Pacing the Cage

This one goes out to The Little Finger and his brothers (& sisters) in arms.

Propaganda By the Numbers

Once again, Hamas has played fast and loose with the facts -- more specifically, the number of civilian deaths in the recent clash between Israel and Hamas in Gaza. A Gazan doctor, who didn't give his name because he wanted to live for at least another 24 hours, told an Italian newspaper:

"The number of deceased stands at no more than 500 to 600. Most of them are youths between the ages of 17 to 23 who were recruited to the ranks of Hamas, who sent them to the slaughter,"

A resident of Tal al-Hawa, who also preferred to not paint a target on his own back, had this to say to the newspaper:

"Armed Hamas men sought out a good position for provoking the Israelis. There were mostly teenagers, aged 16 or 17, and armed. They couldn't do a thing against a tank or a jet. They knew they are much weaker, but they fired at our houses so that they could blame Israel for war crimes."

Read more on this story at Ynetnews.com.

Meryl Yourish has also posted on this story. However, her post also contains links to video evidence of previous fallacious claims by Hamas. I recommend you check them out. You will discover how the UN is used by Hamas and that the "dead" can come back to life!

The Little Finger Is Heading to Iraq

Some time ago, I wrote a couple posts about my male offspring (aka The Little Finger) shipping out to Fort Jackson for Basic Training. After 3 months of BT and 6 months of AIT, he finally returned home in October 2008 to settle in with his Minnesota Army National Guard unit. In November, he got the word that his unit, the 34th "Red Bull" Infantry Division, was being activated and would be heading for Iraq. Well, that time is upon us. He will be flying to Fort Lewis in Washington state in a couple days. After a several weeks of pre-deployment training, he and his fellow Red Bulls will head for Kuwait and then Iraq.

This is, obviously, a time of mixed emotions. I am very proud of my son, not only for his military service, but for the man he has become and will be. As a father, I am also concerned for his safety, even though I know things are better in Iraq that two years ago. I am also going to miss having him around. Other than my mother, he's my favorite person with which to spend time. For the next year or so, we'll have to settle for letters, email and the occasional conversation on Skype.

Here are a couple pics of this fine young man:

Postmodernism & the Middle-East

In his latest article, "The Gaza Rules", Victor Davis Hanson provides an excellent summary of how the usual rules have been turned upside-down when it comes to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Here is a sample:

Watching both this week's war and the world's predictable reaction to it, we can recall the Gaza rules. Most are reflections of our postmodern age, and completely at odds with the past protocols of war.

First is the now-familiar Middle East doctrine of proportionality. Legitimate military action is strangely defined by the relative strength of the combatants. World opinion more vehemently condemns Israel's countermeasures, apparently because its rockets are far more accurate and deadly than previous Hamas barrages that are poorly targeted and thus not so lethal.

If America had accepted such rules in, say, World War II, then by late 1944 we, not the Axis, would have been the culpable party, since by then once-aggressive German, Italian and Japanese forces were increasingly on the defensive and far less lethal than the Allies.

Now go read the other four points that VDH makes in his very timely article.

The Nebulous Definition of "The Bush Doctrine"

Chuck Gibson's interview of Republican VP candidate Sarah Palin was nothing more than a continuation of the attacks on her by the Left-Wing Media elite. The question that best confirms this assessment was, "Do you agree with the Bush Doctrine?"  Sarah's response, which was to ask "In what respect, Charlie?", was the proper response because there is no single definition for the term Bush Doctrine. All one needs to do is to read the first paragraph of the Wikipedia entry for The Bush Doctrine. The following is the relevant section (emphasis added):

It may be viewed as a set of several related foreign policy principles, including stress on ending terrorism, spreading democracy, increased unilateralism in foreign policy and an expanded view of American national security interests. Foreign policy experts argue over the meaning of the term "Bush Doctrine," and some scholars have suggested that there is no one unified theory underlying Bush's foreign policy. Jacob Weisberg identifies six successive "Bush Doctrines" in his book The Bush Tragedy, while former Bush staffer Peter D. Feaver has counted seven.

Now, put yourself in her place. You are asked if you agree with a term that has several possible meanings. No matter which one you pick, the inquisitor can decide that the definition he meant was one of those you didn't pick. It's a bit like someone holding their hands behind their back and asking how many fingers they are holding up. No matter what number you give, they can arrogantly display their recently altered finger count and proclaim you an idiot for not getting it right.

Well, Chuck did his best, but all he succeeded in doing was to give the Kos-DU-HuffPo crowd something to cackle about. For the rest of us out here in middle America, we saw a confident, composed, strong woman who stood toe-to-toe with an aggressively biased Left-wing Media snob. Could she have done better? Yes, I think there were questions she could have handled better. More importantly, there were no Biden-like gaffes -- or if you prefer, Obama-like gaffes.

