Does Obama get out of bed each morning wondering how he can screw things up today?  Does the Obama Administration have a secret department within the bowels of the White House whose job assignment is to come up with ways to screw things up for the United States?  I mean – it just seems impossible for anyone to accidentally screw up so many things so often, and in some case, on a continuous basis.

President Obama is a prime example why I believe the United States needs a military man as President.

Look at Afghanistan.  Under the leadership of the current Commander-in-Chief, American causalities have skyrocketed.  And they will get worse as the Taliban rebounds.  All because an inexperienced American leader openly tells the enemy that he will be withdrawing Americans troops on a date certain.  Oh, you can rest assured that Americans deaths will continue to rise in Afghanistan until we rebuild our forces on the ground there, allow them to go after the insurgents, and untie their hands and allow them to decimate the Taliban in Afghanistan – and in Pakistan — or, get American troops out of Afghanistan – completely.

So what has the Commandeer-in-Chief screwed-up lately?  Well, according to news reports he is about to order a shocking draw down of American troops in Iraq.  Instead of decimating the enemy in Iraq, Obama is decimating American troop numbers to such a low level that US troops will be hard pressed to defend themselves — let alone train Iraqis to take care of themselves.  Look for American causalities to rise in Iraq very soon.

It is reported that American commanders in that theatre are “livid” at the Commander-in-Chief for this amateurish handling of the US military.  What this is, in my opinion, is total disrespect for the US military by Obama.   Our military deserves more, a hell of a lot more, from their Commander-in-Chief, especially after all their sacrifice.

A small contingent of troops will create another “Fort Apache” situation where US troops could potentially over-run and wiped-out.

On the other hand the mad mullahs of Iran are beside themselves with joy!  They cannot believe their good luck.  They find it almost impossible to believe the American people would allow their President to show such disrespect for their nation’s warriors.  But — they are jubilant with the knowledge that this huge blunder by Obama will allow Iran’s influence to grow by leaps and bonds within Iraq and it will allow Iran to train and rearm a huge army of Iraqi insurgents along with a massive inflow of Iranian troops to retake Iraq and fulfill the Iranian goal of hegemony in the region.  In other words – Iran will own Iraq after all the American blood spilled on Iraqi soil – thanks to Obama.

You know, we Americans are one screwed-up people.  We have elected a leader who has managed to trash the nation, here at home, and internationally, and still nearly 40% of the electorate supports the “Trasher-in-Chief.”  How do you explain something like this?  How is it possible that descendents of pilgrims and pioneers have not stormed the White House demanding that Obama resign and leave the Oval Office? (One reason, of course, is that we are painfully aware that Joe Biden is waiting in the wings to step into Obama’s shoes.  That scenario is so scary that I don’t even want to go there!)

Here’s what I see in my somewhat dusty crystal ball for US/Iraqi relations:  The US will have to invade Iraq for a third time — to drive out the Iranians.  The problem with that scenario is that should we have to do that, we most certainly will have to drive into Iran itself to destroy the current Iranian regime and cripple the Iranian military and their nuclear bomb aspirations.

That will be no easy task.  It will be a very long and nasty war with more casualties that the Afghanistan and Iraq wars combined and, most likely, become a regional war involving most of the nations of the Middle East including Israel.

Its called “Thinking Ahead.”  Most successful leaders do it as a matter of course.  Unfortunately for America, our illustrious leader seems devoid of the ability to think ahead about anything but his reelection.

Presidents who win wars listen to their military commanders.  They draw from that well of training and experience dug by the men who actually have to fight the wars by committing American sons and daughters to “Harm’s Way,” and then have to write the letters to their families when those same men and women lose their lives as a result of the commands THEY give.  THEY KNOW about fighting and defeating America’s enemies.  Civilian Presidents, as a rule, DO NOT!

Only 3,000 American troops on the ground in Iraq means they will have to assume a defensive mode and maintain it 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year.  The stress alone will be awful on those men and women.

So why is Obama doing it?  Politics — plain and simple. It’s called “pandering” to the political left. And it will get worse until Mr. Obama is relieved of his duties in the Oval Office in November of 2012.

This is just another reason to vote for anyone with an “R” beside his or her name when you enter the voting booth in November of 2012.  Times are just that desperate in America today.

