Notable Quotes: Ronald Reagan describes today’s enemy.

As I noted in this other posting, today is the twentieth anniversary of Reagan’s famous speech calling on Gorbachev to "tear down this wall." Within it, one finds these words. Less famous perhaps, but they have a renewed relevance to us today, as we find ourselves in a new world war with Islamofascism, the latest incarnation … Read more

A possible future?

    . Our friend and fellow Gilford, NH blogger (and fill-in MTNP radio host), DCE at the WeekendPundit writes a thought-provoking future history essay. A possible future newscast: “It’s July 4th, 2036, a day of celebration and remembrance. We celebrate the 260th anniversary of the founding of the Republic. We also remember the 20th anniversary … Read more

Did you hear the good news from Iraq? I didn’t think so.

Whether a McCain supporter or not, one has to admit the guy is doing yeoman’s work in his support of the notion of achieving success in the Iraqi front of the war. As I noted in this prior post about McCain and others being heckled by a CNN "reporter," he is in Iraq for a first … Read more

The World Needs Great Men Like Dick Cheney

 
One of my favorite moments in politics from recent times was when Vice President Dick Cheney dropped the "f-bomb" on Sen. Pat Leahey (D-VT) after the Senator slammed him with the "Halliburton as beneficiary of government" meme for the umpteenth time. CNN.com reported on the aftermath, following Cheney’s appearance on Neal Cavuto’s Fox News Channel program after the incident:
When asked if he had cursed at Leahy, Cheney answered, "Probably." "Do you have any regrets?," Neil Cavuto asked. "No. I said it," the vice president responded.
He further remarked, that, of those Senators who heard the exchange, some
"felt that what I’d said badly needed to be said, that it was long overdue."
He explained it this way:
"Part of the problem here is that instead of having a substantive debate over important substantive policy issues, he had challenged my integrity, and I didn’t like that. But most of all I didn’t like the fact that after he’d done so, then he wanted to act like everything was peaches and cream."
There you go. Like him or not, Dick Cheney calls ’em as he sees ’em. That was back in June of 2004. It’s now 2007, and Dick Cheney is still Dick Cheney. I, for one, am glad of that. This week has been a busy one for the Vice President, who demonstrated again why he continues to earn my respect and enthusiastic support…
.

Read more

This guy “gets it”

My new hero is Australian Prime Minister John Howard who, according to a Fox News report, had this to say about Democratic presidential wannabee Barack Obama’s "plan" for complete withdrawal from Iraq by March 31st, ’08: Australian Prime Minister John Howard, a staunch Bush ally who has sent troops to Iraq and faces his own re-election bid … Read more

Memo to Ahmadinejad

Here is this week’s "Exercising the First" column, which appears every Thursday in the Laconia Daily Sun (NH). It is based on information and thoughts I originally used in this post here on GraniteGrok a couple weeks back. Even though several points are reruns, there is new information that I think readers might find noteworthy…

Exercising the First

War? No thanks.

by Doug Lambert
.
Recently, the Iran Policy Committee (IPC), a think-tank of military people and other respected experts in that area of the world, released a white paper offering a series of steps and suggestions to supplement President Bush’s latest plans for a new strategy in Iraq. Entitled “How to Make the Surge Work: A Complementary Political-Military Plan for Iraq”, it outlines a political complement to the proposed American military troop surge in Iraq. Additionally, it reveals information about the nature of the enemy and who they really are that most Americans probably didn’t know.
.
Discussing the paper in a January 12th news conference, General Paul E. Vallely, USA (Ret.), co-chair, IPC Military Committee, and co-author of  “Endgame: The Blueprint for Victory in the War on Terror” said, “Sending an additional 20,000 U.S. troops to Iraq under current military strategies and rules of engagement will unlikely make much difference.” The reason is that there is another reality on the ground in Iraq that more often than not goes unstated, due to the obvious implications. Says Vallely: “Based on the intelligence that is now available, it is very clear that Iran is the number one enemy in Iraq. But our enemy, Iran, is not fighting a conventional war against us; it is engaged in an unconventional war.” He further noted that ample evidence exists showing that the Iranians have stepped up their efforts in the past few months. “The Qods Force of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps secretly trains, finances, and arms an extensive terrorist network in Iraq.”
.
Issuing the gist of the warning his group wishes to impart to President Bush and his war planners, Vallely stated, “To prevail, the United States has to transition from a conventional to an unconventional war footing to adjust to Iran’s tactics and make the enemy pay a heavy price for its despicable tactics.”
.
“But Doug, he talked about an enemy—like we’re really at war or something! And what does he mean about Iranians in Iraq? Fighting us? Why would they? Don’t they understand? We don’t want to fight —we just have to talk to them.” 

