Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
I've got a bit of time, why not waste it trying to help you learn how to read.
You see, it's all the words that count- and thier context that give sentences meaning.
'
Your quote:
"Right wing talk show hosts don't lie"
What I actually said:
"First you misread my post to say I said right wing radio hosts never lie"
Do youi knaow what that word means?? IT's a qualifier- probably way beyond your level of comprehension.
You see, youa ctually started the topic of lying with your atatement about rught wing radio doing nothing but lying
If in your pathetic world you consider that a victory- more power to ya
Don;t forget the seat belt when you get on the short bus
I note also you can't bring yourself to actually answer my question and provide examples of left wing lying.
Hype Smackdown: iPhone v. Paris Hilton
By Jeff Diehl
June 28th, 2007
iPhone v. Paris Hilton
It's a battle of pop culture titans as two empires -- one high-tech, one high-rise -- clash in explosive PR fury. Since these two heavyweight memes have climbed into the competitive media ring of their own volition, we thought we'd size them up for you. As Stephen Colbert would say: "Pick a side -- we're at war!"
iPhone: Simple to use.
Paris Hilton: Simple.
iPhone: Questionable protection against viruses.
Paris Hilton: Has herpes.
iPhone: Critics complained battery life too short.
Paris Hilton: Critics complained prison life too short.
iPhone: Provides driving directions.
Paris Hilton: Knows how to drive. (Sort of.)
iPhone: Responds to touch from multiple fingers at once.
Paris Hilton: Responds to touch from multiple fingers at once.
iPhone: Wants to be held by everyone.
Paris Hilton: Wants to be held by her mother.
iPhone: Sexy footage leaked onto the net.
Paris Hilton: Sexy footage leaked onto the net.
iPhone: Appeared in multi-million ad campaign.
Paris Hilton: Appeared in "House of Wax."
iPhone: Everyone wants what's in the box.
Paris Hilton: Everyone knows what's in the box.
Feel free to make your own comparisons in the comments...
You've got it backwards here- it's DiFi and her ilk that are trying to supress free speech.
Though I'm sure you think that the popularity of right wing talk radio is a conspiracy and not a populist movement
Being libertarians, they have had issues with civil liberties issues with Bush
I check them everyday- always interesting reads
http://www.qando.net/Default.aspx?tabid=38
they're libertarians
First you more or less suggest talk radio freaks don't lie. And now it's........"well maybe they do BUT not just the on right
Hey dunce, I know reading the trash you post is difficult, but if I can hold my nose and do it, you certainly should- you wasted the bandwidth to post the garbage in the first place.
YOU SAID " I think both right wing and left wing liars should be called on the carpet and be required to correct themselves when they're caught lying.
First you misread my post to say I said right wing radio hosts never lie, then you misread my post again and forget about your post that started the whole sequence
Early onset Alzheimer's???
"FAIRNESS" DOCTRINE GOOD NEWS: "The House votes 309-115 for a Mike Pence amendment barring the FCC from imposing it."
posted at 07:29 PM by Glenn Reynolds Permalink
DiFi KMA
So, debates take precedence over inaction in the face of the first WTC attack and the subsequent terrorist attacks??
Talk about skewed priorities
Clinton was the president- the COC- he ahd a duty to recognize the threat and act accordingly
Do you think he did so??
Mayberry was predicting the chaos in the middle east for decades
He was spot on
Operation Phantom Thunder: The Spin Begins, Part II
Posted by: McQ
This time it is Juan Cole doing the spinning. Leveraging off of Sen. Richard Lugar's premature dismissal of the surge, Cole says:
His alarm has been illustrated by the difficulties the U.S. and Iraqi militaries faced in the recent offensive operation dubbed "Operation Arrowhead Ripper," aimed at subduing Baquba (pop. 300,000), the restive capital of Diyala province, located 31 miles northeast of Baghdad. American generals admitted that 80 percent of the guerrilla leadership there had slipped away, and that the Iraqi army lacked the equipment and training to hold areas taken in difficult hand-to-hand fighting. The U.S. military compounded its public-relations problem by implausibly branding virtually everyone it fought or killed in the Sunni-majority city as "al-Qaida."
The failure of the offensive casts doubt not only on its purpose of securing swaths of territory, but also on the way the strategy has been sold to the American public.
One more time:
"The center of gravity for the surge is Baghdad."
I cannot emphasize that point enough.
Cole is concentrating his "failure" message on an operation outside of Baghdad comprised on 3 brigades of a 25 brigade operation. But he's presenting it as a failure of the whole. Additionally, he's misinformed or doesn't understand the purpose of the operation or the desire end-state.
With that in mind, let's take apart the Cole paragraph.
First the last part. This "everything is al-Qaeda" meme has been thoroughly discredited. It was a meme started by Josh Marshall and Glenn Greenwald and has absolutely no basis in fact as Connecticut Yankee demonstrated here and here. And I also provided a quote from a June 22nd briefing given by LTG Ray Odierno which directly contradicts the claim:
Operation Phantom Thunder is a corps-level offensive operation that began on 15 June to defeat al Qaeda insurgents and extremists, deny enemy safe havens, interdict movement, logistics and communications. It is an open-ended operation that will extend through the summer and will be done in conjunction with civil-military operations to support political and economic efforts.
It consists of carefully synchronized simultaneous operations at division and brigade level to clear al Qaeda, Sunni insurgents and Shi'a extremists in, near and around Baghdad. It also includes aggressive shaping operations by our Special Operations Forces focused on al Qaeda in Iraq and other special groups.
Apparently Cole couldn't be bothered to research the assertion, preferring instead to use the unproven claim because it better fits the spin he was trying to give his failure message.
Part two, of course, is the "80 percent of the guerrilla leadership there had slipped away" meme. I pointed out previously that his number would be the bone opponents to the war would grab and run with. And Cole is no exception.
As expected, Cole states the "offensive" is a failure and implies that's the primary reason. But as pointed out previously, that has little if anything to do with the primary mission. What it points out, however, is Cole's complete misunderstanding of the purpose of the operation in Babuqua. As LTC David Kilcullen, one of the architects of our counter-insurgency doctrine patiently explained about Babuqua:
When we speak of "clearing" an enemy safe haven, we are not talking about destroying the enemy in it; we are talking about rescuing the population in it from enemy intimidation. If we don't get every enemy cell in the initial operation, that's OK. The point of the operations is to lift the pall of fear from population groups that have been intimidated and exploited by terrorists to date, then win them over and work with them in partnership to clean out the cells that remain - as has happened in Al Anbar Province and can happen elsewhere in Iraq as well.
The "terrain" we are clearing is human terrain, not physical terrain. It is about marginalizing al Qa'ida, Shi'a extremist militias, and the other terrorist groups from the population they prey on. This is why claims that "80% of AQ leadership have fled" don't overly disturb us: the aim is not to kill every last AQ leader, but rather to drive them off the population and keep them off, so that we can work with the community to prevent their return.
Or, said shortly and sweetly: to this point, mission accomplished.
Cole then makes the following claims about the 5th Iraqi Army Division, presently deployed in the Baquba area:
The Iraqi 5th Army, which is largely Shiite, was supported by special police commandos from the Ministry of the Interior, a Shiite force mostly drawn from the Badr Corps paramilitary of the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council — which was trained by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps. In practical terms, the U.S. military was helping a Shiite government and a Shiite security force impose itself on a majority Sunni population.
[...]
In mid-May, the Iraqi government relieved the 5th Army commander in Baquba, Brig. Gen. Shakir Hulail Hussein al-Kaabi, of his command. The U.S. military suspected him of seeking Shiite dominance in the mixed Diyala province, and of lending surreptitious support to Shiite militias and death squads while conducting punitive campaigns of his own against Sunni Arabs. After months of pressure from U.S. generals, the Shiite government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki finally relented.
The implication? The 5th is part of the problem, not part of the solution. Yet Michael Yon, who is actually on the ground in Baquba and monitoring both the situation and the 5th IAD says:
The Fifth Iraqi Army Division is considered an increasingly competent group of fighters, and from the limited scope of 5th IA that I personally witnessed, that judgment seems correct. The 5th is committed to battle. Whereas the Iraqi Army is coming into the fight, and playing increasingly critical roles, the local police force is less impressive.
The part of Cole's assertions left unaddressed, of course, was the result of the relief of the 5th's commander. Obviously when a commander is relieved, the new commander is going to bring in his own people. If the 5th is the problem Cole believes it to be, Yon, a practiced and experienced observer, certainly isn't seeing it. Yon does, however, see a problem with the local police, which, of course, everyone has acknowledged to be a problem for quite some time.