J. D. Longstreet

 

WesternFront America

By Doug Edelman

Does anyone remember Operation Cyclone?

In 1979, Jimmy Carter began arming the Mujahidin in Afghanistan, and ordered the CIA to begin stirring Islamic unrest in the region to “destabilize” the area and help repel the “oppressive” Soviet Union. This action may well have made things more difficult for the Soviets, but it also set in motion the creation of Al Qaida and the Taliban! And, of course, Carter’s policies regarding Iran allowed the creation of the Islamic Republic, now the largest state sponsor of terror on the planet! One could well argue that Carter and his policies were contributory if not causative to the events leading to and following 9-11!

In his first 2 years in office, Barack Obama’s policies toward the Islamic World (and, concurrently toward our allies) have caused a lot of head scratching! It would be a lengthy and distracting tangent to pursue his history in this regard here. Suffice it to say that there are many examples where his foreign policy has been either incoherent or antithetical to our historical understanding of friend and foe.

But with his singlehandedly committing to military action in Libya, he has made an epic blunder which will be history-changing. (By single-handedly I mean without congressional consent; UN authorization and the cries of the Arabs notwithstanding!)

Isn’t it interesting that Al Qaida is cheering for our intervention to oppose Khadafy? WHY? If Khadafy’s demise is desirable to Al Qaida… isn’t that reason enough to question our complicity with it?

Remember that, despite his being a despotic and brutal dictator (what Islamic nation IS NOT under a brutal and dictatorial regime?) Khadafy was a muzzled mad-dog. After Reagan rang his bell with bombs falling around him he shut up. He did try striking back with the Lockerbie incident, but got slapped down again after that. When he saw what happened to Saddam Hussein… he shut down his nuke research, invited inspectors in, and began COOPERATING with us by providing intelligence. He kept Al Qaida at bay in northern Africa. So while he was a dictator ruling his country with an iron fist… he was actually SERVING the US vital interests!

So, with the current unrest – why should we get involved at all? Is there a vital US interest requiring us to commit US blood and treasure? Not according to Secretary Gates! He says we had no vital interests in the region!

President Obama tells us we are acting on the authority of the World Community! (So if the UN says “Jump”, he says “how high?” now?) Isn’t CONGRESS supposed to authorize military action? Is the Constitution now subordinate to the United Nations… that organization that’s been such a good friend and strong defender of America’s Vital Interests? (Sarcasm here.)

Obama claims “This is how the international community SHOULD work”. Really? The UN “authorizes” action and our military acts on their wishes without consent of Congress? Obama touts a “coalition”, yet Bush had twice as many countries on board HIS coalition when we initiated action against Iraq! Bush sought and received authorization from Congress to use military force. We had authorization from the UN as well, to use military action. Yet Bush was blamed for starting an “ILLEGAL” war and a “war for oil”.

(Interestingly, France and England, who were among those CALLING for a no-fly zone in Libya, did so in their own vital interests in the hope of securing Libyan oil… thus, a war for oil! America imports essentially NO Libyan oil so it’s of little to no vital interest to us!)

Joe Lieberman tells us that we’re doing the will of “the Arab street”! Are our military now taking orders from the UN and the Arabs? And what kind of allies have the Arab nations been to the US?

Having failed to make a case for this intervention on the basis of US vital Interests… the Administration is now trying to appeal to America’s humanitarian nature calling it a humanitarian cause to end “atrocities”. They trot out the case of a woman claiming to be raped by pro-Khadafy forces, for example. Tragic, if true, but pick up your local newspaper and you’ll find rapes and murders committed daily! Should we send in Tomahawks to New York, or Detroit, or DC because crimes are committed?

There is not a single Islamic nation on the planet where “atrocities” are not committed on a daily basis! There is civil unrest in most of them. Look at Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Rwanda and the Ivory Coast for example! People are hacked with machetes, limbs are cut off, people are buried to the waist and stoned, and kids have truck driven over their arms. That world is a brutal one. Should we intervene in all of them? (The Ivory Coast is the world’s largest producer of Cocoa… producing more than half the world’s supply. Should we intervene there to insure the free flow of chocolate at market prices? That would be a greater “vital interest of the United States” than is to be found in Libya!)