Read more

Bush details four main goals of the so-called “surge”

In his radio address this week, President Bush provided more detail on the plans for Iraq he discussed in his prime-time speech this week.
THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. On Wednesday night, I addressed the Nation from the White House to lay out a new strategy that will help Iraq’s democratic government succeed.
.
America’s new strategy comes after a difficult year in Iraq. In 2006, the terrorists and insurgents fought to reverse the extraordinary democratic gains the Iraqis have made. In February, the extremists bombed a holy Shia mosque in a deliberate effort to provoke reprisals that would set off a sectarian conflict. They succeeded, and the ongoing sectarian violence, especially in Baghdad, is making all other progress difficult.
Not to mention the ongoing badmouthing of the President, the war, and the new plans for success in Iraq by the Democrats, antiwar moonbats, assorted Bush-haters, and moderate squishes. This makes progress difficult too.
.
The President continued, defining four main points in the strategy:
Only the Iraqis can end the sectarian violence and secure their people. Their leaders understand this, and they are stepping forward to do it. But they need our help, and it is in our interests to provide that help. The changes in our strategy will help the Iraqis in four main areas:
.
First, we will help the Iraqis execute their aggressive plan to secure their capital. Eighty percent of Iraq’s sectarian violence occurs within 30 miles of Baghdad. The new plan to secure Baghdad fixes the problems that prevented previous operations from succeeding. This time, there will be adequate Iraqi and U.S. forces to hold the areas that have been cleared, including more Iraqi forces and five additional brigades of American troops committed to Baghdad. This time, Iraqi and American forces will have a green light to enter neighborhoods that are home to those fueling sectarian violence. Prime Minister Maliki has pledged that political or sectarian interference with security operations will not be tolerated.
There can’t be any real peace with the Iraqi people unable to safely exist in their homes and neighborhoods. Michelle Malkin has an excellent photo series here, showing the current plight of some of the poorest of the poor in a Baghdad slum.
.
Bush went on to number two:

Read more

“Iran is the number one enemy in Iraq”

The following press release is an interesting analysis of the present situation in Iraq and the reality of Iranian involvement in that country. It discusses the nature of the political problems involved, and offers sound advice to President Bush that he ought to consider in the effort to win the day in Iraq. The blunt assessment that we are in fact fighting a war with Iran is rather frightening, but is something we must understand before it’s too late.
WASHINGTON, Jan. 12 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — The Iran Policy Committee held a press conference on Thursday, 11 January 2007, at the National Press Club in Washington, DC to review President Bush’s 10 January 2007 address to the nation on Iraq and release a White Paper titled, How to Make the Surge Work: A Complementary Political-Military Plan for Iraq, introducing a political complement to the proposed American military troop surge to Iraq.
.
Mr. Bruce McColm, Iran Policy Committee, Executive Committee member, set the stage for discussion. Mr. McColm drew attention to the U.S. military raid on the Iranian consulate in the mainly Kurdish city of Erbil in northern Iraq on the day after the President’s 10 January address. U.S. Forces detained at least five Iranian employees in the consulate and seized computers and documents that should be relevant for additional military action against Iranians in Iraq. McColm praised this event "as evidence that the United States may be more willing to counter Iranian subversion of Iraq." McColm also cited Gen. Michael V. Hayden, Director of the Central Intelligence Agency. Hayden testified before Congress that despite earlier skepticism of reports of Iranian operations in Iraq, he now had the "zeal of a convert" on such reports.
This is the sort of information that more Americans need to learn and truly think about. "Iranians in Iraq? Fighting us? Like we’re at war with them or something?"
General Paul E. Vallely, USA (Ret.), co-chair, IPC Military Committee, and co-author of Endgame: The Blueprint for Victory in the War on Terror, followed Mr. McColm by referring to Mr. Alireza Jafarzadeh, author of The Iran Threat: President Ahmadinejad and the Coming Nuclear Crisis. Vallely said, "Jafarzadeh had revealed intelligence that suggests a sharp increase in Iran’s sponsorship of terrorism and sectarian violence, especially in the past few months. The Qods Force of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps secretly trains, finances, and arms an extensive terrorist network in Iraq."
.
In referring to President Bush’s proposal to surge U.S. troops to Iraq, Vallely said,