Cole then tries to support his assertions by describing various and sundry alliances and how these are misreported or misrepresented. Yet, to that point, Cole has seriously misreported and misrepresented everything about the Baquba operation. Why would anyone who realizes that take anything he says afterward with more than a grain of salt?
Cole, like many, are declaring the surge a failure based on their misunderstanding of the purpose of a supporting operation, dated information and baseless assertions made by bloggers such as Greenwald. What Cole attempts to do is paint a false picture which depicts the effort in Baquba as the main effort as well as an effort which is ignoring one of the biggest threats in Iraq, the Mahdi army. Additionally, he infers that we're essentially arming the Mahdi army through the 5th IAD.
Yet Bill Roggio reports:
While the major offensive operation is occurring in the Baghdad Belts against al Qaeda and Sunni insurgent holdouts, major raids continue against Sadr's forces and the Iranian cells in Baghdad and the south. Two major engagements occurred against Sadr's forces since Monday — one in Amara and one in Nasariyah. Scores of Mahdi Army fighters were killed during both engagements after Iraqi Special Operations Forces, backed by Coalition support, took on Sadr's forces.
The Iraqi government and Multinational Forces Iraq are sending a clear message to Sadr: when the fighting against al Qaeda is finished, the Iranian backed elements of the Mahdi Army are next on the list if they are not disbanded. Also, the Iraqi military and Multinational Forces Iraq possesses enough forces to take on Sadr's militia if they attempt to interfere with current operations.
So much for "all al Qaeda all the time."
Which brings us to the statement that finally makes an informed reader recognize that Cole has absolutely no idea of the scope of the mission or what is meant by "synchronized simultaneous operations":
Games of Whack-a-Mole like those being played in Diyala province at present are highly unlikely to deliver a decisive victory to the U.S. military or to its Iraqi allies.
That's simply uninformed twaddle. It is colossally ignorant. If the effort in Diyala were a stand alone operation, Cole could make such a claim. But since it is one of many "synchonized simultaneous operations", something he apparently doesn't understand, he hasn't a leg to stand on.
Maybe, just maybe, Cole will avail himself of other sources besides Greewald. For instance, Frederick Kagan, who explains the overall strategy in recent testimony to Congress:
Generals Petraeus and Odierno did not allocate the majority of the new combat power they received to Baghdad. Only 2 of the additional Army brigades went into the city. The other 3 Army brigades and the equivalent of a Marine regiment were deployed into the areas around Baghdad that our generals call the "Baghdad belts," including Baqubah in Diyala province. The purpose of this deployment was not to clear-and-hold those areas, but to make possible the second phase of the operation that began on June 15. The purpose of this operation—Phantom Thunder—is to disrupt terrorist and militia networks and bases outside of Baghdad that have been feeding the violence within the city. Most of the car bomb and suicide bomb networks that have been supporting the al Qaeda surge since January are based in these belt areas, and American commanders have rightly recognized that they cannot establish stable security in the capital without disrupting these networks and their bases.
But even this operation—the largest coordinated combat operation the U.S. has undertaken since the invasion in 2003—is not the decisive phase of the current strategy. It is an operation designed to set the preconditions for a successful clear-and-hold operation that will probably begin in late July or early August within Baghdad itself. That is the operation that is designed to bring security to Iraq's capital in a lasting way that will create the space for political progress that we all desire.
As Kagan explains, we're in the second phase of a multi-phase operation which is not centered in Baquba as Cole attempts to infer and as I warned you would happen. As Kagan says:
To say that the current plan has failed is simply incorrect. It might fail, of course, as any military/political plan might fail. Indications on the military side strongly suggest that success—in the form of dramatically reduced violence by the end of this year—is quite likely. Indications on the political side are more mixed, but are also less meaningful at this early stage before security has been established.
So to the Juan Coles of this world, it might be useful if you made an attempt to actually understand the operation and its goals, not to mention where we are in its execution before declaring it a failure. And that goes for Sen. Lugar as well.
(Part one spinning Operation Phantom Thunder here.)
Well, I think..... you're an ankle biting idiot
LOL, I knew you'd have a list or right wing "lies" that probably excites you to no end.
I was thinking left wing lies
St. Paul Saints introduce iPig
The Associated Press - Thursday, June 28, 2007
ST. PAUL, Minn.
One day before Apple's highly anticipated iPhone takes the world by storm, the St. Paul Saints are hoping their version really brings home the bacon.
The minor league baseball team with a knack for catchy promotions plans to introduce the iPig before Thursday night's game against the Lincoln Saltdogs.
The Saints, who employ a pig mascot that carries baseballs to umpires during games, say they have developed a live pig that "executes all the functions of the new iPhone" and "turns the animal into an all-purpose technological marvel."
This is only partly a joke.
The Saints plan to sell an actual pig - with speakers mounted on its side, a pouch to hold an iPod shuffle and a phone - for $299, or roughly half of the retail price of the new iPhone.
"This is the most anticipated pig since Porky," Saints general manager/executive vice president Derek Sharrer said in statement. "Taking on a major player like Apple is daunting, but our sense is that Apple has exposed a niche that these pigs fill. Our critics will say there's no market for trying to reinvent the pig. We'll see."
A news release promoting the launch says the iPig is "extremely well-trained and won't run all over the place, staying within a few feet of its owner at all times. Plus, it's virtually impossible to misplace the iPig."
There seems, however, to be one catch. The Saints say that they have produced exactly one iPig to date, generating concerns about supply and demand.
Drawbacks to the iPig include messy cleanup on a daily basis and a possibility of generating some jealousy from this year's pig mascot - Garrison Squeallor.
It's the latest campy promotion from an organization with a history for headline-grabbing stunts. The Saints gave away Randy Moss hood ornaments in 2004 after the former Minnesota Vikings receiver had a run-in with a traffic control officer and also issued neck ties in 2002 during Bud Selig Tie Night after the MLB commissioner ended the All-Star game in a tie.
M
right and left talk radio should be called on the carpet and be required to correct themselves when they're caught lying
Just curious if you can think of examples or were you just being PC here?
So, you think that Clinton's respsonse to the first WTC bombing was adequate???
Where was Rudy wrong here??
http://weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/378fmxyz.asp
Again, who's gonna be the truth monitor??
I could cite the evidence in the linked article above and you- without having donne the exhaustive research and reading the documentws first hand would dismiss it all as lies
Another instance of the libs being invasive when it comes to civil liberties. They KNOW BETTER, so it's their duty to create the Mommy state to take care of all the unwashed.
The assumption is that people are unable to think for themselves because they hold views the snobbish libs don't agree with. Just look at all the southern bashing that goes on on this thread
Bingo
Judging by the number of people on this thread willing to believe any sort of conspiracy theory on the flimsiest of evidence it's gotta be a good amount
They know what happened because they saw it on someones grainy edited video on the web
Pathetic
There is tons of evidence linking AQ and Iraq. That's a far cry from saying that they "attacked us on 9/11?
Rush citing an article doesn't mean he is espousing the same idea.
Nice try, but not actual evidence of your idiot ideas posted previously.
The larger issue, that you seem to avoid, is whether you think that right wing talk radio should be censored by some sort of "fairness doctrine" ???
Well, Mr short bus, consider all the left wing biased trash that goes for "news" on NPR daily.
Again it's the liberal attitude that they know best for the country and the people that don't agree with them are idiots and not to be trusted to engage in rational thought.
Please provide a link to anyone on popular talk radio that has said that Iraq attacked us on 9/11 and that stockpiles of WMD were found in Iraq at the start of the war.
Hint: you'll be wasting your time
Another hint: your statement that all right wing talk hosts do is feed people lies is typical of the elitist bias that exists among most delusional libs. Rather than respecting differences of opinion, they just classify all dissenting opinions as " lies " and want to ban that free speech. And then they whine about erosion of civil liberties
Truly delusional.
Another hint: There is no right wing bias sweeping the country. The country has been center/right for decades now. The dems are just too deluded to recognize it. They blame their electoral defeats on " not getting their message out " and lies from the right.
Talk about misinformed morons, how about all the idiots here- easymoney as the leader - who actually believe the most ridiculous conspiracy theories about 9/11 and almost everything that occurs daily. I don't think the percentage of idiots is really any higher on the right than it is on the left
Gearing up to pass the Fairness Doctrine
Posted by: McQ
The first indicator that an attempt to revive the Fairness Doctrine was afoot was the publishing of a study on political talk radio put out by a liberal think tank which claimed the genre suffered from a "structural imbalance" that needed to be fixed by Congress.
