J's Cafe Nette

Archive for the ‘War in Iraq’ Category

President Bush has not been Conservative enough for some.

For others he has been nothing more than a man who stole an election with the assistance of the United States Supreme Court.

He has been vilified for his handling of the Iraq war, sometimes deservedly so, but it you read, really read the words of those who have served in both Iraq and Afghanistan, most seem to have a clear sense of exactly what their mission has been. I’m not speaking of the arm chair Generals who conduct war from a television studio, but those who have seen the horrors and triumphs.

Through it all and with all his mortal faults (show me any President who does not have them, or any man or woman for that matter), I have remained a supporter of Mr. Bush and there has always remained one central reason why..National Security. My position has never wavered on this and no doubt never will..it is not a matter of fear, it is a matter of this country’s survival.

It came as quite a surprise to run across this article penned by a New York City resident who did not vote for the President in either 2000 or 2004:

With President Bush-bashing still a national pastime, it’s notable how much international terrorism has been forgotten, and how little credit the president has received for keeping Americans safe.

This is a difficult issue for me. I didn’t vote for President Bush – twice. And as a human-rights law professor, the events at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay, along with various elements of the Patriot Act and the National Security Agency’s wiretapping of Americans, are all greatly troubling to me.

Yet I live in Manhattan and I was present on Sept. 11, 2001 – admittedly 100 blocks from the murder scene, but I was here, trembling along with the rest of America. Remember those days?

Mr. Rosenbaum gets it. Very few speak of the President and his determination to carry out his primary responsibility. Does anyone honestly believe that if not for his steadfastness in the fight against terrorism we would not have been attacked again, possibly more than once?

Perhaps historians will understand the perils we faced over the past decades. It is my belief the terrorists understand that this time they chose the wrong man to “take on,” and the Professor appears to agree:

Yes, there are those who maintain that our promiscuous misadventures in Iraq, Afghanistan and Israel have rendered America even less safe. That the president has further radicalized our enemies and alienated our nation. That the animosity for America now, improbably, runs even deeper. Whatever resentments and aspirations gave rise to 9/11 have grown and will not be easily dissipated. For this reason, no one should draw comfort in the relative safety of our shores.

Maybe so. But when a professed enemy succeeds as wildly as al Qaeda did on 9/11, and seven years pass without an incident, there are two reasonable conclusions: Either, despite all the trash-talking videos, they have been taking a long, leisurely breather; or, something serious has been done to thwart and disable their operations. Whatever combination of psychology and insanity motivates a terrorist to blow himself up is not within my range of experience, but I’m betting the aggressive measures the president took, and the unequivocal message he sent, might have had something to do with it.

Americans, admittedly, have short time horizons and, perhaps, even shorter attention spans. Our collective memory has historically been poor. But had there been another terrorist attack or, even worse, a dozen more in cities all over America – a fear that would not have been exaggerated on 9/12 – would we have allowed ourselves the luxury of quarreling over legally suspect counterterrorism measures, even though such internal debates are credits to our liberal democracy and constitutional freedoms?

More at the link above.

Tweet This Post

A recent press release from United States Central Command tells a bit of a different story on the situation in parts of Iraq than those we read in the newspapers daily.

Surge progress may lead to troop reductions in northern Iraq, general says

BAGHDAD — Now at full strength, the U.S. troop surge in Iraq is showing “definitive progress” and the number of forces serving in Iraq’s Multi-National Division-North could be halved by summer 2009, U.S. Army Maj. Gen. Benjamin R. Mixon said.

A reduction of U.S. forces under the general’s command could begin as early as January 2008, he told Pentagon reporters via videoconference.

Mixon, commander of both Multi-National Division-North and the U.S. Army’s 25th Infantry Division, is responsible for six Iraqi provinces in northern Iraq, including the city of Baqubah — site of the ongoing Operation Arrowhead Ripper.

He said he has given U.S. Army Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno, commander, Multi-National Corps-Iraq, a plan indicating a possible reduction of force in Multi-National Division-North during 2008.

Mixon said the current debate over troop withdrawal should revolve around reaching a strategic “end state.”

“It seems to me that we should first decide what we want the end state to be in Iraq, and how is that end state important to the United States of America, to this region and to the world, and then determine how we can reach that end state, and how much time that will take,” he said. “To me, that seems to be the most important thing, because there will be consequences of a rapid withdrawal from Iraq.”

“It cannot be a strategy based on, ‘Well, we need to leave,’” he added. “That’s not a strategy, that’s a withdrawal.”

More here.

I find it most interesting that Congress is pushing for these timelines when they certainly know the information dispatched from those with boots on the ground. Could it be they wish to take credit for an “early withdrawal” when they know very well what the game plan is?

I say that is very possible, however, they should be careful as the military will not and cannot plan a war around the whims of those on either side of the aisle in Congress. They have an option to defund this war they do not have the right however, to interfere in the planning and execution of the war. Oversight is one thing, strategic planning another entirely.

Also, the selective “cherry picking” of the press when it comes to statements made by those in command has been shown again.

Read the rest of this entry »

Tweet This Post

Something rang true with me this morning when reading Grim at Blackfive.

The whole point of the Surge is to address this particular problem. It is six months in the making, if you count from the start of the buildup. If the politicos in Washington set goals that Iraq could not realize, that is their own fault. It is the fault of those whose goals were set without bothering to take any account of military reality.

We’ve got people who are risking their lives every day to give Iraq the chance embodied by the Surge. There are 25 million people in Iraq whose lives depend on the outcome. These games in DC and among the press, they are beyond reprehensible. Real lives are at stake here — better lives than the ones lived by these politicians and journalists.

It is oh so easy to be the “Armchair General” or to “Monday morning Quarterback” all decisions made in Washington in the past.

The President has often said most of his decisions as to operations in Iraq were made after hearing and taking advice from the Top Brass with boots on the ground. That being said, final decisions were in his hands and are his responsibility. However, I believe both the Commander in Chief and those doing the “hard work” in this war see well beyond Iraq.

Would I like to bring home every soldier, sailor, marine and air force member serving in foreign territory..that goes without saying.

Do I believe as Americans we should expect Iraq to field a strong government of their own..absolutely, but standing up that government will be hard work, especially when dealing with the various sects within the country.

Unfortunately, I believe no harder than it would be to stand up a government today in Washington DC with the partisanship and corruption we have on both sides of the aisle.

Tweet This Post