War of Wits

Mr. President:

With all due respect, the “political capital” you once declared that you possessed was spent a long time ago.

Long before you murdered what you call the psyche of this nation with your bad speeches, arrogance and refusal to admit your mistakes.

As a veteran of this nation’s armed forces who bled for his colors and country;

One who served under your father, and supported you through 2 elections and 2 wars;

Since none of your yes-men seem up to the task, I believe I have earned the right to give you an honest assessment of why your poll numbers are in the toilet, why they will remain so and why your cynical attempt to patronize the American people is going to fail. Let this forever be an indelible mark on your legacy, how you turned your back on those who elected you to office.

First, you commit this nation to war in Iraq based on flimsy, inaccurate intelligence and an insatiable desire to get revenge for an assassination attempt on your father by the tyrant Hussein. In the process, you completely disregarded the recommendations of General Eric Shinseki to invade with an overwhelming force composed of several hundred thousand troops.

Then you allow us to get bogged down into a war of attrition with people who have no regard for human life and who only have to wait for a convoy to pass by and push a button to kill US soldiers, instead of facing them in a fair firefight.

You insult every living US veteran by remaining silent while military leadership throw a US Navy Corpsman and 7 Marines into the brig at Camp Pendleton for faithfully following the Rules Of Engagement that they set out. These men have been languishing there behind bars for months and you are completely mute.

And now, you have the nerve to go on television and give a speech where you don’t make a case for victory or what we have to gain by decisively winning in Iraq, but what we have to lose if we don’t stay and continue to absorb enemy car bomb attacks and act as a magnet for the scum of the earth.

What is your plan for finishing this thing? Oh, that’s right. Stay the course and stand down when the Iraqis stand up.

If these are truly Islamic Fascists as you like to refer to them; if they are the totalitarian threat to world democracy that you say they are, then why isn’t the 1st Armored Division rolling over terrorist corpses in the Sunni Triangle?

Stop playing politics. Get your head out of the sand. Come up with a strategy to bring the proper level of force to bear against this enemy to win. After all, what good are huge muscles, if you have no spine?

It’s time to release The Pendleton 8, and drop the charges against all of these men.

You can donate to help PFC John Jodka, and the rest of the men locked up in Camp Pendleton so the Generals can keep their cushy retirements by visiting The Warrior Defense Fund.

After the push to Baghdad and that sideshow where President Bush landed on a US Aircraft Carrier adorned with a “Mission Accomplished” banner, Bush declared “an end to major combat operations” in Iraq, for whatever that’s worth.

After a bunch of terrorists began to chop contractor’s heads off, hang their burning corpses from bridges and kill all foreigners they could get their hands on spawning the so-called “insurgency”, the Bush Administration said it was the last gasp of a handful of Ba’athist “dead-enders”.

After Saddam Hussein was yanked out of that rat hole to be put on trial, the Administration expressed confidence that the remaining resistance would fall apart with no central figure to lead it.

After the terrorist’s strategy of using improvised explosive devices instead of direct attacks began to surface and people began to question why our troops didn’t have enough armor, the President stated unequivocally that if his commanders in the field requested armor, troops or anything, he would give them whatever they need.

After Iraqi elections punctuated by Iraqi political paralysis; when an Iraqi “Unity Government” finally did emerge, the President expressed confidence that US troops would begin to “stand down as the Iraqis stand up.”

After the death of the terrorist formerly known as Zarqawi, Bush seized the moment to send forth the heralds to trumpet his successes. He went on television and stated that he felt “something change.”

After President Bush told Americans that he was giving our troops all of the tools necessary to accomplish their mission including Rules Of Engagement that allowed United States Marines to respond to, hunt down and eliminate enemies who attack them, he assured us of victory if we just “stay the course”.

THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS, THE DEVIL’S IN THE DETAILS.

Proclaiming an end to major combat was the most absurd, amatuerish, “Bush League” performance that I have ever witnessed. That photo-op will go down in history as the single biggest gaffe in the second-worst Presidency in the history of the United States.

Failing to imagine what would occur in a power vacuum led to the bloodshed in Iraq that continues with an average of about 10 dead every day. “Insurgents” don’t wantonly murder civilians like someone would poison an anthill. In Iraq it is wholesale slaughter. Regardless of what Republicans say, in a previous article, I outlined why “staying the course” is actually immoral and sinful.

