Iraq

Posted on Democrats, Iraq, Liberals, Moonbats

the official moonbat update

now playing: adding to the noise/switchfoot

in today’s moonbat update: british MP george galloway, al franken, and cindy sheehan.
we shall start today’s update with anti-war agitator george galloway. i’ve said from the very beginning i didn’t trust this guy’s motives in his opposition to the war. there were earlier reports of his involvement in the oil-for-food program that saddam used for his own nefarious purposes. could there be a smoking gun to prove that this was true? chris hitchens seems to think so.
here’s what he said about that in slate:
now to our favorite rush limbaugh fan, otherwise known as al franken. he’s the guy who attempts to lecture republicans about honesty and ethics. it’s good to know that al franken has the same high ethical standards for his employer, air america radio. or not. anyway, al has been a participant in some interesting video footage recently. michelle malkin has the details.
cindy sheehan WILL NOT GO AWAY. she was arrested in d.c. (also from michelle malkin) again yesterday for staging a “die-in” to mourn the deaths of the 2,000 military men and women in iraq. at least that was the stated purpose of this protest. this has stopped being just another war protest a long time ago. if they want to light candles, sing kumbayah with like-minded idealists, build a big ol’ campfire, and make up really stupid anti-war protest songs, fine. this is america. we allow that kind of thing in this country, and frankly, it’s somewhat entertaining to watch the empowered idiots make fools of themselves.
if we want her to go away, we need to stop paying attention to her. in a 24-hour news cycle, it can be difficult to ignore someone like her, but we have to make the attempt. turn off the cameras. stop giving sheehan a platform to bash this country. tuning out cindy sheehan’s crowd at this point is not about silencing honest, open dissent. it is about bringing down the curtain for good on this staged publicity stunt and its band of bad actors and actresses.
i wish the press would try this approach. i have no confidence at all that they will.

Technorati : , , ,

Posted on Democrats, Iraq

the plame game

high-ranking bushies karl rove and scooter libby appear to be involved in exposing valerie plame (joe wilson’s wife) as a CIA operative. opponents of this administration are giddy over the prospect of possible indictments of karl rove and scooter libby over this. whether national security was significantly damaged by this disclosure is something we still don’t know. if any laws were broken, appropriate action should be taken.

however, i would caution those who are opposed to the war in iraq not to use joe wilson’s op-ed as credible evidence that we went to war because the adminstration intentionally lied to us. that’s what many people want to believe about this administration–that they “outed” valerie plame because they were mad that joe wilson didn’t agree with their pre-war analysis. they brought up questions about joe wilson because it was justified to do so.

here’s why. further reading below.

Bush’s “16 Words” on Iraq & Uranium: He May Have Been Wrong But He Wasn’t Lying–from factcheck.org.
Joseph Wilson Speaks at S.F. State–from california conservative. must read this.
Joe Wilson’s Credibility Problem–from frontpagemag.com…background on plamegate.
Another Media Distortion: Joe Wilson Didn’t Uncover Forgeries and Didn’t “Debunk” Much of Anything –from the weekly standard blog.
The Honorable Mr. Wilson–from NRO
Anomalies— also from NRO

so if the left is hoping that indictments in plamegate will lead to the proof that bush lied about iraq, they may very well be disappointed. once again…if they have better proof that bush lied, let’s see it.

Technorati : , , ,

Posted on George W. Bush, Iraq

iraqi constitution updates

links of interest:

Numbers Show Iraq Constitution Approval Likely–from FNC
Rice, Iraqi official optimistic about referendum–from CNN
Austin Bay’s Iraqi constitution day recap
Finally, a Smart Iraq Strategy–defending cities and killing insurgents
Iraq’s constitutional referendum-what you need to know about it in a handy one-page summary (would it be too flip to call it the iraq faq? just wondering…)

this is a wonderful development for iraq and its people. getting to vote on their own constitution is something not even americans had the option to do. i am aware of some of the objections to this constitution, and i think that concerns about the role of islam in the law are legitimate. having some skepticism that change is possible and that women’s rights and those of minorities will be protected is certainly understandable based on iraq’s recent history under saddam. i don’t think that this constitution should be feared for this reason. i would like to see those so-called experts point out where exactly this constitution restricts these rights, because i didn’t see that part when i read it.