"Based on the intelligence that is now available, it is very clear that Iran is the number one enemy in Iraq. But our enemy, Iran, is not fighting a conventional war against us; it is engaged in an unconventional war."

There he goes again with that "enemy" stuff. Doesn’t he know that we just voted to not participate in the war? "War? We don’t want no stinkin’ war! That’s why we voted for the Dems!"

Read more

You know you want to see it. Watch Saddam hang.

Being a blogger, I quite naturally love the internet. As an everyday user, I pretty much take the whole technological wonder that is the World Wide web for granted. There are still some events, however, that cause me to stop and really appreciate all that it does for ordinary people. . The execution of Saddam … Read more

They’re on a mission from God… Just ask ’em.

As the nation’s power elites encourage President Bush to "talk" with our enemies, one wonders if they actually take time to listen to what are enemies are saying about us. You know- did the clowns responsible for the now seemingly forgotten ISG report hear the president of Iran when he said this last week (as reported … Read more

President Bush: We’re not going to let it happen

While President Bush is likely to have been removed from most Americans’ Christmas card list this year, he still gets my support for his basic handling of the new world war. While I vehemently fault him and his administration for failing to make every attempt at getting Americans to understand the extent of the threat … Read more

Dear Santa. All I want for Christmas is some “pre-emption”. And some ammo…

Put me on this guy’s Christmas card list… WASHINGTON, Dec. 14 /U.S. Newswire/ — An armed sleigh-borne Santa Claus zeroes in on Iranian and North Korean nuclear missiles in a postal Christmas card sent this month to government officials and others. . John M. Snyder mailed the cards to the president, vice president, Cabinet and … Read more

President Bush talks Iraq on the radio this week.

In this week’s radio address, President Bush discusses his meeting with the leader of Iraq:
THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. I returned home this week from a visit to the Middle East. On my trip, I met with Prime Minister Maliki of Iraq to discuss how we can improve the situation on the ground in his country and help the Iraqis build a lasting democracy.
.
My meeting with Prime Minister Maliki was our third since he took office six months ago. With each meeting, I’m coming to know him better, and I’m becoming more impressed by his desire to make the difficult choices that will put his country on a better path. During our meeting, I told the Prime Minister that America is ready to make changes to better support the unity government of Iraq, and that several key principles will guide our efforts.
.
First, the success of Prime Minister Maliki’s government is critical to success in Iraq. His unity government was chosen through free elections in which nearly 12 million Iraqis cast their ballots in support of democracy. Our goal in Iraq is to strengthen his democratic government and help Iraq’s leaders build a free nation that can govern itself, sustain itself, and defend itself — and is an ally in the war on terror.
This really is key. We need a friendly government over there- and the days of picking some dictatorial strong-man type are over. We need friends, but they must be legitimate leaders ultimately chosen by their people. The President continues…
Second, the success of the Iraqi government depends on the success of the Iraqi security forces. The training of Iraqi security forces has been steady, yet we both agreed that we need to do more, and we need to do it faster. The Prime Minister wants to show the people who elected him that he’s willing to make the hard decisions necessary to provide security.
.
To do that, he needs larger and more capable Iraqi forces under his control, and he needs them quickly. By helping Iraq’s elected leaders get the Iraqi forces they need, we will help Iraq’s democratic government become more effective in fighting the terrorists and other violent extremists, and in providing security and stability, particularly in Baghdad.
If the government stays unable to provide for basic security, the people will look elsewhere. This is what causes the rise in the power and prestige of militias and warlords. Authorizing the destruction of Mookie Al Sadr and his army would be a great place to start.
Third, success in Iraq requires strong institutions that will stand the test of time and hardship. Our goal in Iraq is to help Prime Minister Maliki build a country that is united, where the rule of law prevails and the rights of minorities are respected. The Prime Minister made clear that splitting his country into parts is not what the Iraqi people want and that any partition of Iraq would lead to an increase in sectarian violence.
.
Security in Iraq requires sustained action by the Iraqi security forces, yet in the long term, security in Iraq hinges on reconciliation among Iraq’s different ethnic and religious communities. And the Prime Minister has committed his government to achieving that goal.

