Iran On Its Heels As Iraqi Government Gets Stronger

Loading

According the WaPo it appears the Iranians miscalculated when they backed Sadr instead of the Maliki government:

For the first time since 2003, Iran has stumbled in Iraq. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s decision to confront Moqtada al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army in Basra and Sadr City last month caught Tehran off guard. The Mahdi Army lost more than face: It surrendered large caches of arms, and many of its leaders fled or were killed or captured. Crucially, the militias lost strategic terrain — Basra and its chokehold on the causeway between Kuwait and Baghdad and Iraq’s oil exports; Sadr City and the threat it posed to Baghdad security. Visiting Basra this month, I saw city walls covered with pro-Maliki graffiti. Commerce is returning to the city center. Trouble spots remain in both places, as Tuesday’s car bombings show, but the Mahdi Army’s unchallenged hold has ended.

Iran wants U.S. forces to leave Iraq and assumes that a friendly Shiite government would then protect Iran’s interests. Tehran has looked to Gen. Qasem Soleimani, commander of the Revolutionary Guards‘ Quds Force, to manage its strategy of supporting Shiite unity and resisting American occupation. But these efforts do not go hand in hand. The first means supporting stability and state-building and working with Iraq’s government; the second involves building violent militias that undermine government authority.

And according to Vali Nasr the only thing the Iranians have succeeded in doing is alienating Maliki, his government and the Shiite community:

Maliki’s recent push into Basra showed that Iran’s policy was untenable. Not only are its two goals at war, but Iran has alienated the Maliki government and mainstream Shiites. One Shiite politician asked me, “How can the government succeed if Iran undermines its effectiveness?” They recognize that Iranian-backed militias were a threat not to Sunnis but Shiites in the government. It was Iranian-made rockets that rained down on the homes of Shiite leaders in the Green Zone. Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, who refused to even speak with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad during his visit to Iraq, condemned militia violence and said that only government forces should carry guns. Criticism of Iran was rife in conversations I had in Iraq this month, even among those usually protective of Iran’s role there.

Iran has also managed to bolster the Iraqi army. The dissolution of Iraq’s military after the fall of Saddam Hussein was a strategic victory for Tehran. Yet after all the talk of standing up an army that could confront the Sunni insurgency, it was not by fighting al-Qaeda in Mosul but the Iranian-backed Mahdi Army in Basra that the Iraqi army found its footing.

And that footing is getting stronger by the day:

Iraqi troops on Thursday arrested the top official in Amarah, a Muqtada al-Sadr loyalist, officials said, drawing swift condemnations from followers of the anti-U.S. cleric and raising tensions as a military operation against Shiite militias got under way.

Rafia Abdul-Jabbar, who also was acting deputy governor for Maysan province, was seized from his office Thursday morning along with a member of the provincial council, a local official said.

The arrest came as Iraqi troops fanned out and gunmen tossed weapons on the streets or in canals with the official launch of the military crackdown in Amarah, a stronghold of al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army militia and the purported center of weapons smuggling from neighboring Iran.

The military action came a day after the expiration of a four-day deadline for militants in Amarah to surrender their arms or face arrest.

It’s the fourth such U.S.-backed Iraqi military operation launched against Shiite and Sunni extremists in recent months as Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki seeks to assert government control over the country ahead of provincial elections to be held in the fall.

Harry Reid was asked for comment but he appears to be still in hiding….lets ask another Democrat tho, Barbara Boxer:

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) repeatedly attempted to prod Petraeus and Crocker to acknowledge that Iran’s influence inside Iraq has grown even as Americans continue to fight and die in Iraq.

Crocker tried to downplay the issue, calling Iran’s influence a “mixed bag,” but Boxer was having none of it. Crocker also noted that “thousands, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi Shias” were killed during the 1980-1988 war between Iran and Iraq.

The California Democrat, though, wqas have none of it. Boxer was particularly outraged by the fact that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was the first official state visitor to Iraq, openly embraced by Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, while President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and other American officials can only make surprise, unannounced visits under tight security.

“I give up,” Boxer exlaimed after failing to get an direct answer from Crocker on the extent of Iranian influence inside Iraq. “They kissed him [Ahmadinejad] on the cheek!”

Democrats wrong once again. Instead the Iranian influence has waned as the Iraqi army has stood its ground and have now even gone on the offensive. All signs that we are winning the war in Iraq and the Iraqi people are well on their way to a form of Democracy.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
36 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

The upcoming provincial elections are going to be a major milestone in Iraq. I believe you will see less support for the sectarian slates of candidates and more support for the unity slates. If that happens, then the religious parties now in charge of the national government are going to see the writing on the wall.

Shame you didn’t quote Nasr’s last comment:

It is a frequent refrain in Washington that the United States needs leverage before it can talk to Iran. In Iraq, Washington is getting leverage. America has the advantage while Iran is on its heels. Engaging Iran now could even influence who wins the Iraq debate in Tehran.