There is now an effort underway to provide arms to the Libyan rebels. Hearken back to Operation Cyclone! Isn’t that what CREATED the Taliban and Al Qaida? When Khadafy falls, WHO will fill the void? Who’s going to ultimately follow Mubarak in Egypt? The protesters cry “Democracy”, but what does that mean? Does anyone truly believe that a constitutional republic will be the result of the fall of these regimes?

“Democracy” is Mob Rule – literally! (Look it up!) It has been said that Democracy is 2 wolves and a sheep taking a vote on what to have for dinner! Let us remember that “democracy” does not necessarily lead to freedom and individual liberty! Look at what happened in Gaza when they had “democratic” elections. They elected HAMAS! As a wiser man than I said in this context… “Democracy” means one-man, one-vote, ONE TIME! After that they’ll be right back under totalitarian rule… but this time it will be under a theocratic rule and Shari ‘a Law.

So, what is the meaning of all this unrest in the Middle East? CALIPHATE! Remember, the acolytes of the 12^th Imam – the “Islamic Messiah” for lack of a better explanation – believe he will not come until the world is plunged into chaos. Iran’s Ahmadinejad IS such a 12^th Imam believer and has STATED his goal to BRING ABOUT his return. This “popular uprising” among the Islamic nations has been fomented by Iran and other Jihadi influences. This is NOT a cry for western style freedom and liberty. It is a move to establish a world-wide caliphate.

And President Carter 2.0 is playing right into their hands, whether thru Carter-like incompetence or intentional complicity. Either should disqualify him from service as our Commander in Chief.

Copyright © 2011 by Doug Edelman

Doug Edelman is a conservative political analyst and commentator, and was a contributing editor for The Conservative Voice. His work has appeared on ChronWatch, Western Front American, Small Government Times, Western Journalism, News By Us, The American Daily, The Post Chronicle, New Media Journal, Capitol Hill Coffee House and more. Mr. Edelman is also an IT Consultant/Contractor and owner of a Computer Services Business.  He has taught PC Maintenance & Repair and Networking at his local Community College, and maintains a blog at http://starboard.blogtownhall.com/.

 

WesternFront America

I come from a generation, just as several before it, that was drafted into military service. The Draft, conscription, goes back to the days of the Civil War and, before that, it was understood that able-bodied men would serve in militias.

After the Pearl Harbor attack on December 7, 1941, many American men lined up around the corner to volunteer to fight the Japanese. Others would be dispatched to the European theatre of war to fight the Nazis.

Still others waited to be drafted into service. During the years leading up to Pearl Harbor many Americans simply wanted to stay out of the Asian conflict that had begun with the Japanese invasion of China many years earlier and the European conflict that had begun when Hitler invaded Poland in 1939. That changed in 1941.

The “greatest generation” fought and won. They did it by being absolutely merciless toward our enemies because that is the only real rule of war. Kill them before they kill us. Lose the war and you are their possession, their slaves.

World War Two was all-out war with civilians dying in the hundreds of thousands because the people’s will to fight on had to be extinguished. Dresden was bombed to dust; Berlin became a shell of shattered buildings. As American forces waited to invade the homeland of Japan, President Truman ordered the bombing of Hiroshima and, when the Japanese emperor and generals still refused to meet the terms of unconditional surrender, he bombed Nagasaki. World War Two ended.

I often tell people that the history of mankind is the history of war. It is always the history of winners and losers. It may take a short breath, but war is a constant throughout history and in the life of each new generation.

Shortly after the end of World War Two in 1945, the Korean War began when North Korea invaded South Korea on June 25, 1950. That war drew Americans back to a new battlefield until, on July 27, 1953, a truce was signed. The two Koreas are technically still in a state of war because no peace treaty exists.

Then, of course, for most Americans today there was the Vietnam War. Whether of the generation who fought it or those born after it, the Vietnam War remains the war we lost. It remains a cauldron of debate over its conduct. What emerged from that war, however, was an all-volunteer military, a warrior class.

Over the years of the Iraq-Afghanistan conflict I had occasion to write that these were the wrong wars in the wrong places, that the U.S. was wasting its treasure and young men (and women) there. I think, on reflection that I was wrong.

