War of Wits

This is my rifle. There are many like it, but this one is mine. It is my life. I must master it as I must master my life. Without me, my rifle is useless. Without my rifle, I am useless. I must fire my rifle true. I must shoot straighter than the enemy who is trying to kill me. I must shoot him before he shoots me. I will. My rifle and I know that what counts in war is not the rounds we fire, the noise of our burst, or the smoke we make. We know that it is the hits that count. We will hit. My rifle is human, even as I am human, because it is my life. Thus, I will learn it as a brother. I will learn its weaknesses, its strengths, its parts, its accessories, its sights and its barrel. I will keep my rifle clean and ready, even as I am clean and ready. We will become part of each other. Before God I swear this creed. My rifle and I are the defenders of my country. We are the masters of our enemy. We are the saviors of my life. So be it, until victory is America’s and there is no enemy. - U.S. Marine Corps Rifleman’s Creed.

The Rifleman’s Creed exemplifies what it means to be a Marine. The rifleman is the most basic element of the Marine Corps command structure. Without the rifleman, the Corps is nothing.

(more…)

The depths to which Democrats will sink in order to score cheap political points knows no bounds. As a result of all of that free love and LSD in the glory days of their youth, Democrat thought processes are detached from the here and now. They still use 40 year old political slogans to describe modern 21st century threats. They engage in repeated oversimplifications of complex problems, which leads to goofy beliefs like the one that Bush orchestrated 9/11 to benefit the “military industrial complex” or that there is any scientific consensus on the root cause of rising Earth temperatures.

The cold reality today is that there are US boots on the ground in Iraq. The nature of this conflict means those boots are increasingly being recovered with a foot and a single dogtag secured by the laces so that when that soldier gets killed by an IED constructed with Iranian ordinance or electronics we can identify him and notify his next of kin.

(more…)

“I am taking this step because we have to repair the damage that’s been done to our country over the last six years.” - Bill Richardson announcing the formation of his Presidential Exploratory Committee

Now that Hillary Clinton has announced her entry into the Presidential race, all those with Presidential aspirations have now come out of the woodwork to stake their claim to their 15 minutes of fame, lest they be denied a seat on the bandwagon. Democrat Bill Richardson is no exception. The Democratic field is quite interesting. But not because it’s the most diverse field in history with women, blacks, and Hispanics. Now, we also have to wade through a morass of inexperience, hypocrisy, and divisive rhetoric.

(more…)

“A political solution, while more desirable, is not possible until one side of a conflict has their nose bloodied sufficiently to start talking and stop fighting.” - Yours Truly

Hillary Clinton will say or do anything to get elected. All that she seeks; indeed, all that she lives for is absolute power. She has demonized, henpecked, browbeaten, slurred, exaggerated, lied and bullied her way to where she is today with no indication she is about to stop now. To the contrary, her recent comments indicate she is continuing her fabrications in hot pursuit of the Presidency.

Forget that we got “two for the price of one” when we elected “Billary”, it wasn’t much of a bargain. Forget about the scandals. Travelgate… The FBI files… The Rose Law Firm… Vince Foster… Web Hubbel… Questions about cattle futures… Forget that she was a Cubs fan, or a Yankees fan or both… Forget about the ethnic and racial slurs that many witnesses have confirmed over the years. Let’s focus on the present, shall we?

She supports amnesty for illegals, yet recently criticized Republicans –all that stands in her way– for obstructing Democrats on meaningful immigration reform. She claims the G.O.P. isn’t moving fast enough and that she would do better than they securing the border, yet her efforts could add 60 – 100 million people to the US population in the next 20 years. The truth is, no one knows exactly where she stands on important issues.

Project Vote Smart is a nonprofit, nonpartisan effort to educate voters. Candidates are administered a “test”, called the NPAT, to independently gauge their positions on wide range of policy matters. Candidates are not asked what they oppose, only what they support. Hillary Clinton flat out refuses to answer the NPAT.

On television, Clinton exaggerated her little junket to Iraq as if she was sharing in both the risks and the sacrifices of American soldiers. She also took the opportunity to lie and embellish once again. She stated that upon reaching Iraq, due to bad weather, they were advised they [Clinton, Evan Bayh(D-IN) and perhaps others] may have to divert. Their response, as she recounted to Greta Van Susteren, was that they said “Let’s try to get in to Baghdad”. My inner cynic tells me there was more to it than that.

Clinton actually overruled military brass on the ground, possibly putting US pilots and aircrews at risk, just so she could say she’d been there on the ground and the security situation sucks.