With the crisis in Lebanon, the Administration’s stance was that they wouldn’t call for an immediate cease-fire because they feared what would happen in a power vacuum. One can surmise that they learned their lesson from Iraq and don’t want a repeat.

Why then, can’t the administration admit so much as a simple mistake, a goose egg, a boo-boo, a brain fart, a faux pas, a boner, or a S.N.A.F.U. when it comes to Iraq?

Once again, the truth is politics.

The wretched part of all of this though, is that hundreds upon hundreds of people are dying in an orgy of hatred. And we’re left now sitting on the sidelines, hoping that our side (The Unity Government) will come out on top. Pretty rough politics, don’t you think? Makes South Korean Parliament fistfights look like child’s play.

We’ve been engaged over three years. Saddam is history. His military was disbanded and destroyed. There is a new government in place, and the situation is bleaker than ever. The cancer infesting Iraq is no weaker than it was the day Saddam was captured.

Unless we change course, we’ll be there longer than it took for the US to fight World War II. They can’t even train Iraqi police or soldiers, because the terrorists run their buses off the road and execute the recruits 30 to 50 at a time. When they do succesfully train and deploy them, their performance thus far has been spotty.

Along with our allies, we defeated the Axis Powers in about 7 years. We’ve already been in Iraq nearly half that time, and while there had been progress in forming a government, the country has been a rolling spasm of violence for the last 3 years. Without 350,000 troops securing every weapon in the country, it won’t end anytime soon and in my estimation, will escalate quite sharply.

There are several requirements of a sucessful military campaign, any of which –if not met– will doom your plan to failure. The Bush Administration was doomed from the start.

The first requirement is crystal clear objectives.

The technology, tactics, the will and the ability to exercise them to their full potential in order to bring as much force to bear against the enemy as is necessary to break their back, so they can no longer fight.

Accurate intelligence to plan your assault, but more importantly, to monitor how your enemy plans to defend against your tactics, so you can counter his defense.

The ability to sustain your momentum without getting bogged down or beaten back.

And a clear exit strategy.

The objectives were clear. Capture or kill Saddam Hussein. Liberate the Iraqi people and remove his regime from power. Repair the damage, help a friendly government get on its feet, and go home. We possess a superior military in terms of tactics, equipment, training and capabilites, so the lack of will to drop the hammer led to the failure to meet this critical requirement. That and the decision to throw US Marines to the wolves and prosecute them for murder based on the eyewitness testimony of Sunni Iraqis. Both the administration and the senior US Marine Corps leadership are to blame for this miscarriage of justice.

The intelligence was shaky at best and there is ample evidence to suggest it was “sexed up” to support a preconceived plan and that the Administration allegedly used leaks to silence those that disagreed. At the very least, there have been doubts cast about the accuracy of the threat assessments. Not much to argue there. Once again, we failed in that regard.

We had the ability to sustain our momentum, but have only been reacting to threats for the last 3 years. Who could argue? More people are dying –on average– every day than during the initial invasion. Once again, we failed to meet an essential requirement for success.

And finally, the only “exit strategy” to speak of was, once again, to “Stand down when the Iraqis stand up.” That is entirely subjective, and in the eye of the beholder, if you will. It is unacceptable as a measure of when to stop tasking your Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, and Coast Guard with a fools errand.

When liquids were banned on US flights, I knew that was yet another slip on the banana peel, putting us ever closer to tumbling into the abyss, and losing our Constitutional rights forever.

Now, due to our refusal to use even a shred of common sense, we are seriously looking at the prospect of bottled water, toothpaste, lip gloss, or shampoo being permanently forbidden from aircraft due their potential as a weapon. What’s next?

Why don’t they just chain us naked to our seats for the duration of the flight?

Using the logic employed by the Federal Government, we should fly naked. ANYTHING in the wrong hands can be used as a weapon.

A businessman’s necktie.

A cup of hot coffee.

A plastic knife embedded in someone’s eye.

A set of car key protruding from a clenched fist.

Should we just continue down this path of further stripping away our rights by banning everything the terrorists try to blow up a plane with, or should we ban the terrorists? This is the most asinine solution to a problem I have ever heard of.

Why should granny have to suffer the indignity of a random security screening?