much has been made of polls about the president’s approval rating and about how the american people feel about the war in iraq. i believe that most of us want to see iraq succeed, and somehow we have lost sight of the bigger picture. this is because we don’t have concrete evidence of progress and tangible proof at our fingertips every single day on our tv newscasts or in the newspaper. the mainstream press contributes to this negativity by putting the worst spin possible on everything happening in iraq and generally ignoring the good that is being done there.

that’s why we as bloggers have such an important responsibility– to provide balance to the MSM and to tell both sides of the story in iraq. we are doing that, and we will continue to do that.

read this from oblogatory anecdotes. it’s inspiring.

related: ( UPDATE 8:57 PM EDT)

all about iraq (me)
Just said my YES –iraq the model
Polls closing, Iraqis celebrating— from Say Anything
Voting on the new constitution — Cao’s Blog
Iraqis Vote for Constitution (A Sad Day for Liberals)— from California Conservative

Technorati : , ,

Posted on Democracy, Iraq

all about iraq

Zawahiri’s Advice –power line has a great analysis of zawahiri’s letter here.
Zarqawi’s Losing Strategy–austin bay puts a positive spin on the post-war strategy
IRAQ: Status of Iraq?s insurgency–very balanced look at this subject from the CFR

Can Democracy Stop Terrorism?— this article from foreignaffairs. org suggests that there’s no evidence that it can. he argues that we should encourage all political factions to engage in the process, and that this would result in more stable governments. i agree with this last point, and i hope that’s what we are doing now in iraq.

two slightly different views on the iraqi constitution:
Iraq Parliament OKs Constitution Compromise –from FNC
Iraqi MPs approve charter changes — from the BBC

here are some excerpts from the proposed iraqi constitution. interpret for yourself.

Article 7:

First: No entity or program, under any name, may adopt racism, terrorism, the calling of others infidels, ethnic cleansing, or incite, facilitate, glorify, promote, or justify thereto, especially the Saddamist Baath in Iraq and its symbols, regardless of the name that it adopts. This may not be part of the political pluralism in Iraq. This will be organized by law.

Second: The State shall undertake combating terrorism in all its forms, and shall work to protect its territories from being a base or pathway or field for terrorist activities.

Article 14:
Iraqis are equal before the law without discrimination based on gender, race, ethnicity, origin, color, religion, creed, belief or opinion, or economic and social status.

Article 20:
The citizens, men and women, have the right to participate in public affairs and to enjoy political rights including the right to vote, to elect and to nominate.

Article 36:
The state guarantees in a way that does not violate public order and morality:
A. Freedom of expression, through all means.
B. Freedom of press, printing, advertisement, media and publication.
C. Freedom of assembly and peaceful demonstration. This shall be regulated by law.

my favorite part of article 65:
A nominee to the Presidency must meet the following conditions:
C. Must be of good reputation and political experience, and known for his integrity, righteousness, fairness and loyalty to the homeland.

i stuck article 65 in because i think these are good qualities we should have for america’s leaders too. we could do worse (and we have) than following these standards for OUR leaders. do yourself a favor and read the whole thing.

Technorati : , ,

Posted on Iraq

iraq = vietnam?