Nasr’s saying timing is everything here. Five years of enabling Iran grow and watch them influence affairs and events in the region and finally …”Iran is on its heels”, they “have stumbled in Iraq.” Thus, Nasr’s question is, will Washington take advantage of this leverage, and “talk to Iran” …before things change again?

I just posted an article titled:

Will American Business Miss the Iraqi Investment Boom and the saddest quote from the U.S.Today article I was using in the piece regarding how other countries are already investing heavily in Iraq while we sit on our hands is this one:

“American companies may also be reluctant to invest in Iraq because the war has generated so much controversy at home, Brinkley said.”

I cannot believe how blind the left and the Dem leaders are whether it is regarding our success in Iraq, business investment, or Iraq/Iran relations.

I wonder sometimes how these people grew up in this country, attended the same schools I did, and somehow hate their country so much? Why do they want us to turn tail in defeat? Why do they want America to be a laughing stock and “Paper Tiger?”

Proof mounts daily that Iraq is meeting President Bush’s conditions for VICTORY: an Iraq that can govern itself, defend itself and be an ally in the war on terror.

I’d like to stress this paragraph:

The military action came a day after the expiration of a four-day deadline for militants in Amarah to surrender their arms or face arrest.

It’s the fourth such U.S.-backed Iraqi military operation launched against Shiite and Sunni extremists in recent months as Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki seeks to assert government control over the country ahead of provincial elections to be held in the fall.

And not only are the Iraqis mounting these operations, THEY ARE SUCCEEDING!

I’m still waiting to hear whether Harry Reid thinks the “war is lost.”

Mike,

Why do you always have to capitalize everything like and elemtary school student writing in crayon ( E.g,. T

Sorry, pushed the wrong button at the wrong time.

Why do you always have to capitalize everything like an elementary school student writing in crayon (e.g., THEY ARE SUCCEEDING!)?

If your point is valid, it should stand on its own without capitalization.

Notice that your own quote contains the term “U.S. backed” (“It’s the fourth such U.S.-backed Iraqi military operation launched against Shiite and Sunni extremists in recent months.”)

When will the Iraqis be able to do it on their own? It’s been five years so far. We can’t stay there forever.

Do you have any children you wish to contribute to the epochal battle between Islamofascism and democracy? That is, assuming you don’t plan to personally participate in this battle for our survival as a nation.

Vietnam redux.

We can’t do it.

It’s too tough.

It’s taking too long.

We’re never gonna win.

Let’s quit.

We’ve done enough for them.

On and on and on…..

Defeatocrats.

I sure am glad you people weren’t around when we were storming the beaches of Normandy or fighting on Okinawa, or burying the dead from the Battle of the Bulge.

Dave Noble: THANKS FOR THE ADVICE. Next time, wait until I ask you for it.

Now, only months ago you folks were complaining that the Iraqis weren’t standing up to defend themselves. Now, they are doing it almost entirely on their own and you are STILL COMPLAINING!
And then of course you toss in the obligatory “Vietnam redux.”

What crap!

The Iraqis are in the fight, they will be able to do it on their own when their military personnel matures and is fully equipped. It will take a bit more time for the Iraqis to come up with their own up-armoured humvees, planes, copters, ships, enough seasoned generals, etc., etc., etc.

Since when do we have to have children fighting this war to be able to comment? Having been a military wife, mother, daughter, sister, and now aunt/Godmother of family that has been in the thick of it, I would never, nor would any of my loved ones who have put their lives on the line, want to deny anyone’s right to offer an opinion of a conflict they were/are personally involved in.

But, you might take this into consideration, flippant comments like what you just made regarding the progress of the war, as well as all the other crap that’s been spouted throughout this war adds more stress to those that have family in the fight and angers those in the fight. They believe their work is crucial to the safety of our country, and they don’t want their children to have to deal with it, they want to solve this for them, this in a nutshell is what my nephew told our local reporter when interviewed.

Why do you always have to capitalize everything like an elementary school student writing in crayon (e.g., THEY ARE SUCCEEDING!)?

If your point is valid, it should stand on its own without capitalization.

Nit-picking on the aesthetics of a post is a telling sign of having absolutely no arguementative legs to stand on.

Do you have any children you wish to contribute to the epochal battle between Islamofascism and democracy? That is, assuming you don’t plan to personally participate in this battle for our survival as a nation.

Chickenhawk refrain! Is this the new Goodwin Principle? Again, you add nothing substantive to this discourse. Oh, are you aware that there is no age or intelligence limit to joining the ranks of the human shield? Why have you not joined this corps to stop this epochal battle between islamofascism and democracy?

Vietnam redux.

It is…not the way liberals would have liked it have been…thank God:

http://midnightbluesays.blogspot.com/2008/05/fridays-with-ferris_30.html

Comments such as, “Do you have any children you wish to contribute to the epochal battle between Islamofascism and democracy? That is, assuming you don’t plan to personally participate in this battle for our survival as a nation” have no legitimacy.

For those of us that have served in the military, and have gone to war and come back home, it is the last thing we would want our children to see or do. Wordsmith, awhile back, said not everyone is suited for military life. That is a truism.

“Do you have any children you wish to contribute to the epochal battle between Islamofascism and democracy?”