Why should WWII or Vietnam vets with prostheses be forced to remove them so they can be x-rayed for potential explosives? If they ask this veteran to remove his, they’re going to be severly chastised and loudly upbraided in front of everyone.

Why should Americans accept the government’s assertion that profiling of Muslim terrorists will be ineffective? Racial profiling in and of itself is probably not that effective in terms of fighting inner-city crime, but it would be somewhat effective in singling out people from countries who support terror or even look the other way.

The problem with racial profiling is that the net would be cast too widely and most likely result in scrutiny of too many people who have nothing do with terrorism, wasting precious resources that need to be focused elsewhere.

Behavioral profiling, which the government admits to doing now is a little better, but still not good enough. Behavioral profiling involves looking for incriminating behavior such as profuse sweating, excessive fidgeting, nervousness, etc. Once again, the Washington bureaucrats don’t understand that these sorts of behaviors are only exhibited by people with a conscience.

A terrorist who believes he is acting in God’s name and is about to be pleasured by 72 virgins when he dies probably doesn’t have a lot of guilt. Especially if he has had several years to prepare for his massacre. Much like a sociopathic serial killer who passes a polygraph.

Behavioral profiling makes far too many assumptions. And we all know what happens when we ass-u-me too much. In this case, wrong assumptions will lead to bloodshed.

People who saw other’s heads off with rusty kitchen knives, hold the severed head up to the camera and then gloat while glorifying their god probably won’t bat an eye when asked if anyone else packed their luggage or if it has been in their possession the duration of their trip.

On the other hand, I’ll bet dollars to donuts that religious profiling would be effective. And I’ll tell you why the government has this totally wrong. For starters:

Muslims are the population of people from which 100% of the terrorists involved in the 9/11 come from.

100% of Iraqi terrorists, including the foreign jihadists.

The Chechen terrorists are Muslim.

Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad are Muslim.

The terrorists in Indonesia are Muslim.

The terrorists in Pakistan where the London - US airline plot originated are Muslim.

The terrorists who blew up the Madrid trains are Muslim.

The terrorists who blew up the London buses are Muslim.

The terrorists in Sudan are Muslim.

The terrorists in Lebanon are Muslim.

I could keep going, but I think you get the picture. With few exceptions, very nearly all terrorists on Earth are Muslim. A recent Gallup poll asked “should Muslims be subject to special security checks.” 41% of respondents said yes, 57% said no. This should give you an idea of how blind to the threat Americans truly are. And how much work I have left to do.

I cringe every time I hear an average person interviewed on television and completely resigned to this continued gang-rape of our Constitutional rights, but they consider themselves patriotic American’s who are making sacrifices to support their nation in a time of war.

It’s always Americans who have to sacrifice. First it was our jobs in the immigration tidal wave that’s been battering our nation for almost 30 years.

Now it’s our dignity and quite possibly our lives in this jihad.

If Muslim-Americans consider themselves so patriotic, why then, should they not be called upon to sacrifice a few extra minutes in the security line, a little more scrutiny and an occasional interview by police.

Not only are we losing our rights, but in my estimation, people are still going to die.

It’s one thing to give up some of your rights in exchange for something tangible, like the assurance that no terrorist can bring that plane down. It’s entirely another to give up your rights for half-measures that increasingly savvy terrorists can still exploit.

Critics of profiling, including Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff appearing on Fox News Sunday, August 13th, 2006, say profiling is wrong and ineffective because it wouldn’t have caught Jose Padilla or Richard Reid.

But it probably would have caught Mohammed Atta and the other 18 demon spawn. Just because it wouldn’t catch all terrorists is not a valid reason to refuse to profile. Is it ?

Even if it only caught one third of terrorists, you should adopt that measure and then compliment it with something to catch the rest of them. You don’t throw it out because it isn’t one hundred percent effective. Since when does the Federal Imperial Government ever achieve one hundred percent accuracy in anything??

Why then, are they basing their decision to profile on whether or not they can achieve 100 accuracy? Pure, unadulterated, political considerations. Once again, at the future expense of the lives of innocents.

Critics say profiling would alienate Muslims. I say “Too bad.” If they wish to be part of the solution, they can begin globally denouncing the beheadings and bloodbaths.

