Category Archives: War on Terror

A Take On Bush’s Iraq Surge…

Since I haven’t weighed in on Bush’s surge yet, I figure now is the time. The speech itself sounded like the usual canned Iraq war speech that Bush has been giving for almost 4 years now. Hugh Hewitt gave the speech a solid B plus while more sober pundits like George Will say Bush’s “plan” is a failure.

Instead of heaping more criticism on Bush’s “plan”, I will attempt to present one of my own.

1) Withdraw all American troops out of Baghdad and other urban areas and allow Iraqi forces to secure those areas. Make it very clear that American and other international troops will not interfere with Iraqi forces unless Al-Qaeda or Baathist forces retake the cities. American troops will act as a rapid reaction force to assist Iraqi forces if they are unable to maintain control.

2) Redeploy American troops to Anbar province to finish off the remaining Al-Qaeda fighters there.

3) Redeploy American troops to bases in Kurdistan, to protect convoys from Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, and to forward firebases along the Syrian and Iranian borders to secure the borders against infiltration by foreign fighters. In addition, give American forces authorization to pursue militants across the border.

4) Demand the Iraqi government develop and pass legislation within six months to share oil revenue among all Iraqis in an oil trust or the United States will pull all support for the Iraqi government and begin an immediate withdrawal.

5) The primary U.S. mission in Iraq, other than defeating Al-Qaeda, is the training of Iraqi forces. To do this, U.S. troops will be embedded as advisors to bring more units into action as soon as possible. If there is no progress in the quality of Iraqi forces, the U.S. will end all support for the training mission.

6) If the Iraqi government does not crackdown on sectarian militias within six months, the U.S. will end all support for the Iraqi government.

7) Victory in Iraq will be defined as the destruction of Al-Qaeda in Iraq and the leaving behind of a stable government that does not support terrorism in Iraq.

My modest proposal not for merely withdrawing American forces in Iraq, but for victory. The Iraqi government must be forced to do its part by threatening a withdrawal of support. In addition, our troops need to be taken out of the middle of the Iraqis and their sectarian war.

I’m one of the original co-founders of The Liberty Papers all the way back in 2005. Since then, I wound up doing this blogging thing professionally. Now I’m running the site now. You can find my other work at The Hayride.com and Rare. You can also find me over at the R Street Institute.

Is The Surge Doomed To Fail ?

I’ve read a lot of news and blogosphere analysis of the President’s Iraq speech this morning, but the one by Cicero at Winds of Change seems to be the only one that really hits the nail on the head:

The President’s Iraq plan assumes that there is a cogent, non-sectarian, uncorrupted Iraqi national government to partner with. I propose that this is an illusion, laid bare by Saddam’s mob-like execution at the hands of revenging Shi’a. There is no real national government in Iraq that represents all the factions. I don’t believe it is possible at this hour.

We’re pouring 20,000 more of our forces to go “door-to-door to gain the trust of Baghdad residents”. Translation: We’re going to unwittingly assist one side of this sectarian conflict suppress the other. We will be taking sides in a conflict that goes back more than a millennium.

It has become inordinately difficult to see how our token force of 20,000 additional troops embedded in Iraq’s sectarian war will turn the tide in the Global War on Terror.

For that matter, except for the fact that four years of bumbling have turned Iraq into the new Afghanistan, I don’t see what this war ever had to do with the War on Terror to begin with.

Previous Posts:

Stuck In Iraq Longer Than WWII ?
The Iraq Study Group Is Right: It’s Time For Us To Go
The War In Iraq: One Big Fiasco
The Surge Is A Fait Accompli
Thoughts On the Surge

Torture In My Name ? Then I Want Proof

Scott Adams, the man behind Dilbert and The Dilbert Blog, writes in the Washington Post about the conflicted views he’s had about the effectiveness of torture in the War on Terror.

Here’s the money quote:

The burden is on torture’s proponents to produce some evidence that torture makes sense as a policy. I don’t rule out the possibility that it can be effective in some cases, but if it’s being done in my name, I want some frigging evidence that it works.

Then we can talk about morality.

Sounds good to me.

Sheehan Can’t See Forest For The Trees

Sheehan in Cuba to protest Gitmo prison

American “peace mom” Cindy Sheehan called for the closure of the U.S. military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, as she and other activists arrived here Saturday to draw attention to the nearly 400 terror suspects held at the remote site.

Sheehan is among 12 human rights and anti-war activists who will travel across this Caribbean island next week, arriving at the main gate of the Guantanamo base in eastern Cuba on Thursday — five years after the first prisoners were flown in.

“Anyone who knows me, knows that I am not afraid of anything,” Sheehan said when asked about the possibility of U.S. sanctions for traveling to communist-run Cuba, which remains under an American trade embargo.

“What is more important is the inhumanity that my government is perpetrating at Guantanamo,” she told reporters.

I’m sure after this, these “human rights activists” will continue their trip by protesting Castro’s continued oppression and subjection of the Cuban people to his communist dictatorship. I wonder, are the conditions at Gitmo better than those foisted upon opponents of the Castro regime?

Of course, she’s not going to do that, because— while she may not be scared of potential American sanctions— she is definitely scared of what Castro could do to her if she aims her ire at him.

George Bush Is Reading Your Mail

Well, not him personally, but he’s secretly authorized the people who work for him to open mail without a warrant:

WASHINGTON – President Bush has quietly claimed sweeping new powers to open Americans’ mail without a judge’s warrant, the Daily News has learned.The President asserted his new authority when he signed a postal reform bill into law on Dec. 20. Bush then issued a “signing statement” that declared his right to open people’s mail under emergency conditions.

That claim is contrary to existing law and contradicted the bill he had just signed, say experts who have reviewed it.

(…)

[I]n his statement Bush said he will “construe” an exception, “which provides for opening of an item of a class of mail otherwise sealed against inspection in a manner consistent … with the need to conduct searches in exigent circumstances.”

Bush cited as examples the need to “protect human life and safety against hazardous materials and the need for physical searches specifically authorized by law for foreign intelligence collection.”

Quite honestly, I am sick of the Bush Administration’s continued gutting of the Bill of Rights, and the Fourth Amendment specifically, in the name of the “War On Terror.” There is, quite simply, no reason for the President to authorize warrantless searches that are not subject to judicial review, especially when Federal Law already provides a mechanism for quickly obtaining search warrants in exigent cases:

Critics point out the administration could quickly get a warrant from a criminal court or a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court judge to search targeted mail, and the Postal Service could block delivery in the meantime.

Mr. President, the Bill of Rights and the Judicial Branch exist for a reason. Perhaps it’s time to start living up to your oath of office and recognize that.

H/T: QandO

1 49 50 51 52 53 56