“One of the many negative consequences of America’s defeat in The Vietnam War has been the uncontrolled proliferation of Vietnams since then.”

quote from AINA’s Why Iraq is Not Like Vietnam: A Primer for the Geopolitically Challenged

here in this blog, we try to squash ridiculous hyperbole such as comparing iraq to vietnam (in case you weren’t aware, john kerry served there). the above article points out some blindingly obvious differences between the two conflicts. i’ll add my two cents here, because this is an important distinction to make in trying to argue the case for staying in iraq for the present time.

fighting against communism was an important part of our foreign policy. communists have wrong ideas that keep those under a strict interpretation of their system oppressed and poor. we should absolutely be against people being oppressed and poor, and we are.

the difference is that communists are not even a fraction as dangerous as Al-Qaeda or any other terrorist group. although communists had terrible ideas, none of those ideas included flying planes into buildings. i believe that religious fanatics, no matter what religion they are, are scarier than philosophical/political ideologues. that’s the kind of people we are dealing with here –religious fanatics.

that’s why we need to continue to be on the offensive in this war on terror. i don’t deny some mistakes were made, but leaving iraq now would be an even greater mistake. the stakes are too high for us to surrender iraq to those who oppose their move toward greater freedom and their progress toward democracy.

Technorati : ,

Posted on Democracy, Iraq

the war on terrorism

the terrorists struck again over the weekend in indonesia. there has been a long history of terrorist activity in that country. the fact it took this long for an attack to happen again is neither reassuring nor comforting.

perhaps we are taking the wrong approach in this war on terrorism. i’m not sure that military force will stop the true militant ideologues in the muslim world in al Qaeda from being evil and blowing things up. that said, getting rid of saddam was a good thing, and i’m not sorry he’s not ruler of iraq right now. i also believe that aside from the WMDs, he was complicit in aiding and abetting terrorists. this alone should be a good enough reason to remove him from power. my complaint is not with the iraq project, it is with the PR effort.

throughout our history, we have tried to solve problems by brute force and sometimes even diplomacy. the right approach is a balance of both. we need to come to an understanding that changing hearts and minds in the middle east is an incremental process. even countries with a long history of democracy still struggle with it, so we can’t expect iraq or its neighbors to embrace all the changes right away.

president bush has the right idea in trying to spread the ideals of freedom and democracy around the world. but when he appoints karen hughes to spearhead the effort, it makes one wonder whether he is taking this seriously. we should be able to come up with someone better to share our message and counter the anti-american rhetoric often represented on arab tv/radio. al-jazeera for example. when the voices of anti-american muslims are the only ones heard, what alternative do their listeners have? we have a good case to present to them. we need to do a better job in presenting this case.

even with our best diplomatic argument presented, it is possible that there will still be fanatics with explosives who remain unconvinced of america’s good intentions. there’s nothing we can do about that. the goal should be to convince the arab-speaking world not to support the fringe elements among them. we can achieve this. we just need the right people to represent us to the arab world.

Technorati : , , , ,

Posted on Iraq

saddam’s links to terrorism (long post)

how are saddam and iraq linked to terrorism? even though there was a sunday telegraph article linking iraq and al-Qaeda based on documents provided to them, i am not going to argue their validity here. there is a more obvious connection between saddam and iraq to terrorism, or at least supporters of terrorist activity. i am referring to saddam’s long association with the PLO (palestinian liberation organization). i also contend that the israeli/palestinian struggle is also related in a peripheral manner to 9/11. i will explain why i think the muslims keep referencing that struggle. here are a few articles discussing this.
(most titles are mine… they were changed for clarity) if you want to skip to my summary of all these articles, it’s after all the links. 🙂

saddam pays off palestinian suicide bombers
iraq and terrorism–from national review
terrorism: q & a–council on foreign relations summary also points out saddam’s past use of WMDs
chronology of the first gulf war
THE PERSIAN GULF CRISIS AND THE ARAB-ISRAELI CONFLICT –from a senate discussion –an article talking about saddam’s relationship with the PLO and how the PLO supported his invasion of kuwait
israel holds back during the gulf war — suggestion that israel was influenced by the U.S. not to retaliate against iraq during the kuwait conflict so as not to inflame other arab states against the U.S.