Then there was the little he-said-she-said incident in which Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) said he'd overheard Senators Hillary Clinton (D-NY) and Barbara Boxer (D-CA) complaining about right-wing talk radio and their desire for a "legislative fix". That has been followed by a plethora of statements which seem to give credence to the feeling that Democrats will again try to regulate talk-radio and mute its predominantly conservative voice. For instance, Sen. Dick Durbin:
"It's time to reinstitute the Fairness Doctrine," said Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.). "I have this old-fashioned attitude that when Americans hear both sides of the story, they're in a better position to make a decision."
Sen Diane Feinstein:
"I believe very strongly that the airwaves are public and people use these airwaves for profit," she said. "But there is a responsibility to see that both sides and not just one side of the big public questions of debate of the day are aired and are aired with some modicum of fairness."
Of course the obvious answer to their concern is to direct public supported National Public Radio to air "both sides", but for some reason, that seems to be persistently left out of this debate. Instead, it is all about commercial talk radio and nothing else. No newspapers, no TV, no satellite radio, no internet. Only terrestrial talk-radio, mostly on the AM band.
The latest to weigh in is John Kerry. That was from an interview today on WNYC radio (hey, where's the conservative rebuttal? Just kidding.).
Now I hate to be one of those "if'n yer fer it, I'm agin it" types, but John Kerry just brings that out in me. His world views and mine are about as far apart as two can be. But in a larger sense, this is a fundamental political free speech problem which the Democrats seem bound and determined to attempt to regulate. John Kerry, et. al., have never really struck me as the types who much care what the Consitution says if adhering to its strictures doesn't serve their political purposes. And this is a perfect example.
Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN) is fighting back in the House with a piece of legislation called the "Broadcaster Freedom Act" which would do the following:
"The Broadcaster Freedom Act will prohibit the Federal Communications Commission from prescribing rules, regulations, or policies that will reinstate the requirement that broadcasters present opposing viewpoints in controversial issues of public importance. The Broadcaster Freedom Act will prevent the FCC or any future President from reinstating the Fairness Doctrine."
In other words, he's asking Congress to prohibit the FCC from reinstating the Fairness Doctrine as well as prohibiting the President, now and in the future, from issuing an executive order or regulatory change which would reinstate it.
Sounds "fair" to me, if you believe that political speech should be protected and all of that. Notice that the 1st Amendment never states speech must be 'fair' or 'balanced', it simply states that "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech". I continue to wonder what part of "shall make no law" they don't understand.
Pence, along with Jeff Flake (R-AZ) and Jeb Hensarling (R-TX)have also introduced an amendment to the Financial Services Appropriations Bill, which for whatever reason the FCC is funded, to prevent any funds from being used to enforce the Fairness Doctrine. A part of "using the purse strings" portion of the power of Congress to attempt to defeat any Democratic push to enforce it. It will, most likely go down in flames but at least someone is attempting to thwart this pernicious and misguided attempt to control free political speech.
Pence makes a very important point which needs to be understood if this attempt at government control of political views on the airwaves succeeds. In all likelihood, it won't 'balance' anything. Instead of stations placing liberal hosts on the air in an attempt to balance the conservative views (such as those of Limbaugh and Hannity), because of legal and administrative costs, they'll most likely not carry either. They'll simply change the programing to pablum or a different format.
I don't think anyone, to include the liberal side (not counting their politicians who would love that outcome) want that as an end-state.
Anyway, thought I'd update you. I posted earlier in the week concerning why I found the liberal argument concerning talk radio to be wanting. In light of this renewed push for speech control, it might be worth rereading. And take a moment to reread this as well.
And the democratically controlled Congress to 19%????
Radical right talk radio may have helped sustain 6 1/2 years of the worst presidency in US history but it has also given voters a lesson in what radical conservatism feels like and it's been soundly rejected.
That's the meme the libs use to try and disguise their lack of understanding of the political dynamic in this country.
Talk radio isn't "radical", it's merely a reflection of the right/center views of probably close to half the country. And that irks the libs. The Dems haven't been losing elections since the mid 90's because of talk radio- it was because their views weren't supported by a majority of the country. IF the Dems return to power, it won't be because their views are again representing the country, it will be because the Reps are no longer acting according to those principles.
Talk radio began gaining prominence in the mid 80's because NONE of the other media sources had a right of center bias or was even close to being balanced. They were all left wing and continue to be so to this day.
The market has spoken and talk radio fills a need. Just look at the fate of Air America to see the need that is being filled by right wing talk radio.
It's the height of hypocrisy of the libs on one hand to whine about the erosion of personal freedom under Bush and then on the other had to have them try and force feed liberal views on to talk radio
Amazing how talk radio is the ONLY media form that has a decidedly right wing bias and it just drives the libs crazy.
YOu're just gonna have to live with that reality
Get your hands off our talk radio
Jun 27, 2007 3:00 AM (7 hrs ago)
by The Washington DC Examiner Newspaper
F
WASHINGTON (Map, News) - Why do liberals like Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., keep trying to tell the rest of us what political opinions we must listen to in the media?
Feinstein says she is “looking at” reviving the Fairness Doctrine to counteract the decidedly conservative bent of talk radio. Former President Reagan and a Democratic Congress repealed the Fairness Doctrine in 1987.
She wants to bring it back because she thinks “one-sided programming” pushes the American people into “extreme views” — such as their current opposition to the Bush/Kennedy/McCain immigration bill. She wants “an opportunity to present the other side” by forcing radio stations to offer more liberal fare.
Of course, nobody thinks a revived Fairness Doctrine would only be applied to radio. It wouldn’t be long before we would hear liberals demanding that broadcast TV and the Internet be made “fair,” too.
What Feinstein really wants is for federal bureaucrats to decide what political opinion programming we should hear. She presumes to know better than listeners what is “fair.”
We remind the senator that talk radio emerged only after decades of federal bureaucrats suppressing the expression of conservative viewpoints from the public airwaves. If Feinstein doubts this history, she should read “The Good Guys, the Bad Guys and the First Amendment” by Fred Friendly. The former CBS News president details how John F. Kennedy and Robert F. Kennedy were especially enthusiastic users of the Fairness Doctrine to suppress political criticism of their policies from religious conservatives.
Feinstein’s comments are of a piece with other liberals who in recent months have been loudly talking about reviving the Fairness Doctrine, most notably Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio. There is also that infamous “legislative fix” conversation that Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., and Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., deny ever having.
What is especially revealing about these trial balloons for renewed regulation of political speech is that America already has an incredible diversity of media giving vent to opinion and commentary on every conceivable issue in public policy. Thanks to the Internet, America is in the midst of an unprecedented political news and commentary explosion. Anybody with an opinion can start a blog that can be read by anyone in the world with an Internet connection. There are literally millions of political blogs, podcasts, video blogs and blog-based radio operations providing analyses from every conceivable ideological position.
Political expression in America is being liberated as has never before been done in human history. Why does that bother Feinstein, Boxer, Clinton, Kucinich and other Fairness Doctrine advocates?
Drilling for Justice
Army officers have been pleased with Michael Gordon’s portrayal of the events in Baqubah.
On 19 June American forces sealed off Baqubah and began attacking targets within the city. The immediate goal of Arrowhead Ripper was to free Baqubah of al Qaeda, by trapping and killing its members, but according to American officers here, public remarks by senior military officials may have flushed many AQI leaders before the attack. Despite this frustrating and significant setback, progress toward the end-state goal of Arrowhead Ripper—turning over Baqubah to Iraqi government control—appears to be working, at least in terms of the removal of the current AQI leadership and its quasi-government. There are conflicting signals about how many of the AQI leadership escaped before Arrowhead Ripper launched. This weekend’s capture of a possible high-value target in Baqubah indicates that not all AQI leaders successfully fled the city before the attack.
Media reports indicating that many top leaders escaped before Arrowhead Ripper began appear to be mostly true. But other information suggests some AQI leaders are trapped just down the road from where I write. In addition to the seven men who were caught trying to escape while dressed as women, there is information that some AQI leaders remain trapped in a constricting cordon.
Senior Officer in the Iraqi 5th Division during meeting in Baqubah. The Iraqi Army in Baqubah is far more capable than the police.
For security reasons, the Iraqi Army (IA) was not included in the initial planning of Arrowhead Ripper, yet with each succeeding day the IA has taken a larger role in the unfolding attack. The Fifth Iraqi Army Division is considered an increasingly competent group of fighters, and from the limited scope of 5th IA that I personally witnessed, that judgment seems correct. The 5th is committed to battle. Whereas the Iraqi Army is coming into the fight, and playing increasingly critical roles, the local police force is less impressive.