Then she told yet another whopper about not being able to chopper in to Baghdad, and having to drive the Highway of Death from the Baghdad Airport to the US controlled Green Zone, which, if she knew her you-know-what from a hole in the ground, she should know is in Southern Iraq. It is where US forces corralled Iraqi troops into a kill box after the latter fled Kuwait in 1991. Stretching yet again, she suggested that because she has to wear body armor (well, she doesn’t have to), that US forces are constrained in their movements and that this has contributed to a lack of intelligence which in turn has contributed to George Bush’s mistakes.

But by far, the biggest indicators of her foreign policy ignorance, tactical ineptitude, and a prime example of the hot air she spews, is her parroting of the Democratic talking points regarding a “phased redeployment”. She criticizes Bush for not sending enough troops, while in the same breath proposing a “cap” on the number of troops. That is for the Generals to decide, not Hillary Clinton.

She won’t give our fighting men the reinforcements or relief necessary to accomplish their mission, then proposes having them “redeploy” in phases. Redeploy to where? How many phases? How many men in each phase? Over how long? Who goes first? Who goes last? Who provides security when we only have a few thousand troops left?

Finally, I leave you with this thought…

Being an American is a privilege. I thank my maker every day for that honor; for that privilege. In her own words, Hillary Clinton thinks that being an American is an obligation. It may be a slip of her forked tongue, but the words of politicians are constantly scripted and often belie cultural disdain for those they govern.

My opposition to Hillary Clinton has nothing to do with her being a woman and everything to do with her being the most divisive, power-drunk, political figure that I have observed in my lifetime. There is simply too much documented evidence that she will say or do whatever it takes to seize absolute power, no matter how dishonest.

Although the United States is committed to diplomacy to resolve the Iranian nuclear crisis, recent revelations bode ill for those efforts and in fact show that the door has already slammed shut on our ability to bring about a peaceful resolution. It is looking increasingly likely that we may need to intervene militarily to prevent Iran from arming a nuclear weapon.

The US Defense Logistics Agency exists to procure and provide weaponry, vehicles, fixed and rotary wing aircraft and armor to the military for our war efforts. It has done so since World War II. But many of our sworn enemies are secretly obtaining what is supposedly “demilitarized” or “demilled” surplus hardware and war materiel. I’m not talking about rifles, ammunition or mess kits. I’m referring to F-14 microcircuitry, helicopter parts, missile seeker heads, rocket launchers, body armor and surveillance equipment.

(more…)

Would you like to speak German? How about Japanese? Ever wanted to learn Spanish, Arabic, Korean or Farsi? If the Democratic Party has it’s way, you may get your chance to reach native fluency in one or more of these foreign languages sooner than you thought. If the current House and Senate Democratic leadership were sitting atop Capitol Hill when the US entered W.W.II, you’d be eating schnitzel in celebration of Oktoberfest or ringing in the new year with a nice warm sake.

It is only by coming together as a nation that we were able to defeat Nazi tyranny and Japanese imperialism. Back then, the cost was hundreds of thousands of US combat deaths. So with the country more divided than ever in our history, how do Democrats expect to defeat the enemy in Iraq? Oh that’s right, I forgot. Democrats aren’t interested in victory, only in retreat, or as they like to call it, “redeployment”. They keep arguing that Bush has caused terrorism to flourish in the Middle East, that the world is more dangerous than ever, and that it’s Bush’s fault.

(more…)

It’s been a little over a week since Nancy Pelosi became the self-anointed most powerful woman in America and already the bile is leaving a bad taste in my mouth. So much so, that it will eventually cause my teeth to rot, if not neutralized forthwith.

Her protestations were shameful and indicative of the immaturity to which liberal Democrats approach all matters of grave consequence. Last November, Pelosi was oozing bipartisanship, pledging to work with Republicans to repair America’s trust. But those pledges were made with crossed fingers and pursed lips. Even before Pelosi was voted Speaker, the House Democratic leadership publicly stated on numerous occasions that in the days to come, the Democrats would not allow any Republican amendments on the first series of bills they would put forth concerning what was to be the substance of their domestic agenda.

(more…)

“This unfortunately reminds me of when Hitler began rounding up the Jews for no reason and locking them up. Now they’re coming for the Latinos, who will they come for next?”- Carla Vela - Bexar County, TX Democratic Party Chair.

If we as human beings ever intend to carry on a rational discourse about any topic, it is absolutely imperative that people on both sides of the argument employ common sense. There’s no point in two people with opposing viewpoints who are debating the substantive issues of the day comparing apples to oranges. In fact, when either of them does so, it is an intellectually dishonest move and an exercise in futility.