Read more

Meanwhile, back at the new world war…

Did you catch this one? Y-Net News.com reported on November 13th-Monday, According to the Iranian media Monday, Iranian President Mahoud Ahmadinejad declared that Israel was destined to ‘disappearance and destruction’ at a council meeting with Iranian ministers. . “The western powers created the Zionist regime in order to expand their control of the area. This … Read more

You can [cut and] run, but you can’t hide!

Meanwhile, back at the war… . While evrybody’s attention is fixed on Tuesday’s elections, the machinations of the new world war continue. John Keegan writes this chilling observation in the Telegraph.com (UK): There will soon be another war in the Middle East, this time a renewal of the conflict between the Israel Defence Force (IDF) … Read more

Tag, dodge ball and jihad.

This is my weekly column for today’s Laconia Daily Sun.

Exercising the First    by Doug Lambert
Tag, dodge ball and jihad.

At what point will we ban childhood itself? While I’m all in favor of modern innovations like good helmets for children (and adults- if they choose) when bike riding and skiing, more and more lately, the notion of “child safety” just gets plain silly.
.
Consider the latest playground rules at an elementary school just down in nearby Massachusetts. The Sun Chronicle (www.thesunchronicle.com) reports in an article by Susan LaHoud that the eternal childhood game of “Tag is now out during recess at Willett Elementary School.” That’s right- students will no longer be able to participate in the improvised game that has more likely than not been played by young humans since the children of Adam and Eve first set foot on the Earth. The story reports that tag will join other fabled games like touch football and dodge-ball on the growing list of games prohibited during recess. Apparently, dodge-ball is too much of an “exclusionary and dangerous game.”
.
The Sun Chronicle notes that such rules are not unique to this one school. There is a “growing movement against traditional games played by young children in school gymnasiums and playgrounds” in states around the country, including Wyoming, Washington, and South Carolina. Before long, these so-called “chasing” games will undoubtedly be known as quaint activities from the “unenlightened” past. Only trained professionals at some historic “living” museum like Strawberry Banke or Sturbridge Village will “play” such games.
.
Why is this? With child obesity becoming a more widespread problem, you would think that anything involving physical activity like running would be more encouraged. Hasn’t Gov. Lynch’s wife practically made an entire career of the issue? How can these games be allowed to be taken from the kids? Is it entirely because they’re “exclusionary and dangerous”? Or is it something else? You won’t be surprised, as I wasn’t, when I read the answer in the October 16th article: lawyers.
.
Of course this involves lawyers- or, more specifically, lawsuits. The reasons described are attributed mostly as “reflecting society’s increasingly cautious and litigious nature.” Naturally. “[K]ids would get too rough or run into each other, giving rise to parent complaints and threats of lawsuits.” Once again, the vaunted “threat of lawsuit” stops tradition dead in its tracks.
.
*  *  *
.
While we insulate a whole generation of American children from simple fun games that simultaneously teach important life skills like competition, self-sufficiency and independent thinking, what are our enemies doing? As we admonish our young to quit potentially “dangerous and exclusionary” activities like tag and dodge-ball, what are our adversaries, sworn to kill us all, teaching their children? Do they let them play games involving some sort of “chase?”
.
In the August 23rd 1996 “Declaration of War Against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places,” Osama Bin Laden had much to say about Muslim youth: “I say: Since the sons of the land of the two Holy Places feel and strongly believe that fighting (Jihad) against the Kuffar in every part of the world, is absolutely essential; then they would be even more enthusiastic, more powerful and larger in number upon fighting on their own land… To liberate their sanctities is the greatest of issues concerning all Muslims; It is the duty of every Muslims in this world. I say to you William [Defense Secretary Cohen] that: These youths love death as you loves life. They inherit dignity, pride, courage, generosity, truthfulness and sacrifice from father to father. They are most delivering and steadfast at war. They inherit these values from their ancestors.” Wait a minute- there’s nothing about the dodge-ball being “exclusionary”. What gives?
.