On the night of the 23 June, for instance, a police checkpoint called in to say they were under heavy small-arms attack. The same checkpoint then called frantically saying they were under RPG attack. The next even more frantic call was about a mortar attack. Yet when a Shadow UAV and Apache helicopters were dispatched, they saw no activity in the immediate area. Colonel Steve Townsend, commander of 3-2 Stryker Brigade Combat Team, brought this up to a senior Iraqi officer at a meeting on Sunday the 24th, and the Iraqi officer answered with some disgust that those particular police panic at the sound of two shots, and that each member of that police detail needs two Humvees protecting them in order to feel safe.
Also on the 24th, while I accompanied LTC Fred Johnson at a downtown meeting regarding humanitarian assistance, local enemy fighters were attacking the Iraqi Army convoys each time they passed by, about 500 yards from the meeting. The sounds of battles sometimes echoed through the police hallways, yet the Iraqi police refused to respond. Two of Johnson’s men went up to the dangerous rooftop, and SSG Matt Hudgeon patiently waited for a shot on a man about 500 yards away who had been attacking IA convoys with RPGs. Hudgeon saw the man fire two rockets, and he kept trying to get crosshairs on the enemy. When he finally got a shot, Matt steadied his breathing, slowly exhaled and squeezed the trigger of his M-14. Bam! Matt’s bullet shot the man in the stomach, and the man rolled off the two-story roof, landing in the dust next to his RPG.
Iraqi police were called—they were all around us—to recover the body or at least the weapon, but one hour later when we went to lunch, the body was still on the ground near the RPG. Although we tried to get to the RPG later, we were in a hurry to get to a cache that had just been discovered by the Iraqi Army, and our Navy and Army were on it. An F-16 was about to drop a 500-pound bomb onto a house rigged with explosives 300 yards from us and the cache but the F-16 broke off to refuel. By then, we were heading to another meeting. The body and the RPG were abandoned.
There is much work to do here, especially if the Iraqi Police continue to perform below expectations. The absence of strong local leadership is a large part of the reason AQI was able to move in and set up a shadow government in Baqubah, complete with its own court system, torture house and prison. These three pegs of the AQI justice system have been found here in the past week. The judges who administer Sharia law and issue fatwas are called Muftis. A Mufti is a “high value target” because he would have deep connections in AQI in order to have such a trusted position of power.
Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) had tarnished its name here by publicly attacking and murdering children, videotaping beheadings, all while imposing harsh punishments on Iraqi civilians found guilty of violating morality laws prohibiting activities like smoking. The AQI installed Sharia court had sanctioned the amputation of the two “smoking fingers” for those who violated anti-smoking laws. In part because local sentiment was shifting against it, AQI synthesized with other groups and undertook an image makeover, christening itself “The Islamic State of Iraq.” But the new name was just lipstick on a pig here.
On the evening of the 24th I spoke with a local Iraqi official, Colonel Faik, who said the Muftis would order the severance of the two fingers used to hold a cigarette for any Iraqis caught smoking. Other reports, from here in Diyala and also in Anbar, allege that smokers are murdered by AQI. Most Iraqis smoke and this particular prohibition appeared to have earned the ire of many locals. After an American unit cleared an apartment complex on the 23rd, LTC Smiley, the battalion commander, reported that residents didn’t ask for food and water, but cigarettes. In other parts of Baqubah, people have been celebrating the routing of AQI by lighting up and smoking cigarettes.
Other AQI edicts included beatings for men who refused to grow beards, and corporal punishments for obscene sexual suggestiveness, defined by such “loose” behavior as carrying tomatoes and cucumbers in the same bag. These fatwas were not eagerly embraced by most Iraqis, and the taint traveled back to the Muftis who sat in supreme judgment. Locals, who are increasingly helpful in pointing out and celebrating the downfall of AQI here, said that during the initial Arrowhead Ripper attack the morning of the 19th, AQI murdered five men. Townsend’s men found the buried corpses behind an AQI prison, exactly where they’d been told to look for the group grave. Locals also directed Townsend’s men to a torture house. Peering through a window, American soldiers saw knives, swords, bindings and drills. AQI is well-known for its macabre eagerness to drill into kneecaps, elbows, ribs, skulls, and other parts of victims.
One local Mufti who was said to have always worn a hood and sunglasses—and to have somehow disguised his voice—was pointed out to the Iraqi Army this weekend, who promptly captured him. Iraqi officials said today that although they did not previously know that this man was a Mufti, his name had been on their target list. The Mufti is being questioned and his name has not been released.
Colonel Steve Townsend, commander of 3-2 Stryker Brigade Combat Team in Baqubah, takes a break from the streets to conduct a commanders’ meeting.
Although the battle is still unfolding here in Baqubah, Colonel Townsend reports that at least 50 AQI have been killed. Townsend’s subordinate commanders put the number as high as 100. More than 60 suspects are in custody, but Townsend is unsure how many of the suspects are truly AQI versus innocent men who will be released.
American losses include one soldier killed in action, with 21 wounded. One Bradley and one Stryker have been destroyed. The low numbers of friendly casualties have been largely due to the slow, methodical clearing operation where success is not measured against the clock. In meeting after meeting, I have seen Townsend stress to his subordinate commanders the importance of moving deliberately and at their own pace. Given the massive amounts of IEDs that have been found, my guess is that we might have taken dozens more killed by now if the clearing operation had been rushed. Doubtless many American lives have been saved by locals just saying “stop,” and pointing to bombs.
Another part of the success is just plain luck. On Sunday for instance, soldiers entered a home filled with explosives, but somehow escaped without injury. About 15 houses and buildings have been found rigged to explode. The Air Force has helped by dropping bombs on some of the rigged homes, and MLRS missiles have been fired into others. Early on Sunday morning, before embarking on the mission, I was doing a rapid bit of bird photography with an ornithologist named Captain Pike, when an Apache helicopter shot 30mm cannon into a car bomb downtown. We did not see the attack, but a mushroom cloud billowed in the background as I was rushing to photograph a beautiful bee-catcher. (Iraq has fascinating array of birds, and when this war is over, I’m coming back with a long lens and a tripod.)
The fight goes on. Sunday, Colonel Townsend said he was considering bypassing one area where many if not most of the homes appear to be rigged to explode. He doesn’t want to level the whole neighborhood. Al Qaeda has hijacked people’s homes and businesses. To save his own soldiers’ lives, he’ll destroy what needs to be destroyed, but always mindful that most of the citizens of Baqubah did not volunteer to turn their homes into bombs. Townsend’s people have learned, after hard fighting and serious losses throughout Iraq, that the best counter-IED “technology” we have is just getting out of our fighting vehicles and talking with Iraqis. Although I have seen Iraqis do this, most cannot safely shout “stop” and point to IEDs while our soldiers are driving by. Surely we have many intractable enemies here, but the Iraqis have proven countless times that engagement works.
But the enemies who remain here keep on fighting. This weekend, while soldiers continued clearing Baqubah on foot, Townsend’s soldiers returned to an area they had just cleared. The squad leader spotted a vegetable can that had not been there minutes earlier. But it was too late: the vegetable can blew up, the squad went down from the blast, and the enemy started shooting. It was all in a day’s work here. All six of those soldiers are expected to return to duty by today, Monday.
It would be nice to wrap up this dispatch with a neat ending, but accuracy requires this ending be jagged. While typing these last few words, there have been explosions, gunfire, and the sounds of helicopters and jets. The fighting has decreased remarkably over the last few days, but the last pockets have not been cleared, and nobody knows what awaits. So the battle is on and it’s time to get back with the soldiers as they clear Baqubah inch by inch, street by street.
http://www.michaelyon-online.com/wp/drilling-for-justice.htm
IMPEACH CHENEY IF YOU WANT, but do bear in mind that he'll preside over his own impeachment trial.
No, really. The Senate has the sole power to try impeachments. The Vice President is the President of the Senate. He presides. The Constitution provides for only one exception in cases of impeachment: "When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside." That's because of the obvious conflict-of-interest of having the VP preside when the President is tried. But there's no similar provision for having someone else preside if the Vice President is impeached.
Presumably that's because no one could imagine a Vice President doing anything significant enough to warrant impeachment, which was certainly an accurate reflection of the office's character for the first two centuries or so of our nation's history. And it's another argument against the VP being given extensive executive responsibilities, now that I think of it.
instapundit
Hezbollah, Hamas, and Humanitarians
By Michael I. Krauss and J. Peter Pham
While most Middle East watchers know about the takeover of Gaza by Hamas and its transformation into the terrorist enclave of "Hamastan," readers of the mainstream press might be surprised to learn that Hezbollah is alive, thriving, and steadily advancing in its quest to conquer the sovereign nation of Lebanon. Among those surprised would apparently be General Claudio Graziano, the Italian officer who since February has been commanding the United Nations "peacekeeping" forces in Lebanon (UNIFIL). In an interview on June 15, the former mountain warfare and ski instructor declared that the terrorist group is fading into non-existence in the southern part of Lebanon, and will soon wither away altogether.