Why, yes. I have a five-year-old I’m willing to contribute.

I’d like to remind all the other contributers that the army wants our children unwrapped and removed from the packaging they came in.

We can leave them at our local fire stations and auto dealerships.

Curt said:

Are you saying the US has not been trying to stop Iran’s influence in the region? Puhlease.

No. I did not say that. Of course Washington has been trying to stop it. But they have been doing a very poor job!

And Nasr agrees with me.

Nasr a big advocate of talking to Iran. He’s been very critical of the Bush Admin. regarding their ME policy.

I’m confident that when he stated:

For the first time since 2003, Iran has stumbled in Iraq.

He was working in context with these thoughts below:

(Jan-Feb, Foreign Affairs)

Nor can [ “A U.S. containment strategy that assumes broad Arab solidarity is unsound in theory” [(quoted from Nasr’s preceeding paragraph)]] be implemented. For close to half a century, the Arab world saw Iraq’s military as its bulwark in the Persian Gulf. Having dismantled that force in 2003, the United States is now the only power present in the Gulf that can contain Iran militarily. Shouldering that responsibility effectively would mean maintaining large numbers of troops in the region indefinitely. But given the anti-American sentiment pervading all of the Gulf today, none of the states in the region (except for Kuwait) could countenance the redeployment of a substantial number of U.S. forces in their territory. Thus, Washington would have to rely on weaker regional actors to contain a rising Iran, which is the largest country in the Persian Gulf in terms of size, population, and economy. Even major arms sales to the Gulf states could not change this reality.
[…]
Indeed, it is not the Palestinian issue that will decide the balance of power in the Middle East but the fate of the failing states of Afghanistan, Iraq, and Lebanon, where Iranian influence has found ample room to expand. The Palestinian issue remains important to Israel’s security, stability in the Levant, and the United States’ image and prestige. It is also a catalyst for regional rivalries. But the Palestinian issue is not the original cause of those regional contests, nor will it decide their outcome. For all its worrying about Iran’s growing power, Washington has failed to appreciate that the center of gravity in the Middle East has indeed shifted from the Levant to the Persian Gulf. It is now more likely that peace and stability in the Persian Gulf would bring peace and stability to the Levant than the other way around.
[…]
[last paragraph] Engaging Iran while regulating its rising power within an inclusive regional security arrangement is the best way of stabilizing Iraq, placating the United States’ Arab allies, helping along the Arab-Israeli peace process, and even giving a new direction to negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program. Because this approach includes all the relevant players, it is also the most sustainable and the least taxing strategy for the United States in the Middle East. (All bolds are mine)

http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20080101faessay87106/vali-nasr-ray-takeyh/the-costs-of-containing-iran.html?mode=print

Nasr argues particular American missteps in Iraq saw Iraq’s influence in the region grow.

He says the same thing almost everywhere. I saw him say it several nites ago on the Charlie Rose show.

Here’s a clip from where Nasr states “we disturbed the balance …of powers … [after] 2002… in the ME …strengthening Iran” :
http://peaceblog.wordpress.com/2008/06/19/ndn-tv-vali-nasr-on-the-future-of-iran/

He was also on Steve Colbert’s show where he said the same thing, but I can’t find the clip.

In the end, don’t over burden the metaphor Nasr is using; one cannot stay on their ‘heels’ forever; they are there but for a moment and then they regain their balance. Nasr is saying now is the time to talk, now we have leverage, now Maliki is showing some strength.

Dave Noble, just so you know, all caps in cyberland is SHOUTING! :0) Mike’s shouting to make a point. The alternative for emphasis is asterisks, as do you have a *point* here???

Personally I can understand why Mike wants to scream about success. Nobody seems to hear it, or notice it otherwise.

And I’ll try to say this one more time, without yelling. It has *not* been 5 years (see? emphasis… :0). The permanent Iraq government, who is in charge of the Iraq forces, has only been in place since June 2006. It has been two years for them, five years for us. So sorry they cannot create an Arab democracy out of a despotic regime quickly enough for you.

And oh yes, we don’t have “children” serving in the military. They are young adults, enlisted of their own volition. Wish all you pacifists would stop hiding behind them as a talking point. You demean them, and shame yourselves by using them as a cheap trick for political gain. Were that most of the anti-free-Iraq group cut from even a single strand of thread of their cloth. (I’m using bold instead of screaming… but I tell you really… I’M SCREAMING!!!!!)

Good points, Sara. The DNC has made the war so unpopular, and snidely suggested it was a “war for oil” (in which case, we wouldn’t be having an oil problem, would we?). Others seem to suggest we trying to empire build and annex territory.

Needless to say, any US venture in Iraq is just going to result in some naysayer going “See? na na nana naaaa” as to selfish US intentions. So we step, PC, around any smart business transactions to avoid criticism. It’s a bunch of BS, fer sure.

Tom W? ROTHLMAO!!!!! And Missy? You *go* grrrl…..