what prompted this post was a book called al-jazeera, by mohammad el-nawawy and adel iskandar in which it is noted that the PLO was kicked out of kuwait after its liberation. why? they were kicked out, and rightly so i might add, for supporting saddam’s invasion of kuwait. it would naturally follow that israel would support this, being a sworn enemy of most PLO foreign policies. the opposition to saddam and the general aims of terrorist supporters of the PLO was not helpful to gain support for the U.S. we have always supported israel. in the arab world, some would consider us the enemy because of this. this book even suggests that some arabs/muslims believe that there is a zionist conspiracy at work in our media to unfairly portray palestinians. (wait ’til ted turner hears about this!!)

saddam and the PLO were obviously connected. he paid off some of their suicide bombers. the PLO supported saddam’s invasion of kuwait, and even provided logistical support for it. when the U.S. came in and liberated kuwait, and kicked out the PLO, this annoyed saddam and israel’s main opposition group. that’s the connection to the israel/palestinian conflict. it’s also the seed of muslim resentment toward the U.S. that continues post 9/11.

bin laden and the PLO were also quite chummy, according to this piece. it’s not that much of a stretch to believe that a mutual hatred of the U.S. and Israel and a mutual support of the PLO would bring bin laden and saddam together. an attack on america would hurt israel too, and would no doubt be a motivating factor.

just my opinion.

Technorati : , , , , ,

Posted on Iraq, Moonbats

galloway is a loon…part II

continuing with galloway v. hitchens…and his insistence that the terrorist attacks were our fault.

hitchens responds to this lunacy:

“It’s also I think a bit much to be told that these al-Qaeda chaps, these killers and sadists and nihilists and profuse of indiscriminant explosions wouldn’t be this way if we weren’t so mean to them. “

right. just be nice to the terrorists and they will go away.

hitchens on the WMDs:

“Now, just on this point of weaponry. Um, if you have, as you do have in the case of Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, a regime that has used chemical and biological weapons against some of its own inhabitants in Kurdistan, against Iran, several times…On the basis of this, establishable, provable knowledge, who is going to say, well let’s give Saddam Hussein the benefit of the doubt if he says he’s not fooling around with weapons now. What responsible leader of any democracy could face his people later if that bet turned out to be wrong? And say well I had every reason to think he was on the level. Come on! Get real! Be serious on this!”

this is exactly the point we forget when discussing the WMDs…saddam had WMDs. he used them on his own people, against iran, etc. so, to believe that saddam was on the level when he says he wasn’t trying to get WMD, well, that borders on delusional thinking. also, if saddam wasn’t going anything wrong…shouldn’t he allow the inspectors full access to his facilities to prove that the UK and the US were out to lunch with their accusations? hmm….

on his response to colin powell’s comments about his UN speech:

“I don’t give a damn about what Colin Powell thinks about anything. I never have, and I never will. I think he’s, I’ve noticed that he’s, having being for a long time, the most overrated public figure in the United States. He’s running for the nomination to most overrated man in the world. But I don’t really care…and you can’t make me.”

good one. but hitchens is wrong here. there are quite a few candidates for most overrated public figure in the US before we get to colin powell. the first of those would be our former president bill clinton. to listen to liberals talk about him, he appears somewhat similar to a god. if clinton was still our president, there would be no wars. there would be less poverty. more people would have jobs. the government would save us from evil tax cuts for the rich and the windfall into the US treasury from that extra money would find its way magically into the hands of the poor people. send me a postcard from fantasyland, foolish ones. i hear it’s nice there in the fall.

more on this in future posts.