It is hard to know whether Gen. Graziano is woefully incompetent or merely willfully ignorant. For the very same day that he was making his confident prediction, Hezbollah gunmen kidnapped three Lebanese policemen in south Beirut, stripped them of their weapons and interrogated them before setting them free. The policemen had had the audacity to try to settle a citizens' dispute on Hadi Nasrallah Avenue in Beirut, which is within Hezbollah's self-declared "secured square" in the southern part of the Lebanese capital, i.e., off-limits to Lebanese troops and police. Two days earlier, on June 13, a bomb exploded at a popular seaside club, killing a prominent lawmaker and nine other people. The bomb, believed to have been hidden inside a parked car, exploded as Walid Eido, a Sunni member of Parliament and an outspoken critic of Syria, drove by. Eido, 65, was a member of the Future Movement headed by Saad Hariri. Two years ago, Hariri's father, former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, was assassinated a few miles away on the same coastal road. Hezbollah's (along with Syria's and ultimately Iran's) involvement in Eido's and Hariri's assassinations is a virtual certainty.
And in Gen. Graziano's own backyard of Southern Lebanon, the often well-informed Debka reports that Hezbollah is employing hundreds of troops disguised as villagers to harass UN peacekeepers patrolling under UN Security Resolution 1701. One Hezbollah undercover group plants illegal yellow Hezbollah flags along the border with Israel, which are replaced as fast as they are removed by the peacekeepers. (Since UNIFIL has seized many thousands of such flags, one wonders how its commander could assert that Hezbollah is disappearing.) A second group fans out along south Lebanese roads, often waiting hours to waylay UN patrols with a hail of stones and rocks. On some roads, they build roadblocks to trap peacekeepers, who are not permitted to open fire on these "civilians."
The most dangerous section of this anti-UN front is a pocket formed by Bint Jbeil, Joya, Tibnin and Maaruch, where Hezbollah has its southern regional HQ. One Israeli officer serving on the Jewish state's northern border, from which Hezbollah attacks on UNIFIL troops are visible, reports that UNIFIL now keeps its distance from high-risk areas, confining patrols to armored vehicles with closed flaps. This of course reduces UNIFIL's effectiveness as an observer to zero - which probably explains why four Katyusha rockets were fired at Kiryat Shmona on Sunday by "unknown elements" working within a zone ostensibly controlled by UNIFIL. Three of the 107 mm. bombs hit a factory and parked cars within the northern Israeli city.
Meanwhile, further south, the Iran-Hezbollah-Hamas axis has of course conquered Gaza. Palestinian Authority (Fatah) officers were dragged from their posts and gruesomely executed. At least 35 people died in fighting on June 13: thousands more are now at the mercy of Hamas, and will likely be disarmed and expelled from Gaza. Any international force in Gaza would be resisted the same way an Israeli occupation army would, declared a Hamas spokesman on Thursday, June 14. The strategic "Philadelphi" crossing at the Egyptian border will now become a massive point of entry for materiel destined to be wage war on Israel.
Connect the dots, folks - all these offensives are related. Sunday, Azam al Ahmad (the PA's deputy Prime Minister) declared in an interview in Ramallah that the fomentors of the coup in Gaza are the same people who killed Rafik Hariri, "Both come from the same hand [Syria]," he said. Syria = Iran = Hezbollah.
Let's see if we can sort this out. Once upon a time, statesmen realized with Clausewitz that war was the continuation of politics by other means. Their charge was to do everything possible to prevent the outbreak of hostilities. But once it was clear that diplomacy failed or that one of the parties had initiated hostilities (casus belli), warriors were allowed to deliver what diplomats failed to produce: a definitive resolution of the conflict by determining a winner and a loser. The result was unconditional surrender, the political and military annihilation of the enemy.
Nowadays, however, when a terrorist group financed by a sovereign powers commits a casus belli, the international community reacts in one of two ways:
* 1. If the terrorist attack is successful, all those who resist are killed mercilessly. The international community wrings its hands and deplores the outcome.
* 2. If the terrorist attack is unsuccessful, the terrorists are pushed back from whence they came. The international community establishes humanitarian institutions, which prevent the annihilation of the terrorists and give them a chance to rebuild before they next attack. When this happens, repeat 1 or 2.
War is, or at least used to be, a bloody business. Precisely because of this, bellicose strongmen had disincentives against initiating conflict: once they unleashed the dogs of war, they faced dire consequences, including debellatio, the ending of enemy belligerency through the complete destruction of their state. The unconditional surrender of the Third Reich was the end of the conflict it had loosed upon the world.
Today, no such disincentives exist. Warlords can wage war with certain knowledge that the "humanitarian considerations" of the United Nations will put aggressor and victim on the same level and save them from total defeat. Miscalculate your enemy's strength and resolve, and not only will the international community rally in midnight sessions of the UN Security Council to prevent your collapse, but the state you attack will have to tolerate inept "peacekeepers" such as General Graziano, and helplessly await your next onslaught.
Are we the only ones who see something cockeyed here?
Michael I. Krauss is professor of law at George Mason University School of Law. J. Peter Pham is director of the Nelson Institute for International and Public Affairs at James Madison University. Both are adjunct fellows of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies.
Funny how the dem led congress's ( who made such grandiose noise about changing things in DC ) poll numbers are below Bush's- 19%
Talking about things heard before- how about the quagmire meme that has been the staple of defeat loving libs since the start of the war.
The surge is different in the number of troops being used- their focus- and the change of tactics/political reality on the ground. I guess you haven't noticed all the sunni/shis tribes that have come to the realization that AlQada means them no good and that are supporting the surge. Of course your liberal blinders won't allow you to see any difference or acknowledge anything positive regarding Bush's actions.
Bottom line, we will be out of Iraq in the numbers we have now shortly. The pathetic lib defeatists continue to hope for the worse. They put their political aims- hatred of Bush over the needs of the Iraqi people.
Would you rather have a relatively stable Iraq before we leave???
You can't answer that question I have asked you several times. If you do, you should be hoping the surge succeeds?
But, you and your selfish political ilk want only defeat so you can continue to blame Bush for all that's evil in the world.
The increased number of troops, the changed dynamic politically and the different tactics all show how the surge is different. Your refusal to acknowledge facts easily verifiable again shows your pathetic need to see America embarrassed in Iraq . You have no concern for the consequences- you just want to be able to continue screeching your surrender monkey mindless chant
A Warning from Gaza
By Michael J. Totten
Efraim Halevy writes about Hamas in the New Republic.
The handwriting was on the wall; everybody knew that there would be a showdown between Hamas and Fatah in the Gaza Strip; everybody knew that Hamas was the overriding force in that territory. In the Middle East where the "Mu'ahmara," the conspiracy, has been the leitmotif behind every catastrophe, the man in the street knew that the Americans and Israelis had been conspiring with Fatah, that Hamas had been conspiring with the Syrians and Iranians, and that the Saudis were toiling to get things on track and to move the entire region in the direction of moderation. But now, a week after the events that culminated in the takeover of the Strip by Hamas, people are just now overcoming their surprise.
Let’s see: the Americans are siding with a weak government compromised and undermined by militarily superior terrorists, the Syrians and Iranians are backing the terrorists, and the Saudis are trying to broker some kind of moderate compromise. Sound familiar? It should.
Here is Michael Young in Beirut’s Daily Star:
In recent days, some have suggested that Hizbullah intends to do in Lebanon, or part of Lebanon, what Hamas did in Gaza. The reality may be worse, if more subtle. A statement on Sunday by Hizbullah's Nabil Qaouk could be read as notification that the party might defend what he termed "Lebanon's unity" by force - shorthand for a military coup. Qaouk's warning that foreign observers should not deploy on the Lebanese-Syrian border, his describing such a project as "Israeli," his presumption that he had the right to impose a new "red line" on the state, all suggest a new mood in Hizbullah, one that is dangerous.
Hizbullah's attitude is only convincingly explained in the framework of Iran and Syria implementing a project to reclaim Lebanon, but more importantly perhaps to eliminate international, particularly Western, involvement in the Levant. After having won in Gaza, Tehran and Damascus are now pushing forward in South Lebanon. Their joint objective, regardless of their different priorities on other matters, appears to be to remove the Siniora government, undermine United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701, and create a situation where the international community would have to accept a Syrian return to Lebanon, which would, by extension, scuttle the Hariri tribunal.