Doug, I suspect Iran stumbled when they armed militants with bombs and ammo to murder Iraqis. The Iraqis know where that stuff was coming from. So I’d say that “stumble” they speak of now has been building for quite some time. The media’s slow to catch on to what they’ve known for some time.

I expect Iran and Iraq to speak and deal with each other. They have friends and relatives across borders. They are neighbors. I don’t expect them to isolate each other. Hopefully Iraq can influence Iran youth into taking their country into the 21st century with freedom, sans their despotic three way leadership. Afterall, get rid of the leaders, and both Iran and Iraq trend modern, much like Kuwait City and UAE.

Dave, if any of my kids wanted to join the military profession during time of war I would support them, but I would also let them know what they’re getting into and what to expect.
..and yes, I would be scared S—less during their deployment.

Which one were you in?

Dave Noble – wow. had to resort to critiquing syntax to make any kind of argument. Our all volunteer military can collectively grin at your lack of ammo! Many of us step in the face of danger to represent our country, and prepare for the spit of the morally rightous. Keep up the good work!

MataHarley says,

I suspect Iran stumbled when they armed militants with bombs and ammo to murder Iraqis. The Iraqis know where that stuff was coming from. So I’d say that “stumble” they speak of now has been building for quite some time. The media’s slow to catch on to what they’ve known for some time.

First, whether the Iranian ‘stumbling’ may have been “building for some time” or not, it really it doesn’t matter; it’s here now, it’s arrived, according to Nasr. Maliki is looking stronger, he’s regaining control of cities, he’s showing independence.

Second, Nasr is correct. This is a ‘stumble.’ It’s not a ‘fall’, a ‘decline’ or the change in a trend.

Let’s not rob Nasr’s metaphor of “Iran being on its heels”– let’s take it for what it means: they are off balance presently and we should use it to encourage discussion.

Third, this must be understood in the context of Nasr’s thesis: Iranian power is here; it’s here to stay:

You have to admit that things have gone wrong [in Iraq], that we did disturb the balance of power [in the ME], that Iraq didn’t work this way [the way we wanted], that the Arab governments have lost as a consequence of our [disturbing the balance].” Therefore we need to be willing to create a new regional order, an order that needs to be based on the reality of 2007, not the reality of 2002.

http://peaceblog.wordpress.com/2008/06/19/ndn-tv-vali-nasr-on-the-future-of-iran/

As Nasr sees it, in 2007 Iran arrived; it is a central regional player now; it’s not 2003 anymore and we (the Bush Admin.) can’t contain Iran with a pre-2007 mindset.

Therefore, whether or not you accept Nasr’s premise that Iran backed the “wrong horse” with Sadr is, in my opinion, secondary to his central theme: the containment of Iran will not be found thru Israel now (which is how Bush is proceeding), it will now be found in Iraq, Afghanistan and Lebanon and Iran. I think he may be right. We certainly have awoken the Shia population in the region, empowered them and increased their disliking of America. That cannot be denied. The question now is if Palestine is less of a issue, and the more pivotal issue is Persia, how do we deal with Persia.

Well, in summation, he says, (in the first sentence), “For the first time since 2003, Iran has stumbled in Iraq.”
… (and concludes in the last paragraph), “It is a frequent refrain in Washington that the United States needs leverage before it can talk to Iran. In Iraq, Washington is getting leverage. America has the advantage while Iran is on its heels. Engaging Iran now could even influence who wins the Iraq debate in Tehran.”

Of course the WH isn’t going to change their policies, but Nasr is on to something. Nasr is one of the few who can really can put color to his argument for many to see the details. He’s very articulate and knows how to sew together many new ME strands that others haven’t seen or want to ignore.
———

I found the Colbert piece:
http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/index.jhtml?videoId=85104

Do you have any children you wish to contribute to the epochal battle between Islamofascism and democracy? That is, assuming you don’t plan to personally participate in this battle for our survival as a nation.

I have served, to date, 14 years in the US Army and still serve today (why I am not on as much as others). I have done so with Move-on/ANSWER/ACT and other “anti-war” groups stabbing me in the back, with “journalists” making up stories bad news in front of my face while deployed, with democrat politicians telling bold faced lies, and being accused of every sort of stupidity the above groups throw out while they worship the islamofascists (who actually DO despicable acts, have no accountability, are are proud to show off their “work”). I fight for good people’s freedom and even useless idiots (to paraphrase Lenin) like yourself. Nothing was asked of you and as long as the wolf is kept at the door, you can keep living in your fantasy land of leftdom.

I have 2 boys with one girl on the way. The oldest is 3 years old. I “hope” to have won this war before they are old enough to enlist or go for commission. If not, they can CHOOSE to enlist or do something else. Adults make those choices. Our enemies (and they are your enemies, even if you do not understand that they want your life or absolute obedience) force REAL children to fight us. They strap bombs on kids 15 and under with the threat of slaughtering the child’s family if they do not attack Coalition troops. They train the more easily brainwashed in Madrasses in the verses of the Koran these islamofascists allow (has to do with the “Sura of Abrogation”, Sura 2, Koran) to hate and kill in the spirit of Hilter Youth and unleash them upon the world. Those are the demons we fight. Despicable people who send 9 year olds strapped with explosive vests or given AKs as big as they are to fight while the cowardly AQ, Taliban, Iranian, Syrian leadership hide behind walls and in caves.