It’s time for Muslims who want peace to start turning their backs on those who practice this perverted brand of Islamic Fascism, turn them in or banish them from their villages instead of calling for us to stop being the aggressor.

Hmm. Alienate Muslims; Allow Muslims to annihilate Americans. Those are our choices. Now let me see…

The airline companies are insane if they expect me to spend hundreds of dollars so I can;

A). Wait in line for hours.

B). Watch my wife get fondled, and her underwire bra wanded repeatedly.

C). Have my toiletries and bottled water seized.

D). Be subjected to random security checks when I object to my wife being fondled.

 

So that after being molested, I can:

A). Board an aircraft.

B). Then die inside a flaming missile when it hurtles to the ground at 400 MPH and disintegrates after a terrorist’s bomb explodes in the cargo hold. Because, the truth is, while they banned my water and my wife’s lipstick, they don’t x-ray all cargo and refuse to scrutinize Muslims, whether they be the cell members on the airplane who are the plot’s foot soldiers or their support network, the employees at the airport who assist them.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is not living up to it’s name. It is an organization that does nothing to endear Muslims to the United States, or to enhance the US-Muslim relationship.

It exists solely to foment discontent - always looking hither and yon for religious descrimination or civil rights violations. When George Bush referred to terrorists as “Islamic Fascists”, the CAIR spokesmouths got their knickers in a twist at the mere thought that anyone would use such a term.

I say, “If the shoe-bomb fits, wear it.”

Calling them “Islamic Fascists” is kind of like Muslims calling Americans and Israelis “Zionist Crusaders”, “the Crusader Jew Alliance”, “The Zionist Entity”, “The Great Satan” or any of the other pejoratives they constantly use to describe the US or Israel.

Bin Laden hinted in a declaration of jihad that we could escape the sword if we converted to Islam. Looking at the definition of fascism, I don’t see much to argue with.

Bush wasn’t referring to all Muslims, only the throat-cutters, jihad mongers and baby blower-uppers.

CAIR is associating all Muslims with fascists, not Bush. Then they turn around and say that it is wrong for Bush to make the association. Enemy propaganda, plain and simple. I see nothing wrong with Bush’s statement, nor should any American. If we don’t prepare for the coming asymmetrical onsolaught from these animals and stop worrying about everyone’s feelings, they are going to send multiple passenger aircraft plummeting to the ground in gigantic fireballs and kill hundreds of innocent people.

The sky will rain body parts. The only thing left will be a few teeth. All because pulling the 4-man suicide squad out of line to give them a 10 second pat-down and ask them a few questions was totally off limits.

Every time a terrorist plot is uncovered, the rats from CAIR ascend from the sewer and issue a press release that is short on disavowing terrorism and long on calls for us to use restraint. They always start with a repudiation of terror or violence, but inevitably stray into admonitions to us not to be vigilantes, not to commit hate crimes and not to rush judgment. They have the unmitigated gall to host a (now defunct) petition criticizing the US government for not calling for an immediate cease fire in Lebanon, without one single syllable to take note of, describe, disavow or explain how the crisis got started in the first place.

• Not one single call for the aggressors to release hostages and stop raining Katyushas down on Haifa.
• Not one single call for Iran’s Ahmedinejad to stop meddling, and arming the aggressors.

Let me make something very clear:

Anyone who disavows violence against the US, but then urges us not to stereotype, rush to judgment or engage in hate crimes in the same breath, is part of the problem, not the solution. That’s what I call the double talk. More aptly, it is described as Moral Relativism. They’re not really disavowing the violence. It’s kind of like saying: “Yeah, a Muslim did something pretty bad, but rednecks who commit hate crimes against Muslims in retaliation are pretty bad too.” It’s a poor-man’s justification for Muslim violence.

When Naveed Haq - a Muslim - killed Pam Waechter and wounded 5 others at the Seattle Jewish Federation on July 28th, 2006, CAIR issued no statement that I am aware of. You see, when they can point to an incident from a distance, such as contrived Israeli genocide in Lebanon; something that cannot be truly verified unless you are on the ground; they will issue a statement criticizing the United States and possibly inflaming the anger of Muslims here in the US who may listen to them.

But when a single, identifiable, Muslim perpetrator goes on a cold-blooded killing spree in Downtown Seattle, in his own words, because of Israel, they say absolutely nothing.