How would such a project be carried out? Here's one interpretation. The priority is to emasculate the Siniora government, whether by taking control of its decisions or through the creation by Syria of a parallel government. In this context, the opposition's calls for a national unity government don't favor unity at all. Opposition parties will only enter a Cabinet they can control and bring down. We know that because they rejected the 19-10-1 formula proposed by Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, which would have given them the means to block decisions they didn't like. But the opposition's insistence on a 19-11 division is valid only for torpedoing a government through the resignation of its 11 ministers. The aim is apparent: to bring to office a president sympathetic to Syria.
If its conditions for a unity government continue to be rejected by the majority, the opposition might create a parallel government or engineer a situation allowing President Emile Lahoud to remain in Baabda. There are surely problems in a second government, not least of which that Sunni representation is bound to be anemic. This could create a troubling sense that a Sunni-dominated Siniora government is facing off against a Shiite-dominated pro-Syrian government, which could backfire regionally against Hizbullah and Iran. There is also the fact that Michel Aoun's bloc might begin cracking if the general enters such a government.
What would the purpose of this second government be, beyond wreaking havoc in the country and putting pressure on Siniora's government? Simply, to neutralize the effectiveness of the Lebanese Army and UNIFIL in the South, by making their interlocutor in the state unclear. Many have overlooked that the Nahr al-Bared fighting might have been a stage in a process to render the army less effectual in South Lebanon. Several units have been pulled out of the South in the past six months - first to prevent sectarian clashes in Beirut after the opposition built its tent city in the Downtown area last December; then to engage in fighting in the North. This has given Hizbullah much more room to maneuver in the border area, while also opening space up for groups operated from Syria. Even if Hizbullah did not fire the rockets against Kiryat Shmona on Sunday - probably the work of pro-Syrian Palestinians - it almost certainly was aware of the attack, and did not oppose it.
Arab governments are finally taking notice that the Islamist radicals they have been tolerating, appeasing – and sometimes even nurturing – are clear and present dangers to them. Their winking and subtle support for Israel during last summer’s war with Hezbollah may have been explainable by the Sunni-Shia conflict, but their sudden fear and loathing of Hamas, the Palestinian branch of the Sunni Muslim Brotherhood, cannot be.
I’m skeptical, to say the least, of the West’s sudden swooning for Yasser Arafat’s Fatah. This corrupt band of gangsters and killers destroyed Palestine before it was born, and they haven’t improved an iota since Arafat died. They are just about the most unconvincing allies and saviors imaginable.
But who knows, maybe they’ll turn it around. Not likely, but it’s barely possible. If the Hamas takeover of Gaza really does spook Arab governments, as it should, there is a chance – albeit a small one – that Fatah, the Saudis, the Egyptians, and the rest of the so-called “moderates” will finally figure out that Islamists threaten everyone in the Middle East, not just the Israelis, and that the Israelis, in fact, don’t threaten anyone but the Islamists and, tragically, the civilians who are unlucky enough to live in their neighborhoods.
Apparently none of the Arab governments, except the one in Syria, ever expected or even wanted Hamas to dominate Palestine or even defeat Israel. (Hamas could not do the latter without first doing the former.)
Arab regimes have been playing appeasement games of their own to keep the radicals busy fuming at somebody else.
You could even argue that the Syrian regime has been appeasing Islamists, that support from Damascus is really just a life-insurance policy so the Islamists don’t gun for the Baath Party as they did before Hafez Assad flattened large parts of the Sunni city of Hama. Bashar Assad’s regime is overwhelmingly Alawite. They belong to an extremely deviant and heretical branch of Twelver Shiism that is no longer really even Islamic. The Alawites probably figure that have no choice but to ride the Islamist tiger so they won’t be eaten. Assad also, quite cleverly I must say, whips up Islamists to deter the U.S. and Israel from terminating his regime. No one wants to see the Hamasification of Syria after the departure of the Assads.
I don’t expect most Arab governments to wise up and follow the lead of Jordan’s King Abdullah and forge an actual alliance with Israel any time soon. Some, none more than Syria’s, have gone too far to turn back.
But if Lebanon falls, and if Iran gets nuclear weapons, and if maniacs wearing ski masks take over Iraq after the U.S. withdraws, most of them will eventually figure out who their real enemies are. What’s happening to Abbas, Seniora, and Maliki can happen to any and all of them, even Assad.
The fact that Arab governments threaten to build nuclear arsenals to counter Iran’s, but not Israel’s, all by itself tells you who and what they’re really afraid of. Blowback isn’t just for Americans anymore.
Posted by Michael J. Totten at June 23, 2007 11:04 AM
Quote of the Century? [Michael Ledeen]
Just got this from the wonderful Fred Singer, who puts out a terrific weekly e-mail on energy questions—mostly deflating the global warmers. In it, he provides this gem:
It appears we have appointed our worst generals to command forces, and our most gifted and brilliant to edit newspapers! In fact, I discovered by reading newspapers that these editor/geniuses plainly saw all my strategic defects from the start, yet failed to inform me until it was too late. Accordingly, I'm readily willing to yield my command to these obviously
superior intellects, and I'll, in turn, do my best for the cause by writing editorials - after the fact.
Robert E. Lee, 1863
All along they have said that they won't be bale to evaluate the effectiveness until September.
I've posted srticles outlining the progress. The libs are constinutionally unable to acknowledge any positive news about our efforts in Iraq
They are all in with the latest operation- if it fails, then you can rejoice at the Anerican failure
Nice that you declare failure where operations haven't even started in certain areas
Be carefu;, once we obtain world domination, people like you will be the first to be eliminated
Israel Issues Ultimatum To Syria
Perhaps sensing a leadership vacuum in Damascus based on the odd report yesterday that Bashar Assad did not participate in a Ba'ath Party leadership conference, Israel has issued an ultimatum to Syria demanding the return of its soldiers and the end to Hezbollah activity along the border. If Syria does not comply within 72 hours, an Arabic newspaper reported, Israel will launch a major attack against Syria:
The London-based Arabic language newspaper Al-Hayat reported Saturday that “Washington has information according to which Israel gave Damascus 72 hours to stop Hizbullah’s activity along the Lebanon-Israel border and bring about the release the two kidnapped IDF soldiers or it would launch an offensive with disastrous consequences.”
The report said “a senior Pentagon source warned that should the Arab world and international community fail in the efforts to convince Syria to pressure Hizbullah into releasing the soldiers and halt the current escalation Israel may attack targets in the country.”
Al-Hayat quoted the source as saying that “the US cannot rule out the possibility of an Israeli strike in Syria,” this despite the fact that the Bush administration has asked Israel to “refrain from any military activity that may result in civilian casualties."
Last night the Syrians declared their solidarity with Hezbollah and warned Israel that it would not allow Hezbollah to fail in the latest war. That statement of alliance has obviously prompted Israel to call their bluff, and the silence of Bashar Assad will now get more attention. It is more than passingly strange that a nation would openly ally itself with another nation or group engaged in war on another nation without that statement coming from the head of state. It is inconceivable that such a policy announcement would occur in a dictatorship without the dictator himself being involved.
The Ba'athists in Syria may have been serious, but it seems more likely that they wanted to bluff Israel and the global community with what appears to be a rather empty threat. The Syrian military could not match up against the Israelis when they controlled Lebanon, and without Saddam Hussein as a backstop, they don't have a prayer now. Unlike Hezbollah, they actually have territory to lose, and they no longer control the strategic Golan Heights.
Syria may believe that the mutual defense pact they have with Iran will cause enough nations to rein in Israel before the war escalates into a regional conflict. However, they may find their bluff insufficient. First, most of the West believes that this has already become a regional conflict, and that Syria and Iran have deep involvement in Hamas and Hezbollah. All Israel's ultimatum accomplishes is to add significant risk to Syria directly for their proxy war. Second, the Iranians will find it quite difficult to march to the aid of Syria with 135,000 American troops blocking their way, and the US Navy in the Persian Gulf.
Israel has decided to raise the stakes on Syria. Will Syria blink?
Addendum: We should point out that the Syrians and the Iranians have incredibly poor timing. Why did they bother to start this conflict now? The US has had months of tension over the status of our troops in Iraq. In a year or so, we would have significantly drawn down the force there, making coordination between Iran and Syria easier. Now the Syrians have placed themselves in a vise between the Israelis on one side, the Americans on another, with NATO ally Turkey sitting on top of them. I'd say that the Ba'athists in Damascus have the same military genius as the Ba'athists did in Iraq when Saddam Hussein was in power.
UPDATE: Israel denies the report (h/t: Michael van der Galien at TMV):
Responding to a report in a pan-Arab daily newspaper that Israel presented Damascus with an ultimatum, an Israel Defense Forces officer said Saturday that targeting Syria is currently not on Israel's agenda.