When discussing war, for example; The “war on drugs” isn’t really a war. Neither is the “war on poverty.” The US military isn’t burning South American coca fields and toppling their tenuous dictatorships or bringing aid on the backs of M1-Abrams tanks to African nations wallowing in the filth of poverty. (more…)

“The enemy of my enemy is my friend.”

Democrats continue to choose treachery over patriotism, siding with our enemies while ignoring the realities on the ground in Iraq as well as throughout the rest of the world. While there is now some Democrat infighting over MoveOn.org’s recent character assassination of 4-Star US Army General David Petraeus (and rightfully so), there is no public Democratic Party disavowal of the attack on this American patriot. As a result, there is increasing outrage among military families and average Americans over these horrendous tactics designed specifically to divide the country. The only 2 conclusions one can draw from Democratic silence over MoveOn.org’s cheap shot courtesy of the New York Times are either political cowardice or outright approval.

(more…)

Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.

In a previous article, I made what I felt to be a compelling case why we should have at least tried to exploit Saddam Hussein’s influence among Iraq’s Sunni population, instead of handing him over to the hangman to be executed for his crimes.

The Bush Administration articulated from the beginning of the whole execution handover process that the execution of Saddam was a decision made by a sovereign Iraqi government in a clear and transparent process, free of American influence or interference. Bush’s speech might play well to his Republican base and Rush Limbaugh’s Ditto Heads, but not so well to those we are trying to convince of our intent; those who are continuing to attack our soldiers; those who will forthwith escalate their attacks on Americans; those who already viewed Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki as a stooge of the US and his government a tool of our foreign policy.

It seems clear that al Maliki rushed Hussein’s execution. The Iraqi Constitution allowed thirty days from the date the appeals court rejected Saddam’s appeal. Saddam was given less than a handful to ensure it was over before a holiday, despite apparent law and custom against this practice. The execution appeared to have taken place in a darkened stairwell on the upper floor of a building. The building was reportedly used by Saddam for the same purposes. Everyone present, except one man whose face was blurred, wore black hoods. Media reports confirmed that in the process of hanging Saddam, he was taunted. He was hung to chants of “Muqtada”, a reference to Shiite murderer and rabble-rouser Muqtada al Sadr. A grainy, cell phone video then surfaced on the Internet, showing Saddam’s final moments.

Collectively, all of these things will feed the perception among Sunnis that Saddam’s execution was a hastily crafted lynching; conducted by Shiite death squads in the pre-dawn darkness. I’m not saying that’s what it was, but we certainly shouldn’t be contributing to that perception in any way.

I don’t care if you are a liberal, a conservative, a terrorist, a pacifist or an atheist. You cannot violate the spirit of the law, while executing someone pursuant to the letter of it, and claim the moral high ground in a battle of good over evil.

Thus is the crux of my continued argument that the Bush Administration lacks the intellectual, moral and intestinal fortitude necessary to win in Iraq and more broadly against global terror.

I’m not suggesting that we hold the opinions of terrorists in high regard; to the contrary; for the last seven months, I have been stressing the need for us to escalate our use of force against terrorism, but here’s the dilemma when exercising military power:

If your goal is conquest, then kill your enemies and get it over with so our soldiers can come home and not get embroiled in a protracted bloodbath between feuding cousins. If your goal is not conquest, then you must win the hearts and minds of the indigenous people you’ve invaded in order to accomplish your objectives. That means all of them, not just the majority. At some point in the battle for hearts and minds, you have to be cognizant of the perceptions you are feeding if you are to be victorious in that battle.

This issue is not as simple as many would like it to be. Just because you take offense with the manner in which this execution was carried out does not mean you are “either with us or with the terrorists”. Nobody would have dreamed on September 12th, 2001 that conservatives would be criticizing our –arguably– conservative President for his myopia both in Afghanistan and Iraq.

The Bush Administration went out of its way to wash its hands of Saddam’s death. For nearly four years, America has collectively wished that the Iraqis could stand up so we could stand down. Well, the Iraqis stood up and took charge of their judicial process. In that regard, as I said before, be careful what you wish for. Those who would argue that Saddam tortured and murdered hundreds of thousands and therefore is deserving of whatever he got are oversimplifying the problem. Of course he did, but the issue is not Saddam nor the way he died.

The issue is twofold: 1). that we deposed one dictatorship and we’re well on our way to creating yet another, and 2). that our hypocrisy has just made our mission objectives that much more difficult to attain. Shiite death squads have now supplanted the al Qaeda/Sunni partnership as the biggest threat to stability. Add to this not just the execution of Saddam, but the lack of dignity of the whole process and the Sunni minority seems to be in no mood for reconciliation.