YOU *sir* are an ASS!

We can’t stay there forever

Are you sure of that. Kosovo, South Korea, Japan, Germany. How long has the fighting been over there? When is the planned troop pullout date? But you always need a complaint don’t you. Before it was likely how our soldiers are dying and the Iraqis do nothing. Now its how long will we have to support the Iraqis while they are taking the lead.

Do you have any children you wish to contribute to the epochal battle between Islamofascism and democracy?

Funny, I didn’t know parents were allowed to sign up their adult children to join the military. When did this occur? I mean I know that adults can decide to sign up on their own, but I didn’t know parents could make the decision. Well except for possibly 17 year olds who want to enlist, but they need the parent to consent to their signing up.

The parent’s wishes are inconsequential.

Well, that got everyone’s attention. Now that I have your attention:

First, I am not a pacifist. I am a twenty-year veteran, who wholeheartedly supports our troops. I have made that point before on this site. Although I have no combat experience, I have the utmost respect for those who do. That includes John McCain, Duncan Hunter, Chuck Hagel, John Kerry, Max Cleland, Jim Webb and everyone on this site who is a combat veteran. I make no distinctions of idealogy or party on that count.

My son-in-law did two tours in Iraq and is now home safe and sound. I wish the same for your loved one, Missy. I have a ex-Marine buddy at work, all three of whose sons are in the Marines, one in Iraq, one in Afghanistan, and one in officers’ school. I asked him how they were the other day and with respect to the son in officer’s school, he said maybe things will have quieted down by the time the gets out of officers’ school.

I relate that last story to say this – I hope and pray things quiet down soon, but I doubt it. You all seem to be comfortable with a long horizon for this war. I am not. Mike, “just might be allies” are not allies. “U.S. backed Iraqi troops” are not Iraqis able to defend themselves. Please reread those Economist articles you posted. I read them and the closing paragraphs are so much less sanguine then you make them out to be. Aye Chi, we hit Normandy on June 1944, a year later the war was over. Bad analogy to World War II once again. On another post I will be glad to discuss how Iraq is far more like Vietnam.

We have a long, long way to go. Secretary Rumsfeld, whom John McCain called “possibly the worst Defense Secretary in history,” screwed this up royally and American men and women and Iraqi civilians have paid for his arrogance with their blood.

With respect to the “chickenhawk” theme. Yes, I percieve you, Mike, as a cheerleader for the war. Unfortunately, war is not a spectator sport. Just because you are not a combat veteran does not mean you have no right to an opinion on the war. But there is a real problem here that goes beyond what I might think of Mike. In World War II 12% of the eligble population was under arms. Today it is less than 1%. The average American is making no sacrifice for this war beyond putting a Support the Troops sticker next to a Jets sticker on the back of their car. This is the first modern American war where there has been no increase in the income tax to pay for the war. We are paying for it with our national credit card. I saw a photograph of graffiti on a wall in Ramadi. It read “America is not a war, the Marines are at war. America is at the mall.”
I guess some lib pacifist must have written that. I think not. I believe that perception does more to hurt the morale of our troops than honest critiques of the war from people who care about them.

A final comment on the “chickenhawk” (BTW, your term not mine) issue:
“When you’ve never experienced war,” said Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., another decorated Vietnam vet, “it’s a little easier to be more cavalier about committing troops and not understanding the consequences of war.”

Now in closing as to tone. Mata, I knew all caps means your shouting. That’s precisely my point.
Mike, you shout too much, when you’re not saying things like “Poor(Fill in the blank)” or “Sad” or Tut-tut” There is an old rule about debate. When the facts are for you, pound the facts. When the logic is for you, pound the logic. When neither is for you, pound the table. You’re a habitual table-pounder, Mike. As for me hitting on aesthetics rather than argument, Skye. If you’ll notice right below my comment about Mike’s use of caps, I address Mike’s disingenous morphing of “U.S. backed Iraqi troops” into Iraqis standing up and defending themselves.

As far as being flippant. I am not flippant. I am dead serious about this war. If you want to see flippancy I recommend Tom W.’s post in which he makes a joke about “contributing” your children to the war. I doubt someone who had a son or daughter die in Iraq would find that amusing. Finally, re: using the term “children” for our troops. I get the point, but I have five children whose ages range from 26 to 36. They are and will always be my children. Further if this war continues to drag on, those who are now undisputably children will be going off to fight it or the next war in Iran.

“Bomb, bomb, Iran.” With all due respect to a genuine war hero, that’s flippant.

Bad analogy to World War II once again.

Actually, a perfectly good analogy. Perhaps you chose to reject it because I struck too close to your nerve endings.

This is the first modern American war where there has been no increase in the income tax to pay for the war.

Great. Another Lefty talking point.

What are you doing, going down a list now?

Since you chose to wade in, let me ask you a question. Since you feel that income tax revenues should be higher, how much extra did you send in when you filed your 1040 this year?