After all, how can you defend the defenseless and maintain even a shred of credibility?

On one hand, the pen is a weapon used by our enemies to fight an asymmetrical war. A war that uses our traditions, culture, customs, tools, technology, laws and political process against us. On the other, the pen is an olive branch. A tool used to try and prevent a war. Lately, regardless of whether the US has chosen the pen or the sword, we have come up short.

Left unchecked, The War On Terror will soon reach the boiling point. There’s only one way out of the cauldron, but unless we stiffen our resolve –real fast– we are bound to lose this thing.

This global war has several possible outcomes, none of them yet certain. Among these:

- Uncle Sam opens up a can o’ whupass with his few remaining allies and excises this cancer from our existence violently and permanently so we can live in peace along with the rest of the world.

- Uncle Sam “stays the course” and continues down the same road; tossing Marines who actually follow their orders into cages like common street thugs so they can show our enemy that although we’re causing civilian deaths because they hide behind the skirts of their women, we still care about human rights and will investigate and prosecute Marines for following orders in a war zone.

- Uncle Sam eventually gets vaporized along with a sizable contingent of his countrymen and the United States descends into anarchy because of political correctness and a failure to call a spade a “spade”, only after “staying the course” until Iran or another terrorist-harboring nation can develop a nuclear warhead and the technology to deliver it on target.

There are probably a hundred other possible outcomes or combinations thereof, but I submit to you that it will be one or a combination of the above, depending on when exactly we wake up and start doing the dirty work inevitable in any war effort. We’d better hope it’s not the latter.

The problem with the war against terrorism is that no one in the US Government understands it. There are high-school dropouts in this country with more intuition than the Ivy League bureaucrats in charge. What they don’t understand is that the Pen Is Mightier Than The Sword.

The first objective is that we need to invest in and consistently obtain accurate intelligence to find and fix them. Wherever they are. In New York City, Karachi or a mud hut in Waziristan. Then we need to surround them and then kill them.

Right now, thousands of soldiers are either on their way to Iraq as reinforcements or have been told that their deployments have been extended. (Bravo Zulu to the Scrambled-Egghead who decided not to rotate in other fresh troops. What a great boost of morale to our fighting men.) Their stated purpose is to secure Baghdad.

The second and most vital objective is that we need to stop the festering dung pile of lies, hate and enemy propaganda that is being spewed forth from madrassas and mosques in so-called “moderate” Muslim countries or on news programs.

Muslim youth are indoctrinated by terrorist agitators from a very young age that Israelis are the hook-nosed descendants of pigs and monkeys, the US is the Great Satan and all sorts of other vile things. They back this with a twisted justification that their religion says it’s OK to kill nonbelievers, especially Jews.

The Palestinians as well as Hezbollah and many other Muslim terror groups routinely train children to fight after they have bred them on a steady diet of hate. Suicide bombers are lionized by Palestinian children. Ask one what they would like to be when they grow up and they’ll tell you they wish to detonate a bomb on an Israeli bus as an act of revenge.

Once again only a military solution will end the crisis in Lebanon. Lost in all of the machinations are the whereabouts and well-being of the kidnapped Israeli soldiers that are the true cause of this crisis.

Hezbollah’s leader stated publicly on Saturday that they were agreeable to the terms of the cease-fire on Saturday then abruptly changed course today along with Lebanon’s Cabinet, a sure sign to me that they are in cahoots.

When it comes down to the question of whether the pen is mightier that that sword, once again, it depends on who wields the pen. In the case of Lebanon, I don’t have to tell you the answer is, “It’s the UN, Stupid!”

I supported both of the Bushes’ Iraq wars. I am a veteran. I am a registered Independent, not some Democratic operative. I tend to vote Republican because Democrats are like suicidal sheep in their aversion to fighting. No one enjoys it, but it is a necessity in the world in which we live if one is to survive.

There exists in Christianity what is referred to as the Just War Doctrine. No matter what antiwar.com, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International or liberals in general say, there are certain times when it is OK –actually a moral obligation– to dispatch evil by killing people.

Even Jesus Christ himself exhibited righteous anger when he drove the moneychangers out of the temple. Anger, when used to right a wrong, and when measured, is a good thing.

In order for a war to be just and remain so, there are several rigid tests that must first be applied and several conditions, all of which must be maintained.