I think, now, that even this veteran of the U.S. Army, drafted in the 1960s, simply grew weary of these wars and neglected the broad history of conflicts dating back to biblical times.

A friend of mine, a professional soldier who served for 25 years, had this to say:

“When I first came in, the drill sergeants, platoon sergeants and sergeants majors were all ‘Nam vets and they all told us the same thing; we are an all-volunteer Army, none of us were drafted; having served in a conscript Army they all said that we wouldn’t want to be in conflict with a bunch of draftees who did not want to be there. They told us about disciplinary problems in the draftee military you would not believe.”

“The war we are currently engaged in is The One Hundred Years War and the sooner the American people get used to that, the better. I do not differentiate between the ‘Iraq War’ and the ‘Afghanistan War’; they are simply different theaters of the same war.”

In his new book, “Kaboom”, Matt Gallagher traces his transformation from an ROTC college graduate to his battlefield experiences in Iraq. He wrote:

“As I watched the platoon joke, clown, and ramble their way through the holiday dinner, I couldn’t help but think about the country that had produced them. These were the men in the flesh that society only celebrates in the abstract.”

“The NCOs had served in the army long enough to stop caring about the whims of the American culture they protected so effectively; the joes were just removed enough to not fully recognize how the same society that reared us had detached itself from us the day we signed our enlistment papers. In a voluntary military, we fought for the nation, not with it.”

Americans, most of whom honor our troops, have not had our lives personally touched by the Mideast conflicts. The way of life they are fighting to protect has barely been altered as they put their lives on the line every day in a combat zone or service in any of the branches.

Under such circumstances, it is easy to forget there are countless enemies, mostly Muslim, striving to bring down America and to kill us in the same fashion as they killed some three thousand of us on a single day at the beginning of this decade.

Withdrawing from conflict zones in Iraq and Afghanistan may seem like a good idea, an end to our casualties in battle, but those who are there, our warrior class, know that it would just be a brief cessation of what will be a very long war we cannot dare to lose.

Alan Caruba writes a daily post at http://factsnotfantasy.blogspot.com. An author, business and science writer, he is the founder of The National Anxiety Center.

© Alan Caruba, 2010

 

WesternFront America

President Obama said some interesting things in Oslo, accepting the Nobel Peace Prize.

Still, we are at war, and I’m responsible for the deployment of thousands of young Americans to battle in a distant land.  Some will kill, and some will be killed.  And so I come here with an acute sense of the costs of armed conflict — filled with difficult questions about the relationship between war and peace, and our effort to replace one with the other.

Some of those young men will die because of idiotic rules of engagement which you imposed upon them.  The relationship between war and peace is that of polar opposites. Replacing peace with war is relatively easy, replacing war with peace requires victory; an overwhelming victory that breaks the will of the aggressor so that they will not soon repeat their imperialistic adventure.

Terrorism has long been a tactic, but modern technology allows a few small men with outsized rage to murder innocents on a horrific scale.

Individual terrorists may be motivated by rage or revenge, but Jihad is driven by doctrines enshrined in the Qur’an and exemplified in the sira & sunna.  What does it matter to the innocent victims whether they were killed by one, ten or a thousand men? What does it matter to them what weaponry was used in their murder? The fact of killing innocents is important, not the scope, scale, method or manpower involved. Islamic doctrine requires “great slaughter“; killing “many of them“.

There will be times when nations — acting individually or in concert — will find the use of force not only necessary but morally justified.

For Islam, imperialistic conquest is required by Allah and justified by our status as kuffar, rebels against Allah.  If you search for O9.1,  O9.8 and O9.9, and add my byline as a qualifier, you will find posts in which I have quoted Islamic law which requires annual attacks upon Jews & Christians and pagans.

A non-violent movement could not have halted Hitler’s armies.  Negotiations cannot convince al Qaeda’s leaders to lay down their arms.  To say that force may sometimes be necessary is not a call to cynicism — it is a recognition of history; the imperfections of man and the limits of reason.

A violent movement could have preempted Hitler’s aggression. Nobody had the requisite courage, will & resolve to take action.  Nothing short of death can convince mujahideen to lay down their arms. They seek death, and when one is killed, another steps forward to take his place. ‘Martyrdom’ is their their ticket to Paradise.