Did you send in an extra $100, $1000, maybe even $5000? Did you even send in one extra dollar?

You ask who wants to enlist their children and you lament that income taxes have not been increased so tell us how much extra you paid in so that we can see if your money is indeed where your mouth is.

Of course I am sure everyone here will be perfectly happy to just take you at your word on the matter.

Income (Punishment) taxes did not exist for most wars America fought. How can something that did not exist be raised? Also, raising income taxes does not lead to increased revenue. It leads to lower income.

Aye Chi,

I speak of growing weary of the war and you cite World War II and Normandy. I note that it was a year from 1944 to VE day. At that time we were fighting the most efficient war machine in the history of man, short of our own. Help me understand how you made a good analogy. You’re making conclusory statements again – “Its a good analogy because I say its a good analogy.”

See if this sounds different: The war in Iraq was won by the time President Bush stood under a sign that read “Mission Accomplished.” Yet five plus years later, we are still there pouring our treasure and the blood of our servicemen and women onto the sands of Iraq, fighting a band of criminals, religous fanatics, jihadis, and warlords, in what is actually the occupation phase of the original war.

And its not the fault of our troops. We gave them a job not fit for them. They are heroes, not miracle workers. We are asking them to prop up a corrupt regime riven with religious and ethnic divisions and build a democratic nation out of an ethnically and religiously heterogeneous population, with no history of constitutional government. We are asking them to fight an urban counterinsurgency against an enemy that as Skye rightfully points out (with a different intent) will stop at nothing, including murdering civilians, suicide bombing, and the use of human shields.
That’s a damn lousy thing to do to our young men and women.

Re: talking points. This blog is awash in conservative talking points. From Barack Obama is a Muslim, black separatist, Marxist radical who can’t speak coherently without a teleprompter to empty and facile “Lefty talking point” and “Defeatocrat” rhetoric. I can listen to Sean and Rush and then wait to see it show up on this blog. Obama, the “September 10th” candidate? Recycled Bush 04′ and Rove “06.

Let’s drop the rhetoric that substitutes for thoughtful commentary. Instead let’s have an intelligent discussion. Or not.

Dave Noble accused: “I percieve you, Mike, as a cheerleader for the war.”

What an appalling thing to say!

There is no sensible, decent person I know that wants war.

I could remind you that there are worse things than war.

Let’s start with the quote by John Stuart Mill:

War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.
John Stuart Mill

Then, place that in the context of the horror that Saddam inflicted on his own people. A horror that was removed thanks to President Bush and the U.S. military:

A man and his child found dead after attempting to flee the poison gas Saddam unleashed on the Kurds.

An Iraqi woman searches the mass graves of Hila for the bodies of her children.

Have you heard the story of the man in Saddam’s prison who had to watch as Saddam’s guards raped his very pregnant wife? When she did not begin a miscarriage, they slit open her stomach and he was forced to watch as the unborn and his wife bled to death.

The U.S. military has brought peace with justice to Iraq. And I will “cheerlead” that just as loudly as I will denounce your indifference to the suffering of the Iraqi people.

Your weasel words are ringing ever more hollow.

I speak of growing weary of the war and you cite World War II and Normandy. I note that it was a year from 1944 to VE day.

Dave,

Do you think that the American people had not developed war weariness in the space between Pearl Harbor and Normandy?

Do you really think so?

Come on.

My point was this:

We can’t do it.

It’s too tough.

It’s taking too long.

We’re never gonna win.

Let’s quit.

We’ve done enough for them.

On and on and on…..

Defeatocrats.

I sure am glad you people weren’t around when we were storming the beaches of Normandy or fighting on Okinawa, or burying the dead from the Battle of the Bulge.

Can you even begin to imagine how the media would have howled over the bloodshed and troop losses that we suffered just at Normandy?

I stand by my original point:

I am really and truly glad that the defeatist, microwave culture attitudes of the anti-war proponents weren’t prevalent during WWII.

Wow…..Mike #26! Said loud, said true, said with compassion! The quote by John Stuart Mill says it all about the defeatists (democrats) of this country. They have had things handed to them on a silver platter all their lives. By things I mean freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom to enjoy life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. You know, the important kind of freedom that can only be bought with blood, not money.

They have no idea of what it’s like to live in fear every day of their lives. When you and your family, are at the whimsical mercy of an intolerant madman, freedom is more important than food. Those people needed our help and I’m so glad we answered their call. Nobody else in this world gave a rats a**. The Gimme Generation is all over the world not just here.

Mr Noble, just so you know, I’m a vet, my husband is a 20 yr vet, my husband and brothers were in Vietnam, our daughter was in during the Gulf War, my dad was a tail gunner during WWII, an uncle was a paratrooper in WWII and was killed on his first jump into the Phillippines. That’s just a few of my family that love this country and were proud to put on the uniform.