Despite all of that, now that Saddam is gone, it is absolutely imperative that we win in Iraq. If we do not prevail Shiite tribal militias will. If we hastily retreat, that will bring not just civil war, but tribe-on-tribe violence and eventually a power vacuum. Dictators fill power vacuums. Withdrawal without a secure Iraq is no longer a viable option.

Milestone - mile - stone `mI(-&)l-”stOn

(n.) - A stone serving as a milepost. A significant point in development

2006 has now been relegated to the archives of history. It was a year to remember and a year to forget. It was a year of scandal and of missed opportunities; a year of increasing divisiveness, as demonstrated in the midterm elections and the year that the American conservative movement repudiated it’s Commander-In-Chief.

It was a year that found the New York Times leaking sensitive information on two occasions, while arguing that the public’s –therefore by default al Qaeda’s– right to know outweighed the Bush Administration’s right to use electronic intercepts to track our enemy’s domestic phone calls or money transfers, both of which incidentally would precede a major terrorist attack.

Above all, It was a year of milestones, most of which were never fully realized and even a few that were manufactured specifically to divide the country in a time of war.

Ted Kennedy, The Associated Press, Reuters News Service and other mental midgets in the media rang in the New Year celebrating the historic milestone of the 3,000th US servicemember killed in Iraq. Kennedy called it a “tragic milestone”, while the media variously referred to it as a “grim milestone” or “the death toll milestone”. Both Reuters and the AP were practically drooling, awaiting the announcement of the next dead soldier. As a matter of fact, for about two hours on New Year’s Eve, Yahoo News posted an article attributed to Reuters entitled “US death toll in Iraq reaches 2,999″ with no byline. A few hours later, it was replaced with the three thousand figure. The article was then attributed to Claudia Parsons (Reuters), and has been updated on several occasions.

Reuters is straining sooo hard to emphasize that this is a milestone, that the story was accompanied by those unauthorized photos of flag-draped coffins being offloaded at Dover Delaware that are several years old. In addition, according the the source they’re citing for the casualty figures, there has yet to be an official confirmation of the three thousand figure, yet the Reuters headlines scream “3,000 dead”. The figure was followed in the next paragraph by a sentence indicating the number of casualties had not been “officially confirmed” and then the author’s own insinuation that the figure was not being confirmed so Bush’s critics wouldn’t have any ammunition to attack him.

Let me clarify the misconceptions you are being inculcated with by liberals in politics and the media.

A milestone is something you use to measure either a). distance or b). progress. So unless you’re cheering for the terrorists in Iraq, no number of dead US soldiers is a “milestone”. And no body count should ever be the measure of the success or failure of an entire military campaign. Using the published methodology for icasualties.org, which is the source for the Reuters article, as of publication of this piece, there are 2,991 confirmed deaths with 11 pending confirmation for a total of 3,002 . I surmise that I subscribe to the same Dod feed that icasualties does and as of the publication of this column, US Army Sgt. Edward W. Shaffer, 23 Mont Alto, PA was the last confirmed US military death in Iraq. The trouble is that his death occurred on December 27th. The most recent death confirmed by DoD occurred on 12/28.

The entire methodology is suspect. In this first screenshot, observe the timestamp. The “current time in Baghdad” was 9:43:07 PM 1/1/07. There were reportedly 2,993 deaths with 9 pending confirmation. In the second screenshot , also observe the time. It reads: 10:33:24 PM, forty minutes later, but the confirmed body count went down by two in the 40 minutes between the two screenshots. How is this possible? Rushing to be the first and not confirming your sources, that’s how.

If the latest death was confirmed on 12/28/2006, and the icasualties figures keep bouncing up and down on 1/1/2007, Reuters, through Ms. Claudia Parsons has some ’splainin to do about the accuracy of her article. I have monitored DoD casualty reports for two years. DoD only confirms military deaths upon notification of the families and sometimes they are posted on DoD’s website out of chronological sequence. Therefore, I submit to you that the entire premise of this piece of garbage propagated by Reuters and then modified at least three times over the course of six hours is in question. The number 3,000 cannot be confirmed by any independent source and yet Reuters reported it as fact.

Even worse, not only does Ms. Parsons report suggest that an unconfirmed US body count is some sort of measure of progress, she disrespects all US soldiers by devoting half of her article on their deaths to the details of how Saddam Hussein was mourned in his hometown. Apparently she sees Saddam Hussein as morally equal and therefore deserving of just as much attention. What a sicko.

And people wonder why the influence and subscription rates of mainstream media publications continue to plummet. The only milestone worthy of mention here is the new lows that some people and organizations will descend to in order to advance their agenda.