Where force is necessary, we have a moral and strategic interest in binding ourselves to certain rules of conduct.  And even as we confront a vicious adversary that abides by no rules, I believe the United States of America must remain a standard bearer in the conduct of war.  That is what makes us different from those whom we fight.  That is a source of our strength.  That is why I prohibited torture.  That is why I ordered the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed.  And that is why I have reaffirmed America’s commitment to abide by the Geneva Conventions.  We lose ourselves when we compromise the very ideals that we fight to defend.  (Applause.)  And we honor — we honor those ideals by upholding them not when it’s easy, but when it is hard.

Torture was already prohibited. Water boarding as practiced by the CIA is not torture. What is the difference where you confine unlawful combatants?  Gitmo or Thomson; what is the moral difference?  Our adversaries are not signatories of the Geneva Conventions nor do they abide by them. They are not entitled to  the protection of conventions they do not recognize. Geneva Conventions are not the ideals we fight to defend. Those ideals are enshrined in the Declaration of Independence.

First, in dealing with those nations that break rules and laws, I believe that we must develop alternatives to violence that are tough enough to actually change behavior — for if we want a lasting peace, then the words of the international community must mean something.  Those regimes that break the rules must be held accountable.  Sanctions must exact a real price.  Intransigence must be met with increased pressure — and such pressure exists only when the world stands together as one.

What sanction would have stopped Hitler? What sanction will stop Iran? When an enemy is dedicated and devoted to genocide; when they believe that genocide pleases their demon, they will engage in it, regardless of sanctions. Only death will deter them.

One urgent example is the effort to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons, and to seek a world without them.  In the middle of the last century, nations agreed to be bound by a treaty whose bargain is clear:  All will have access to peaceful nuclear power; those without nuclear weapons will forsake them; and those with nuclear weapons will work towards disarmament.  I am committed to upholding this treaty.  It is a centerpiece of my foreign policy.  And I’m working with President Medvedev to reduce America and Russia’s nuclear stockpiles.

Unilateral disarmament is suicidal.  Dreaming of a world without nuclear weaponry is suicidal idiocy.  Avaricious dictators are constantly probing for weakness, seeking opportunities for exploiting those unable or unwilling to defend themselves.  Pandora’s box has been opened, the demons are loose, and they can not be recaptured.  Public expressions of suicidal insanity such as Obama’s present temptation to aggressors, inviting war.

Those who seek peace cannot stand idly by as nations arm themselves for nuclear war.

They want nukes, give them a few, like we gave them to Japan.  Nothing less will stop those who dream of ruling the world. The megalomaniacs and their supporters must be eliminated.  What if Hitler had developed the bomb first?  Any weapon loses its deterrent effect if those who possess it lack the will to use it.

And yet too often, these words are ignored.  For some countries, the failure to uphold human rights is excused by the false suggestion that these are somehow Western principles, foreign to local cultures or stages of a nation’s development.  And within America, there has long been a tension between those who describe themselves as realists or idealists — a tension that suggests a stark choice between the narrow pursuit of interests or an endless campaign to impose our values around the world.

Case in point: Somalia; President Clinton sent our armed forces, with suicidal rules of engagement and insufficient material. He pulled them out when too many got killed, telegraphing weakness and lack of resolve to the enemy. The results ain’t pretty.  Predation is not entirely about the biggest fangs, it is also about attitude: the will to kill.  If you don’t have it, don’t get involved!  A Security Council resolution said that Hezbollah would be disarmed. How did that work out? The ‘peace keepers’ are too timid to disarm Hezbollah.  The meek will inherit the earth; only if the aggressive kill each other without first killing the meek.

America has never fought a war against a democracy, and our closest friends are governments that protect the rights of their citizens.

Hitler was elected. The Roman Empire had a Senate. Some people just can’t get a clue. Form and substance are not the same. Hamas won an election a few years ago; majority rule decided to perpetuate terrorism. The result would have been the same if their rival had won the election.

Let me also say this:  The promotion of human rights cannot be about exhortation alone.  At times, it must be coupled with painstaking diplomacy.  I know that engagement with repressive regimes lacks the satisfying purity of indignation.  But I also know that sanctions without outreach — condemnation without discussion — can carry forward only a crippling status quo.  No repressive regime can move down a new path unless it has the choice of an open door.