I hope that qualifies me to have an opinion on this war, not that I care what you think. Speaking of rhetoric Mr. Noble, why don’t you put down the demonic (Sorry, democratic) talking points, quit drinking the kool-aid and start THINKING for yourself! (sorry didn’t mean to offend your eyes by shouting) I see a lot of your kind of patriotic Americans in my town, don’t think very highly of them either.

RIGHT ON TO YOU TOO Chihuahua!! (By the way my shouting to you is in the way of a cheer!)

Thank you Crafty One for your comment and even more so for your service to your country.

I’m also reminded of one of the lessons Winston Churchill sought to teach us. It’s one that some have yet to learn:

Here is a line of milestones to disaster. Here is a catalogue of surrenders, at first when all was easy and later when things were harder, to the ever-growing German power. But now at last was the end of British and French submission. Here was decision at last, taken at the worst possible moment and on the least satisfactory ground, which must surely lead to the slaughter of tens of millions of people. Here was the righteous cause deliberately and with a refinement of inverted artistry committed to mortal battle after its assets and advantages had been so improvidently squandered. Still, if you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than live as slaves.
–Winston Churchill

God forbid we ever see a day when that worst case scenario is inflicted on the United States.

Aye Chi,

I will try once more and then rest my case.

Pearl Harbor – Dec 1941

VJ (since it’s later than VE day) – Aug 1945

That is less than four years. We have already been in Iraq over five years. I point you again to the difference in enemies in both cases. With respect to war weariness, as I pointed out in a previous post, there was shared sacrifice in WWII. I’ve cited the statistics – In terms of combat, over 10 times as many Americans proportionally fought for their country in that war as opposed to Iraq. In WWII Americans back home were paying higher taxes and rationing. They were doing their part. Neither has occurred in the current war. And finally, WWII, as you note, began with an attack on our troops and war-fighting capability at Pearl Harbor. Saddam Hussein, brutal butcher that he was, never attacked the United States.

Mike,

I did not call you a warmonger. I did not mean to suggest you were happy about this war. But what I very definitely did mean to suggest was that you cite the smallest progress in this war and claim VICTORY! You willfully ignore and distort the full import of articles like those you cited in the Economist. You want VICTORY so bad you see it where it is not. That is not cowardly, it is not craven, but it is not objective, nor is it honest.

Saddam Hussein was a monster. And I am very familiar with the Anfal campaign. I have an Iraqi Kurd friend who sought and won political asylum in the United States. But what we have unleashed in Iraq would give Saddam a run for his money. Iraq today is a horror show, not the island of peace and justice you present. There aren’t torture rooms in Iraq now? There are. Atrocities are being committed every day in Iraq, not just by jihadis. By Sunnis against Shia, by Shia against Sunnis, and by Shia against Shia. Iraqi society, though full as all societies are with many good and reasonable people, is dysfunctional, even psychopathic. Saddam Hussein needed 500,000 soldiers and police to keep the lid on Iraq and we ripped it off, arrogantly projecting that we would be greeted as liberators, and foolishly believing that the innate human desire for freedom would triumph over the effects of centuries of religious hatred and decades of despotism. In our hubris we have opened Pandora’s Box and we are now caught in the whirlwind we unleashed. Or more accurately our brave troops and the innocent Iraqis are. We go to bed in safety every night.

We brought peace and justice to Iraq? Do you and I live in alternate universes? Over 50 people died in a car bombing in Baghdad, the capital of the country we liberated just last week. This week another car bomb went off killing 10 including, two American servicemen. That is a bizarre kind of peace. A country at peace does not have 2 million of its citizens flee to other countries.

Craftyone,

I have no interest in playing one-upsmanship in family histories of military service. I served my country for 20 years. No medals warranted, just a fact. [Nor, Skye, do I want a statue erected to me because I mourned our nation’s loss on 9/11. If everyone who did that were to get a statue, there would be statues from sea to shining sea across this country. And I assure you they would not all be statues to conservatives and Republicans.] My service gives me no more and no less right to speak my mind than any other American. Yet Craftyone, because I have the audacity to take a position you disagree with, you make assumptions about me, while knowing next to nothing about me. I don’t really care about your personal opinion of me anymore than you care about my opinion of you. But for the record I did not have everything handed to me. Stop drinking the kool-aid and think for myself? Why do you think I am on this website? If I wanted to drink the liberal kool-aid, I could go on the DailyKos or the Huffington Post, high-five the other liberals and attack anyone who dares to express a conservative opinion on that site. In the same way you just did.

Also, Aye Chi, consistent with my point on shared sacrifice, how would my contributing extra money to support the war induce shared sacrifice? First with a monthly bill of $12 B, I’m afraid I can’t be of much help. More importantly everyone else gets off the hook. More fundamentally though, why would I contribute extra to a war I oppose? Your attempt to flip my criticism of Mike fails because you got it backwards. Rightly or wrongly, I criticized Mike for being such a vehement supporter of the war and not participating in the fight. Again, fair or not, that is at least logically consistent. I am an opponent of the war and you ask why I don’t do more to support it. That is logically inconsistent.

I will try once more and then rest my case.

Pearl Harbor – Dec 1941

VJ (since it’s later than VE day) – Aug 1945

That is less than four years. We have already been in Iraq over five years. I point you again to the difference in enemies in both cases.