And what about Chuck's idea of what the Bush Doctrine means? To his credit, he narrowed the timeframe to, ". . . the Bush doctrine, enunciated September 2002, before the Iraq war." Then he defined it (emphasis added):

The Bush doctrine, as I understand it, is that we have the right of anticipatory self-defense, that we have the right to a preemptive strike against any other country that we think is going to attack us.

If that is the Bush Doctrine, then virtually every leader of every civilization in history agreed with it. If FDR had received information on December 6th that the Japanese fleet was going to attack Pearl Harbor the following day, is there any doubt that he would have ordered a preemptive strike? Of course he would have. However, Chuck got it wrong according to the previously referenced Wikipedia entry. Again, I will quote the relevant section (again, emphasis added):

Other foreign policy experts have taken the term to mean Bush's doctrine of preventive war, first articulated in 2002, which holds that the United States government should depose foreign regimes that represent a threat to the security of the United States, even if such threats are not immediate and no attack is imminent. This policy was used to justify the invasion of Iraq in March 2003.

I am certain, given Chuck's obvious bias, that this was the policy he intended to trap her with. Unfortunately, he couldn't get it right and he failed miserably in trying to make her look bad. In fact, his ineptitude gave her the perfect opportunity to highlight what almost all Americans know in this election:  If we want to be safe from enemies, foreign and domestic, the only choice is McCain-Palin.

Dear Mr. Obama

HT: Hugh

Wesley Clark Does Obama's Dirty Work

Retired General Wesley Clark appeared on CBS' Face the Nation and had the following to say about Republican Presidential candidate John McCain's military experience:

"Well, I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president"

Using the former General's reasoning, getting your PT boat sunk while you're at the helm would also not be a qualification to be president. That didn't stop JFK from using it to get elected, did it?

I'm a little surprised that he doesn't know that you don't "ride a fighter plane".  Also, John McCain flew an attack aircraft, an A-4E Skyhawk to be specific. If he flew a fighter, the nomenclature would begin with an "F" as in F-16 or F-22. I guess basic military knowledge is not a qualification to be a General -- or a failed Democrat Presidential candidate for that matter.

Needless to say, Clark was just doing the dirty work for B. H. Obama. That way Obama can make some vague comments about respecting military service and perpetuate the illusion that he is for "change". This is just regular old sleazy Chicago politics that Obama knows so well.

WaPo: "Lull in news coverage" of Iraq Progress

Yesterday's Washington Post editorial, The Iraqi Upturn, starts out by commenting on the lack of media coverage of the remarkable good news coming from Iraq.

There's been a relative lull in news coverage and debate about Iraq in recent weeks -- which is odd, because May could turn out to have been one of the most important months of the war. While Washington's attention has been fixed elsewhere, military analysts have watched with astonishment as the Iraqi government and army have gained control for the first time of the port city of Basra and the sprawling Baghdad neighborhood of Sadr City, routing the Shiite militias that have ruled them for years and sending key militants scurrying to Iran. At the same time, Iraqi and U.S. forces have pushed forward with a long-promised offensive in Mosul, the last urban refuge of al-Qaeda. So many of its leaders have now been captured or killed that U.S. Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker, renowned for his cautious assessments, said that the terrorists have "never been closer to defeat than they are now."

The editorial goes on to mention several areas of significant progress, politically as well as militarily. In the last paragraph, it suggests that "likely Democratic nominee" Obama may need to adjust his strategy to the current situation. The editorial suggests that, instead of withdrawing troops on an arbitrary time table, he should tie "withdrawals to the evolution of the Iraqi army and government". In other words, he should handle it like President Bush and the Republicans have been saying all along.

BRILLIANT!

When Casualties Equal Progress

With the recent increase of U.S. casualties in Iraq, many of the usual suspects are citing that statistic as proof that we are losing and need to withdraw immediately. However, this assumes that, in war, casualties always indicate failure. In his New York Daily News article, In Iraq, a Storm Before the Calm, Michael Yon explains why that is not necessarily the case. In fact, in the case of General Petraeus' surge strategy of last summer, it meant exactly the opposite. Michael's article suggests the latest spike in casualties is due to a second phase of what began last summer.


Order Michael's new book:

And Then There Were Two

George Smiley of the blog In From the Cold reports that one of three remaining U.S. veterans from World War I has passed away. You can read the entire article here.

Iraqis Taking the Battle to AQI

Reuters reports that the Iraqi security forces have begun an offensive against al-Qaeda in Iraq.