So, what did you do to aid the dissidents in Iran? How effective were your efforts?  If those dissidents had prevailed, would their regime be any better than that of the Mullahs?  Most revolutions do not produce liberal democracies, they replace one tyranny with another.

Third, a just peace includes not only civil and political rights — it must encompass economic security and opportunity.  For true peace is not just freedom from fear, but freedom from want.

President Obama will be surprised to discover that a few people can analyze his statements and determine their true meaning. He is demanding re-distribution of wealth & income on a global scale.  He is demanding that we submit to global taxation  for that purpose. President Kennedy’s economic development policy had a consequence: foreign competition cost American jobs. Got a clue yet?

And that’s why helping farmers feed their own people — or nations educate their children and care for the sick — is not mere charity.  It’s also why the world must come together to confront climate change.  There is little scientific dispute that if we do nothing, we will face more drought, more famine, more mass displacement — all of which will fuel more conflict for decades.

I will use two words most others won’t: International Socialism.  That is what President Obama is up to,  in plain, direct language. He intends to impoverish us and ruin our standard of living for the benefit of others, so that they can build up great armies and conquer us.  Islam does not wage war  because it is poor, it wages war to get more. It was founded for the purpose of enriching its founder through accrual of spoils.  It is now known that the ‘scientists’ fudged their data to establish a lie as  ‘scientific fact’ for political purposes.  We can’t educate our own children & care for our own sick, but President Obama has decided that we must pay to educate and heal the rest of the world.  He is a prime example of cranial-rectal juxtaposition.

And yet somehow, given the dizzying pace of globalization, the cultural leveling of modernity, it perhaps comes as no surprise that people fear the loss of what they cherish in their particular identities — their race, their tribe, and perhaps most powerfully their religion.  In some places, this fear has led to conflict.  At times, it even feels like we’re moving backwards.  We see it in the Middle East, as the conflict between Arabs and Jews seems to harden.  We see it in nations that are torn asunder by tribal lines.

Tribal & religious conflict long preceded globalization & modernity.  Islam has been engaged in it for nearly 1400 years. President Obama slyly puts the onus on Europe for slowly awakening to the fact that Muslims are taking over their continent.

And most dangerously, we see it in the way that religion is used to justify the murder of innocents by those who have distorted and defiled the great religion of Islam, and who attacked my country from Afghanistan.

How many times will he repeat that damn lie? Islam has not been defiled, nor has it been distorted. It was designed for genocidal warfare using terrorism as a tactic.  Its mission is mercenary and its method is martial.  Read Surah al-Anfal, paying particular attention to verses 1, 39,  41 & 67.  What does Allah want? What did Moe want? To whom do the spoils belong?  What did Allah command Muslims to do?  President Obama assumes that nobody will recognize and point out his deception.

Such a warped view of religion is not just incompatible with the concept of peace, but I believe it’s incompatible with the very purpose of faith — for the one rule that lies at the heart of every major religion is that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us.

When I see a Gd’d lie, I call it, without fear or favor. I don’t care who is offended! President Obama is a liar! Islam is a war cult, not a religion. The purpose of Islam is to enrich its founder through the professional practice of piracy. This fatal fact is fully documented in Islam’s Mercenary Mission.  Here is the concluding paragraph from that blog post. It summarizes the major points documented therein.

What keeps a war from being holy? Embezzling the spoils.  That says it all!  A summary follows in the form of an outline.

• The spoils belong to Allah and Moe.
• Allah & Moe get the top 20%.
• Allah granted special dispensation to take spoils.
• Allah promised abundant spoils.
• Embezzling the spoils:
  • condemns the embezzler to Hell
  • makes war unholy.
• Allah gave Moe the keys to the treasures of the world.
• Allah made Moe wealthy through conquests.
  • Moe got his income by his spear.
• Moe wanted the spoils & ransom; Allah wants genocide.
• Rome & Persia will be defeated and their treasures spent in Jihad.

Each of those points is based on explicit text in an ayat or hadith. Links are provided so that you can verify the quotes and explore the context. Next time, do due diligence and examine the ideology, character & associations of the candidates before voting. We can not afford to repeat the mistake we made in ’08!

Originally posted at Ben’s Blog © Dajjal

 

WesternFront America