There must be a tyrant or aggressor causing pain and misery. The pain and misery must be tangible and long-term. Going to war for raw materials or to conquer is not a justification. Iraq was not an immediate threat to us but Saddam Hussein gassed, tortured, and murdered thousands.

According to the Doctrine, that is an evil that we are obliged to confront if all other means fail. I believe we have met the first requirement, both in Iraq and the War on Terror. The terrorists are aggressors who are attempting to conquer and if that fails, to kill. They failed the first requirement.

War must be a last resort. All other methods for achieving peace must be exhausted. The UN attempted to disarm him for over a decade. I don’t care if the chemical weapons we found were from the Iran/Iraq war, they’re still banned weapons. He was forbidden by the international community from having them, he used them on Iranian soldiers and his own people and he thumbed his nose at international law for many years. I believe the second requirement is in our favor although I’m sure others would disagree. Once again the terrorists fail the test.

There must be serious prospects of success. There is no question the US military is up to the task. Not much more can be debated. We have the most technically advanced weapons systems, best trained, equipped and conditioned personnel and they are all volunteers which makes them highly motivated.

Unfortunately because of the lack of political will of our present leadership, although we have the capability to win in Iraq, victory is by no means certain. In the case of the terrorists, the converse is true. They are more motivated than ever, yet they live in caves or mud huts and fire homemade rockets and use human bombs. We have radar and stealth and aircraft carriers, yet we’re essentially in a stalemate. Everywhere we’ve engaged them.

The act of waging war must not produce evils which are greater that the evil you are trying to eliminate. In that regard is where this war fails the test.

In Iraq, thousands of innocents have been killed in the most horrible ways imaginable. Shot, fragged, blown to bits, throats slit, heads sawed off. The war itself may have been morally justified - had the country been invaded on a large-scale, and the land cleared and then held with reinforcements.

The failure of Bush to not squash the terror campaign immediately is what led to his complete loss of moral legitimacy on the issue of Iraq. At this point, it matters not how evil the terrorists are. If we’re not killing them and our very presence is causing more pain than existed prior to our arrival (which it is) that is against God’s law.

Even if George Bush thinks he’ s justified.

This war started out as just but turned stinky real fast. On June 18th, I wrote that nothing had changed, and probably wouldn’t. Well, it’s now August and it hasn’t. And it won’t.

Another requirement of the just war is that the weaponry used discriminate between enemy and noncombatant. GPS and laser-guided bombs certainly meet this requirement, when used with accurate intelligence. Muslim terrorists constantly violate this tenet and have been doing so since terrorism was brought into the forefront.

It is against God’s law to deliberately target noncombatants. By the same token civilian deaths that are unavoidable and come only after taking great pains to avoid them are regrettable, yet justified, if all of the other requirements are met and maintained. Therefore, taking this to it’s logical conclusion one could infer that the responsibility for the deaths in Iraq is al Qaeda’s. In Lebanon it is Hezbollah’s.

A just war can only be waged by a legitimate authority. The President of the United States is(arguably) a legitimate authority. As is Tony Blair, even Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan. Osama Bin Laden or any other group operating inside of a terrorist-harboring country is not. Hezbollah is not. Hamas is not (yet), and hopefully will never be.

Revenge itself is no justification for a war. The war must be fought to redress a wrong suffered, to eject an enemy, in self-defense or as a preemptive measure to prevent an enemy from attacking when intelligence shows an attack is likely, either by conventional means, or by WMD.

The blame is to be shared by Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Gen. George Casey, General John Abizaid and Gen. Peter Pace. This week, comes the admission by Abizaid and Pace that “sectarian violence” -code for civil war- is on the rise. Stunning that they were unable to envision what the American public has known for two years.

In addition, untold thousands of Shiites are now protesting in the street against the US and Israel and in support of Lebanese Hezbollah. Bush had no clue what might happen when he let the genie out of the bottle. He just doesn’t understand the Muslim psyche or the religious and ethnic rivalries that have gone on for thousands of years. If you look at a map of the Middle East, you’ll see over 100,000 US troops in Iraq on the verge of war with Shiites, along with Shiites in Lebanon on one side and Shiites in Iran with nuclear weapons programs on the other.

Incidentally, it was the Shiites that we liberated from Saddam Hussein. What a monumental screw-up.