Read more

McCain: When he’s wrong, he’s wrong. When he’s right, he’s right. Today he’s right.

Anybody that knows me knows that I am generally p-o’d at John McCain for whatever cause he happens to be championing. Whether it’s stifling free speech with campaign finance "reform" or seemingly protecting the "rights" of terrorists, I regard him as more harm than good for many of the issues important to me. Many crusades upon which he embarks appear designed for publicity and to distance himself from policies of the Bush administration.
.
That being said, given the poor polling numbers that continue to dog President Bush, there may be- and it’s a big "may"- some "method to his madness." If large numbers of voters continue to allow themselves to be misled by the President’s detractors (main stream media, Democrats, etc.), the only way for any Republican to be successful in ’08 may be by being the "anti-Bush." Do I like this possibilty? No. In a perfect world, more people would wake up, see the soundness of the present administration’s overall strategy, and choose a candidate running a campaign based upon a continuation.
.
The world is not perfect.
.
McCain isn’t always wrong, either. He scored 2 positive points with me this week. First, he guest blogged at Captain’s Quarters (which, now that I think of it, earns him another point) on the North Korea situation. He did this nation a great service by reiterating the folly of the ’94 Clinton administration deal with the communist regime, helping people to recognize that mistake so that we don’t repeat it.
The worst thing we could do is accede to North Korea’s demand for bilateral talks. When has rewarding North Korea’s bad behavior ever gotten us anything more than worse behavior?
.
I would remind Senator Hillary Clinton and other Democrats critical of Bush Administration policies that the framework agreement her husband’s administration negotiated was a failure. The Koreans received millions in energy assistance. They diverted millions in food assistance to their military. And what did they do? They secretly enriched uranium.
.
Prior to the agreement, every single time the Clinton Administration warned the Koreans not to do something — not to kick out the IAEA inspectors, not to remove the fuel rods from their reactor — they did it. And they were rewarded every single time by the Clinton Administration with further talks. We had a carrots and no sticks policy that only encouraged bad behavior. When one carrot didn’t work, we offered another.
.
This isn’t just about North Korea. Iran is watching this test of the Council’s will, and our decisions will surely influence their response to demands that they cease their nuclear program. Now, we must, at long last, stop reinforcing failure with failure.
Amen! This is "straight talk" of the kind that I only wish was more common. What’s not to understand? What is surprising about this from McCain is that he followed it up with another correct statement on an important issue- the Iraqi front in the war. 

Read more

Gaffney on the real “state of denial”

Frank J. Gaffney, Jr. is one of my "go-to" people on national security matters and its relation to the new world war. With the mess the media (and the Republicans themselves) have made for the Republicans in the upcoming election thanks to the Foley/ page affair (no pun intended), stirred with the addition of the latest … Read more

Share to...