The Surge is Working / Mission Accomplished

The surge is working. That is what I continually hear on the right. One question: If the surge is working, then when will combat end? In other words define “working.” If your goal is to have troops in Iraq fighting until 2012 as the Iraqi Defense minister predicts, then perhaps it is working, on that schedule.

The goal of the surge was originally to be a move to give the political bodies in Iraq time for reconciliation. Now proponents of the surge are celebrating rebaathification, which is counter to one of the strategies in the aftermath of the invasion.

As we recruit former insurgents and pay them to fight another enemy in Iraq, that we call Al Qaeda, but is actually non-aligned radical insurgents who look for strength in allying with the mythical entity Al Qaeda, a loose coalition of radical Muslims. You doubt that? Answer this: Do you think that Osama Bin Laden is giving orders for tactics to these guys in Iraq? I didn’t ask about words of encouragement, I asked whether he is giving direct tactical orders. Of course he is not, therefore, it is not a centralized formal organization, but rather a loose confederation of like-minded violent radicals Hell-bent on driving out the “crusaders.”

Perhaps they would like a central organization with maybe a Salahadin to lead them in their Jihad.

It is important to understand the nature of that word too. Jihad is only acceptable to Muslims if it is in retaliation for an aggressive act. I heard a lot of Americans starting on 9/11/2001 looking for payback, including the President, when he came out of hiding and put on a hard hat at ground zero. One man’s payback is another man’s jihad. Does that put it into a different perspective for you? For what on earth could they want payback?

Well, in the case of Osama, it was for having U.S. and therefore Western/Christian bases on holy ground in Saudi Arabia. In the Second Crusade, Reynauld of Chatillon planned and launched an invasion of Saudi Arabia with the intent of destroying both Messina and Mecca, Islam’s holiest sites. In the minds of certain Muslims, having American bases in Saudi Arabia was tantamount to Reynauld’s failed action, which of course led to the destruction of the Christian states in the Middle East fifty years after their inception in the First Crusade. Think that isn’t important in today’s world? Think again.

So, is the surge working? Supporters say that militarily it has, though the whack-a-mole that they pointed to in the old strategy is still there, with attacks spreading from Baghdad to Mosul last week. I submit that the violence in Mosul and other areas indicates that there is probably more military needed still to quell that spread, therefore the surge as it was planned is not working. Unfortunately, we have no more military available. So even militarily is at best a success with caveats.

Politically? Let’s see, we have rebaathification, paying insurgents to fight for us, arming tribal war lords on all sides of the multiple ethnic rifts, hoping that the Shia Mehdi Army stays on hiatus and that Iran’s alleged involvement lessens as we rattle sabers with them and an Iraqi Defense Minister who says we’ll need to be there for internal security until 2012 and for external threats until 2018. Sure, why not? Mission accomplished.

Media Distraction

While the media in America are completely unraveling about snippets of comments made by political candidates over issues that do not matter, (Is hope enough or do you also need to work and utilize the political process? Try both!), the Iraqi Defense Minister Abdul Qadir dropped a bomb on a Fort in Virginia. In a visit to Fort Monroe he said that Iraq will need U.S. Military assistance until 2018. That’s defending the country from outside. He said that Iraqis should be able to handle their internal security by 2012. Of course these numbers keep sliding into the future. John McCain has said that American forces can be in country for 100 years. Look at Germany. Look at Korea. Internal threats don’t apply to those. In 2003, we were saying that it took months to pacify Germany after World War II. Pacifying South Korea was not a real issue after the “conflict” leveled it. Occupation of those was to stop external threats. Apples and Oranges. We’re talking being in Iraq until 2012, at least, just to pacify it internally?

Now as far as the Tim Russert led misinformation campaign about comments made by Hillary Clinton, that were a reaction to a question from FOX NEWS reporter Major Garrett who read an Obama quote about Martin Luther King Jr., in which Obama said, in effect that leaders have to set challenges, such as King’s I have a Dream speech. He was reacting to Hillary Clinton’s focus on deeds vs words. Of course, from Obama, they were just more words. Clinton answered Garrett saying that Presidents before Johnson had not acted and it took someone who knows the ropes to actually get the bills passed. So, no she did not discount MLK’s work, in fact she praised it in the full quote. If you say that this has anything to do with race then you haven’t seen the full quote. It is right there on You Tube. Nice try Russert. I am sure that since Hillary slammed your "Jesuit logic" that you will try harder next time.

Strait of Ton..., Hormuz

The Strait of Tonkin, sorry, Hormuz was the scene of a harrowing experience over the weekend, according to The Bush Administration, as tiny boats approached three United States Navy ships just off of the Iranian coast. Among the ships was the Ticonderoga Class Cruiser USS Port Royal. That ship carries two Mk 41 VLS (Vertical Launching Systems) that usually each have eight tubes allowing for continuous firepower of missiles. These missiles can include, Sea Sparrows, which I have seen shoot down a drone flying in at 600 miles per hour, and which can also hit surface vessels. The ship also carries Tomahawk Cruise Missiles, Anti Submarine Missiles, Mk Torpedoes, Harpoon anti-ship Missiles, two Mk-45 that can fire 16-20 five-inch rounds per minute and is fired from an automated system with deadly accuracy, and of course two Phalanx CIWS, (Close-in Weapons System), that can fire a 20mm round (Remember the German 20 mm tearing up the troopers in Saving Private Ryan, when they were on the German tank in the village? Of course that was just a movie, but it was pretty representative.) Well, the Phalanx can fire 3,000 of those rounds a minute. Of course the magazines only hold half that. Oh yeah, they are guided by radar, and again are very accurate. The rounds in the Phalanx are armor piercing.

And that’s only one of the three ships that were “threatened” by the Iranian gunboats.

Now, remember that the Strait of Hormuz is at the narrowest point 21 miles. So they could have been 10 miles off of the Iranian coast, give or take. Imagine foreign ships of that destructive power ten miles off the coast of let’s say, Savannah. Let’s also say that in the past, about 20 years earlier a similar ship from that foreign country had been there and shot down a Delta flight. (1988 US Vincennes, an Aegis Cruiser shot down an Iran Air Airbus A300, which had just taken off loaded with passengers.)

How would we react to that ship being so close?

Of course the Iranians are tempting the U.S. Navy. We have a President who sails through the region, well, not him personally, invading Iran’s neighbors, on both sides mind you. They know The U.S. cannot afford the wars he has already started, much less a confrontation with Iran. Bush is about to go to the region. Perhaps they are just reminding the world that we have that kind of firepower in their waters, before he gets an opportunity to talk to regional leaders and pretend that he is about no more than just puddin’ and pie, peaceful democratic efforts. He’s about the weapons described above.

He makes the First Crusade seem like a game of marbles.