others here at home. The Iraqis do not want U.S. troops patrolling their cities forever, any more than the American people do. But we need to ensure that when U.S. forces do pull back that terrorists and extremists cannot take control.

The strategy that General Petraeus and the troops he commands are now carrying out is the best opportunity to bring us to this point. So I ask Congress to provide them with the time and resources they need. The men and women of the United States military have made enormous sacrifices in Iraq. They have achieved great things, and the best way to begin bringing them home is to make sure our new strategy succeeds.

Benchmark Assessment Report
Benchmark Report
Iraq Strategy Review