"We're not a gang that shoots in every direction," the officer said. "It won't be right to bring Syria into the campaign."
The IDF officer emphasized that the Golan Heights frontier has been quiet since 1974, a factor which Israeli views as a vital security asset. The officer said that the Syrian air force as well as additional units are on high alert, a fact which hasn't escaped Israel's attention.
Israel may wait for Syria to make the first move. They did so with Hezbollah and with Hamas, which has allowed them more diplomatic manuevering room.
UPDATE II: Does this save Hillary from doing a remake of "Billy, Don't Be A Hero"? The Anchoress thinks so. It all depends on the meaning of "cross", anyway.
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/007498.php
I guess the Isreali's should just ignore that Hamas has as part of it's charter the elimination of the state of Israel.
I'm sure if your neighbors wanted to kill you you would defend their "rights" also, huh?
I guess you missed this part of a previous post:
Until now, our efforts have always been piecemeal, stop-start affairs. Even our success in the Second Battle of Fallujah in 2004 went unexploited.
Things have changed. And terrorists, not just Iraqi civilians, are dying.
The 10,000-man operation reported in the Baquba area is only one part of a broader effort. In the words of a well-placed officer in Baghdad, "Operations like that are going on around Fallujah, Salman Pak, in Eastern Anbar, the belts around Baghdad, in Arab Jabour, outside of Taji and throughout the Diyala River Valley."
This widespread offensive against al Qaeda in Iraq and other terrorists is part of a carefully developed, phased plan. The first step as the troop surge proceeded was to establish livable conditions in key neighborhoods of the capital.
So OK, he's excited, but what does it all mean?
LTG Ray Odierno briefed reporters at the Pentagon today via teleconference from Iraq. He described the operation like this:
Operation Phantom Thunder is a corps-level offensive operation that began on 15 June to defeat al Qaeda insurgents and extremists, deny enemy safe havens, interdict movement, logistics and communications. It is an open-ended operation that will extend through the summer and will be done in conjunction with civil-military operations to support political and economic efforts.
It consists of carefully synchronized simultaneous operations at division and brigade level to clear al Qaeda, Sunni insurgents and Shi'a extremists in, near and around Baghdad. It also includes aggressive shaping operations by our Special Operations Forces focused on al Qaeda in Iraq and other special groups.
These operations are intended to eliminate accelerants to Baghdad violence from enemy support zones in the belts that ring the city.
Some important points about the operation that make it different from others conducted there to date. First, Operation Phantom Thunder is the umbrella name for a number of 'carefully synchronized simultaneous operations". That's important to understand. Instead of piecemeal or isolated operations which may secure a particular area but simply displace the terrorists, the purpose of these operations is to secure the area and kill the displaced terrorists before they can find another area to infest.
Being wrong by stupidly parroting the quagmire meme regardless of evidence to the contrary is pathetic.
The tell here is that the libs don't care what happens to the Iraqi's at all. They are ONLY concerned with political advantage.
Do you want the Iraqi's to achieve a politically stable country?
Right
I didn't think you had a coherent answer
YOU response- everything Bush has done is wrong by definition. The surge- which has showed great signs of military progress- was declared ineffective by Reid even before it got to full strength.
Will you acknowledge that the sruge has had military success?
Assuming that you do actually consider AlQada a threat, how would you deal with that threat??
Explaining Operation Phantom Thunder
Posted by: McQ
Ralph Peters talks about Operation Phantom Thunder of which Operation Arrowhead Ripper is a single part:
HALLELUJAH! For the first time since Baghdad fell, our military in Iraq has a comprehensive, integrated plan to defeat our enemies.
Until now, our efforts have always been piecemeal, stop-start affairs. Even our success in the Second Battle of Fallujah in 2004 went unexploited.
Things have changed. And terrorists, not just Iraqi civilians, are dying.
The 10,000-man operation reported in the Baquba area is only one part of a broader effort. In the words of a well-placed officer in Baghdad, "Operations like that are going on around Fallujah, Salman Pak, in Eastern Anbar, the belts around Baghdad, in Arab Jabour, outside of Taji and throughout the Diyala River Valley."
This widespread offensive against al Qaeda in Iraq and other terrorists is part of a carefully developed, phased plan. The first step as the troop surge proceeded was to establish livable conditions in key neighborhoods of the capital.
So OK, he's excited, but what does it all mean?
LTG Ray Odierno briefed reporters at the Pentagon today via teleconference from Iraq. He described the operation like this:
Operation Phantom Thunder is a corps-level offensive operation that began on 15 June to defeat al Qaeda insurgents and extremists, deny enemy safe havens, interdict movement, logistics and communications. It is an open-ended operation that will extend through the summer and will be done in conjunction with civil-military operations to support political and economic efforts.
It consists of carefully synchronized simultaneous operations at division and brigade level to clear al Qaeda, Sunni insurgents and Shi'a extremists in, near and around Baghdad. It also includes aggressive shaping operations by our Special Operations Forces focused on al Qaeda in Iraq and other special groups.
These operations are intended to eliminate accelerants to Baghdad violence from enemy support zones in the belts that ring the city.
Some important points about the operation that make it different from others conducted there to date. First, Operation Phantom Thunder is the umbrella name for a number of 'carefully synchronized simultaneous operations". That's important to understand. Instead of piecemeal or isolated operations which may secure a particular area but simply displace the terrorists, the purpose of these operations is to secure the area and kill the displaced terrorists before they can find another area to infest.
So Operation Phantom Thunder (OPT) is made up of simultaneous division and brigade operations, such as Operation Arrowhead Ripper being conducted in Baqubah with the 3-2 Stryker Brigade Combat Team (2ID) where Michael Yon is. There are also operations going on with the 3ID called Operation Marne Torch (3ID is known as the "Rock of the Marne" from WWI).
It is also necessary to understand that OPT is not only focused in Baghdad, but also in the belts around Baghdad.
The disposition of forces can be found here:
Show/Hide
Deployed are 20 Brigade size combat teams, a Marine Expeditionary Unit, 4 Combat Aviation Bdes and a Marine Air Wing. Lots of firepower. And don't forget the artillery.
As you can see, within Baghdad are five Bde Combat Teams (BCT): 2nd and 4th BCTs of the 1st ID in the west and south, 2nd BCT of the 1st Cav in the center of the city, 2nd BCT of the 2ID in the east and the 2nd BCT (my old unit) of the 82nd in the north.
These are the units taking it to AQ in Baghdad. They are trying to either kill them there or make them flee the city to be killed by those ringing the city. In the NE, in Diyala, you have three BCTs, 3rd and 4th BCTs of the 2ID and 3rd BCT of the 1st Cav. In the south, in you have 2nd and 3rd BCTs of the 3ID and 4th BCT of the 25th ID. To the east 2nd BCT of the 10th ID and in the NW, in Anbar, the 13th MEU and 6th Marine RCT.
In this case instead of whack-a-mole, all holes are hopfully covered.
And note who they're targeting. Yes, al Qaeda is a target, and the primary target, but they aren't playing favorites. They're going after "al Qaeda, Sunni insurgents and Shi'a extremists in, near and around Baghdad." That pretty much includes all the bad guys. So when Michael Yon entitles his series of reports "Surrender or Die", those are pretty much the only options being offered at the moment.
Note too that Odierno calls this an "open-ended" operation. It's going to go until the military feels the terrorists and insurgents are degraded to the point of ineffectiveness. One of the ways that will be done, obviously, is clear, hold, stay and build. But the other thing which has to be done is to minimize as much as possible AQs ability to disrupt this process. And that gets to another part of Odierno's description:
It also includes aggressive shaping operations by our Special Operations Forces focused on al Qaeda in Iraq and other special groups.
These operations are intended to eliminate accelerants to Baghdad violence from enemy support zones in the belts that ring the city.
So special operators are going to be terrorist hunting and they're going to trying to eliminate "accelerants to Baghdad violence". That's milspeak for they're going to be looking for the bomb factories that make truck and car bombs and the chlorine bombs. It has been in the belt areas around Baghdad that most of those have been made.
Last but not least, keep in mind the goals Odeirno has outlined for the operation:
"[D]efeat al Qaeda insurgents and extremists, deny enemy safe havens, interdict movement, logistics and communications", all of which will be "done in conjunction with civil-military operations to support political and economic efforts."
That is why it is an "open ended" operation. Parts of it are going to wind up sooner than other parts depending on what they find as they take, clear, hold, stay and build in these areas. Some areas are going to take longer than others, some are going to need more work than others, and some are going to take longer because the Iraqi Security Forces in the area aren't ready.
I'm not intimating through this explanation of the operation that all is peaches and cream and this is going to go off like clock work and everything is going to be fine. But having been an operations officer for 18 years up to and including Corps level, I can tell you that this is a plan with a chance.