HT: Pajamas Media

The Origin of the Surge in Iraq

Fred Barnes of the Weekly Standard relates how President Bush decided on the now famous Surge strategy in Iraq.

A Look Inside al-Qaeda In Iraq

According to this Washington Post article, documents found in northern Iraq are providing some unique insights into the foreign insurgents in Iraq (that is, al-Qaeda in Iraq).  From the description in the article, at least some of the documents appear to be job applications. Here are a few things from the article that I found particularly interesting:  

• Based on the Sinjar records, U.S. military officials in Iraq said they now think that nine out of 10 suicide bombers have been foreigners...
  
• ...they assess that 90 percent of foreign fighters entering Iraq during the one-year period ending in August came via Syria...
• The extent of al-Qaeda in Iraq's ties to the wider al-Qaeda network has long been a subject of debate within the U.S. intelligence community and military. Although its membership is overwhelmingly Iraqi, it has been led by foreigners with direct ties to al-Qaeda central...
  

Shipping Out - UPDATE

The Little Finger called me from the airport earlier today to inform me that he will be going to Fort Jackson, SC instead of Fort Benning. Everything else will go as scheduled.

By the way, we went to The Water Horse, which was pretty good. As for dinner, well, the "carnage" was fabulous.

Shipping Out

Well, the day has finally arrived. No, I am not talking about the Iowa caucuses. My male offspring (aka the Little Finger) will be shipping out to Fort Benning, Georgia for Basic Training. He joined the Minnesota Army National Guard last June. (Due to a scheduled family event, he was able to get his Basic Training delayed.) He will be at Fort Benning until March 2008 and then will move to Fort Gordon, Georgia to begin is 6+ month Advanced Individual Training. If you haven't done the math, that means that he will be gone for about 9 months. He's looking forward to the experience. I suspect he doesn't quite realize what he's going to experience. Well, I was about 3 years younger than he is when I went to Basic. If I was able to make it through, he should be fine. Well, we've got about 9 hours before I must entrust his care and feeding to the U. S. Army. We've got a movie to see and a steak dinner to eat.

Needless to say, I am a very proud father.

Victory Ignored

I knew things must be going well in Iraq when the media stopped the daily barrage of body counts and stock footage of convoys being blown up. As I was watching the news the other day, I noticed something else interesting. They were reporting the sad news of another serviceman being killed in Iraq. The interesting part was how the story was framed. Do you suppose they put it in the context of 5 straight months of declining casualties among US troops AND Iraqi citizens? No, that would not be "objective" reporting. They reported the death of that honorable and heroic soldier as adding to the "deadliest year" of the Iraq War. It may be true that this has been the deadliest year of the war. I haven't checked the facts, but I'm willing to accept it at face value. However, if they were really concerned about objectivity, why did they chose to leave out the positive news altogether?

Victor Davis Hanson's RCP article, Good News Is No News, addresses this very issue. You can read more of VDH at VDH's Private Papers or his Pajamas Media blog, Works and Days.

Missing Lieutenant Daily

Christopher Hitchens' Vanity Fair article, A Death In the Family, will simultaneously inspire you and break your heart.

Thank you, Christopher. I now miss him, too.

HT: Hugh Hewitt

A War We Just Might Win

If you have not yet read the New York Times article A War We Just Might Win by Michael O'Hanlon and Kenneth Pollack, please do so now. These gentlemen have been critics of the War in Iraq although, as some have pointed out, they have not been stridently anti-war. I don't think that that undermines their credibility, since the strident anti-war folks would never, ever consider anything to be evidence of progress no matter how hard they have to suck on their Everlasting Gobstoppers of Denial.

Standing Up For Victory

The following is from a comment on my post , For Your Consideration, in which I encouraged you to check out Vets For Freedom. I thought it deserved a post of it's own:

Thanks so much for blogging on Vets For Freeedom’s efforts. They’ve done an awesome job the past few weeks. I invite you and your readers to join us at Move America Forward as we launch our national, cross-country “Fight for Victory Tour” this September 3 - 15 ending in DC where we’ll have a rally with a collection of pro-troop groups including Vets for Freedom, Gathering of Eagles, Military Order of the Purple Heart, Free Republic, Protest Warriors and others. It’s a vital time for us to be mobilized and speaking out and it’s for such a just, worthy, noble, and pertinent cause. So let’s kick some butt and stand up to those who wish to force surrender terms upon our troops! http://www.MoveAmericaForward.org

Joe Wierzbicki

For Your Consideration

Take a look at Vets For Freedom. They may be worth your time and treasure.