Technorati : , , ,

Posted on Iraq, Moonbats

george galloway is a loon…and other obvious truths

fun fun fun. lefty loon and brit MP george galloway defends his radical foreign policy prescriptions and general lunacy against christopher hitchens. there is no question whose side i’m on. not only is galloway a radical nut-case, he’s also a hypocrite on the oil-for-food situation.

the complete transcript is linked below. i’ll just post a few comments here from each combatant and add my own view of them.

galloway:

“You may very well ask, why so many people wanted to come in here and watch and listen to two British guys debating in the United States of America about a war far away. I think the reason is this: our two countries are the biggest rogue states in the world today. And it is therefore vitally important that those who oppose the crimes of our governments, on both sides of the Atlantic, link hands, link arms, stand shoulder to shoulder, until we’ve rid the world of George W. Bush and Anthony Blair, once and for all…”

i think that both sides of the iraq debate want reassurance that they are in fact correct. that’s part of the reason for the curiosity in this debate. he says that the US and the UK are the biggest rogue states in the world today. i guess if you don’t count north korea, syria, or iran, we are in the team picture. there’s a long list of oppressive governments and countries before you get to the US and the UK. he doesn’t take it upon himself to criticize any of these countries.

he considers the war in iraq a crime. if you consider removing saddam from power, freeing iraqis from oppressive baathist rule, moving them toward a stable pro-democracy government, and helping them write a new future in their constitution to be a crime….slap the cuffs on. i don’t feel guilty about this. neither should bush and blair. just to be clear on mr. galloway’s statement…would he be ok with assassinating either of these gentlemen? it sounds suspiciously like that.

more galloway:

“Unless we stop invading and occupying Arab and Muslim countries, then we will be forced to endure the atrocities that took place in New York on 9-11 and in London on 7-7, over and over again. So if I can’t reach your hearts, let me at least reach your heads in your own interests..”

“…in America’s own interests. Revert your policy towards Israel and Palestine, reverse your policy towards dictators in the Muslim world. Reverse your policy towards war and occupation and we can all be safer! ”

it’s all our fault. we did this to ourselves. 9/11 and 7/7 were the result of american imperialism and occupation. what country were we occupying before september 11th? didn’t the US save kuwait from saddam??? i see no evidence of occupation here, yet the terrorists still struck new york.

so the answer, as galloway sees it, is for us to allow rogue governments to remain unchecked? right. that will work. thank God HE’s not PM. but this isn’t about iraq. this is about israel and palestine. the US is a friend of israel…the UK is to a lesser degree. (although it must be noted that the roadmap is blair’s pet project)

more comments will be analyzed in future posts.

read the complete galloway vs. hitchens transcript, courtesy of seixon.

Technorati : ,

Posted on Iraq, Moonbats

cindy sheehan — head moonbat

the moonbats in codepink had a busy weekend, according to little green footballs. i’m tired of reading about cindy sheehan and her small band of agitators, but i have to address some things she wrote at huffington post.

cindy sheehan is still recruiting political support for her own little war. i don’t know what she hopes to achieve by continuing this campaign. bush is not going to resign or pull the troops out of iraq. his poll numbers continue to plummet, but it can’t get much worse for him than it is now. some peripheral administration flunkies may be thrown under the bus because of katrina. in fact, the aftermath of hurricane katrina may end up doing more damage to bush than sheehan’s anti-war rants could have. bush isn’t going anywhere.

sheehan doesn’t seem to know what she’s talking about when it comes to iraq. as far as the iraqi constitution is concerned, she recycles the same drivel the MSM is trying to sell. i have previously posted on this. the iraqi constitution includes rights for a number of groups, including women, at least according to the draft i read. having a different set of rules than they had under saddam will make the country more stable, not less.

to the argument that iraq needs leadership, she says that the existing leadership is a puppet government with the neo-cons pulling the strings. her point about chalabi may be valid. however, to say this would strongly imply that the election was a fraud, that all the people with the purple fingers participated in this conspiracy. if the neo-cons could pull strings, they could force agreement on the iraqi constitution and have a administration lackey whispering in the PM’s ear. that’s not what we have. like it or not, iraq is going to run itself. that’s our plan.

she goes on to make other points that i don’t have any definite opinion about either way. her solution to all of this is wrong, though.

enough about sheehan… take a break and check this out. it’s really cool… an different version of rock, paper, scissors

Technorati : , , ,