However, here's something you can count on now. We will see increased US casualties. This is tough, dirty, nasty fighting and it is close quarter fighting. Offensive operations are costly. But they are the only way, really, to gain any sort of military victory. And yes, I know that the civilian side - the economic and political side - are equally important.
That's the wild card here, folks. That's the unknown.
The center of gravity in OPT is Baghdad. This operation, if successful, should provide the time and room necessary for the reconciliation process. Whether or not the Iraqis will take advantage of that, or instead act like the Palestinians, is yet to be determined.
Anyway, that's the layout. I'm going to try and keep up with this and explain as much as I can based on the info I can dig up. Feel free to ask questions.
Battle for Baqubah
22 June 07
First a quick media round-up. (This is not all inclusive.)
Alexandra Zavis from Los Angeles Times is down in the heat of the battle bringing home information. Michael Gordon from New York Times is still slugging it out, and his portions are accurate in the co-authored story, “Heavy Fighting as US Troops Squeeze Insurgents in Iraqi City.”target=”blank” (Long title.)
CNN has joined the fight. AP came but will stay only a few days. Joe Klein from TIME was here on the 21st and his story posted the same day and was accurate. We rode together in a Stryker. Like magic, Joe’s story was out before I got back to base. Joe took a helicopter out and filed from elsewhere. I’m having comms problems here which is greatly slowing the flow. My Thuraya satellite phone and RBGAN satellite dish are not working for hours each day. The AP reporter is having the same problems. The signal degradation is caused by a special sort of RF interference. Moving our antennas around won’t work. We simply get cut off for long periods.
I am with 3-2 Stryker Brigade Combat Team. I’ve run a few missions with them in Baghdad, and they have fought all over Iraq. This Brigade has much recent combat experience, and is expertly commanded. A person does not need to even meet the commanders (though I do each day) to know they are running a tight ship. The professionalism of 3-2 is particularly high, and they are very competent fighters who are maximizing their assets, including the incredible Stryker vehicles.
While the name “Stryker” is on the table, apparently controversy is brewing back home whether Strykers should be in our arsenal. The answer is YES: we need all we can get. The Stryker might be the finest all-around combat vehicle in Iraq. But that is a matter for another day, and for professional soldiers to answer.
The combat in Baqubah should soon reach a peak. Al Qaeda seems to have been effectively isolated. The initial attack on 19 June achieved enough surprise that al Qaeda was caught off guard and trapped. They have been beaten back mostly into pockets and are surrounded and will be dealt with. Part of this is actually due to the capability of Strykers. We were able to “attack from the march.” In other words, a huge force drove in from places like Baghdad and quickly locked down Baqubah.
LTG Ray Odierno visited Baqubah on the 21st. Odierno clarified that this battle is to be final: we are not going to do this again. Odierno stressed to our commanders that they need to be thinking of an end-state that results in Iraqis taking charge, but that Iraqi commanders should not be given the reigns until they are ready, so that the result is we set them up for success. Odierno’s timing was remarkable: even before he arrived, the commanders here were talking about end-state daily and, on a more sour note, our commanders have their hands full with the local Iraqi commanders who seem less competent (to be kind) than those I have seen elsewhere, such as in Mosul.
Our guys are winning. Al Qaeda is about to be strangled and pummeled to death in this town, but the local Iraqi leadership is severely wanting. This was most obviously noted in one area in particular, where there were some slight indicators of a possible humanitarian need. “Crisis” certainly is not the correct word, but there are displaced persons numbering at least in the hundreds. LTC Fred Johnson actually took me out there. (The access even to “bad” news is amazing with this Brigade.)
I have been with LTC Fred Johnson for several days. LTC Johnson seems to recharge on sunlight or moonlight and can run a man into the ground. After seeing the humanitarian need building with no action to abate it underway, Johnson was very unhappy. He immediately started jerking choke chains on the people who are supposed to be handling humanitarian need, trying to avert having it build into a crisis.
This is where the inept local Iraqi commanders come in. I’ve seen them in meeting after meeting, over the past few days, finding ways to be underachievers. The Iraqi commanders have dozens of large trucks and have only to drive to our base to collect the supplies and distribute those supplies to the people displaced in the battle. Our troops are fully engaged in combat, yet the Iraqi leaders were not able to carry that load without LTC Johnson supplying the initiative. The Kurds would have had this fixed yesterday. The Iraqi commanders in Mosul would have fixed this. The local Iraqi command climate is disappointing by comparison.
Later I spoke with Major Jerry Gardner who is in charge of humanitarian needs. Gardner said he has 70,000 kilos each of flour and rice (bought from Iraq), and enough bottled water to keep 5,000 people going for 15 days. He can get three times that amount with a phone call. He’s got about 30,000 MREs, and also a complete “W.H.O. kit” that he says can feed 30,000 people for a month. Gardner said he can get four more kits like that if needed.
The need is not at the level of a crisis, but the need for those few hundred is becoming more serious. They have small children. Our soldiers took me out there and let me talk with the people as long as I wanted to. The kids wanted their photos taken and were happy, but the moms looked worried. All males between ages 15-55 are being screened before being allowed to pass through the cordon. People are trying to escape the fighting, but we made this mistake in places like Tal Afar and Fallujah where our people attacked and left huge escape routes. This time, the number one priority is to trap and destroy al Qaeda.
On information flow, as of noon in Baqubah on 22 June, the press is starting to flood in. The Public Affairs Office and the press climate at this Brigade are A+. Access is actually better than I have ever seen, and that is saying a great deal. A PAO officer told me that about 20 press should be here over the next days, so we should be able to get reports from many independent sources and compare and contrast. The access is unbelievably good. They are not holding back the good, bad or the ugly. Press who aren’t here in Baqubah with 3-2 Stryker Brigade are missing out. However…the press who are here are wasting huge amounts of time on trivial matters that are occurring above the level of 3-2.
There are serious technical problems that I have brought up privately to high-ranking PAO officers over the past nearly two years which persist today, despite that any one of them could be easily resolved with better planning on the part of PAO. I’ve found that communicating with them privately is generally useless. (Obviously, as the problems persist.)A person has got to tell a million people before they are heard. Since it will affect how the news from here gets reported, and since I know the other writers here are often afraid to speak up about this stuff, (one senior PAO officer actually threatened to kick me out a few months ago) I’ll take the heat on telling the million people:
I could be in combat now, but have been wasting time trying to get a badge to get into the dining facility. Got one. Not a big deal, until you add that up for 20 reporters all wasting part of their very limited time (we are in a war), and soldiers’ time (they are fighting it) getting ridiculous paperwork when the Press ID could simply say, “Unescorted access to dining facilities is authorized. Please call DSN 867 5309 with any questions.” Simple solution. I have wasted hours on the issue of eating over the past few days. It adds up when your time windows open and close unpredictably and rapidly.
On communications, senior Public Affairs officers knew this battle was unfolding. It would have taken practically zero assets to set up a media shack or tent in advance. The shack or tent only needs to have electrical outlets and an internet dish, along with phone lines. Cots would be nice but I can sleep in the dirt. (Sleeping arrangements here are excellent. I’m in a tent with soldiers and have a cot.) We need a dedicated dish and phone lines because for hours each day our RBGANS are not working, nor are our Thuraya sat-phones. All those reporters flooding out here are about to flood into difficult reporting terrain. Cell phones do not work in Baqubah.
Public Affairs should have known this months ago. Valuable stories about our soldiers and the battle are being lost and will never be filed because reporters, after a long day of being on the battlefield, cannot make a simple phone call, or file a story. Why be here? It’s pretty dangerous, and insurance is expensive. I had to skip a mission this morning because I cannot make communications, and am down to filing stories on the fly again without time for editing. There is no other way to keep the flow open, and if you are reading this, it’s only after I’ve wasted hours trying to upload it. Hours I could have been with our soldiers, telling about their days in one of the most important battles of this war.
Otherwise, the battle is going very well. A big fight seems to be brewing. As of about noon in Baqubah on the 22nd, there seems to be a lull in the fighting. A calm. This is about to get wet. At the going rate, al Qaeda in Baqubah will soon have two choices: Surrender, or die.
Using that "logic" we should have never gone after OBL, right.
Sheesh, the libs are pathetic when they can't even bring themselves to celebrate victories against our enemies.
So, we should just stop fighting AlQada as they plan to slaughter us??
THE fact that they are multi national is exactly why we need to recognize their threat- not hide our heads in the sand
Well, since "The headquarters of al-Qaeda are not known anymore.
", wouldn't it be a good idea to attack them wherever we find them??
Has to one of your dumber posts