My original point remains completely valid:

I am really and truly glad that the defeatist, microwave culture attitudes of the anti-war proponents weren’t prevalent during WWII.

How long did we remain in Germany and Japan after the VE day and VJ day?

I am an opponent of the war and you ask why I don’t do more to support it.

Actually, you are an opponent of the war bemoaning that everyone isn’t bearing a greater sacrifice.

If you want everyone else to do as you suggest you should lead by example.

You remind me a lot of those who are “opposed” to tax cuts but then are quick to take advantage of them.

More fundamentally though, why would I contribute extra to a war I oppose?

Because asking everyone to bear an extra burden when you yourself are demonstrably unwilling to do so is the height of hypocrisy.

Of course, your point always remains the same even in the presence of facts to the contrary.
And you do know that “your point” is a piece of rhetoric, not a statement of fact or a logical conclusion.

How many American servicemen died during the Occupation of Germany and Japan?

I am not unwilling to bear an extra burden as long as the sacrifice is shared. And I would not complain if my taxes were raised to fund the war. But if I unilaterally make an extra contribution, that would do nothing to create a shared sacrifice. What part of that reasoning continues to confuse you?

My point was that if there had been a spirit of shared sacrifice, the American people might feel differently about the war. It is the President and his Administration who are hypocritical in defining the Iraq War as the central front in our generational struggle against “Islamofascism”
and then not having the leadership to enlist the shared sacrifice of the American people.

I am not unwilling to bear an extra burden as long as the sacrifice is shared. And I would not complain if my taxes were raised to fund the war. But if I unilaterally make an extra contribution, that would do nothing to create a shared sacrifice.

Lead by example.

How about this: I am opposed to drinking and smoking. Those are my choices. Choices that I feel would benefit everyone.

Suppose I went out and touted my beliefs in regard to those things while chain smoking and chugging a beer or taking shots of hard liquor.

No one would take me seriously and it would be very easy to see the hypocrisy of my position.

If you really truly, down in your heart of hearts, believe that “shared sacrifice” is what is needed then step up and show the rest of us some commitment to the idea that you are pushing.

You are revealing yourself to be a classic example of the Left wing in this country. Constantly sniping and griping about what everyone else is not doing and then repeatedly showing that you not willing to do the very things that you are complaining about.

You point out the disparity of the enemies that we faced in WWII then you turn around and use the length of WWII as an indictment of what is happening in Iraq.

That makes no sense.

After completing post #32 I started thinking about some other things that you wrote David.

It’s striking to me that you state that Saddam Hussein was a monster. You claim knowledge of the Anfal campaign. I can accept those statements at face value.

Then you go on to say

what we have unleashed in Iraq would give Saddam a run for his money.

There’s not a single fact out there anywhere to indicate that anything we have unleashed in Iraq could possibly compare to Saddam’s evil murderous oppression.

You say

Iraq today is a horror show

By saying that you are totally denying the reality of what is going on in Iraq today.

Even the MSM that the Left in this country trusts so much for truth dissemination has caught on to what is happening.

Further you add

There are [torture rooms]. Atrocities are being committed every day in Iraq, not just by jihadis. By Sunnis against Shia, by Shia against Sunnis, and by Shia against Shia. Iraqi society, though full as all societies are with many good and reasonable people, is dysfunctional, even psychopathic.

By your own admission every society is filled with dysfunctional and psychopathic individuals who get sick pleasure from the maltreatment and murder of others. Yet you propose that we just leave them to fend for themselves.

I wonder if what would happen if we pulled out all of the police from DC or Detroit or NY City. There’s mayhem enough in those places with law enforcement in place.

arrogantly projecting that we would be greeted as liberators

There is ample proof that we were indeed greeted as liberators.

You should look that up sometime.

foolishly believing that the innate human desire for freedom would triumph over the effects of centuries of religious hatred and decades of despotism.

You drastically underestimate the will of the Iraqi people specifically, and more generally, human nature.

Now that it has become evident that we won’t run out on them the Iraqis have stepped up the challenges that they face.

Their resilience has proven to be remarkable.

That is a bizarre kind of peace. A country at peace does not have 2 million of its citizens flee to other countries.

First, you omit the fact that the refugees fled during the active combat/bombing portion of the war and in the ensuing unrest.

You also, quite conveniently omit the fact that now that things have calmed down dramatically the refugees are streaming back into the country that they left.

I wonder why you left those parts out.

Finally you say

Over 50 people died in a car bombing in Baghdad, the capital of the country we liberated just last week. This week another car bomb went off killing 10 including, two American servicemen.

You claim to know how bad Saddam was. You claim to have knowledge of Anfal. You claim that things now are worse than they were then. Yet you’re willing to just pack up and leave the Iraqis to their own devices.

Remarkable.

No one has declared that our work in Iraq is finished. No one has declared that the country is perfect. Those are leaps in logic that you are putting forward in order to make a point.

Because you are so totally committed to your view of things you cannot possibly admit the amazing level of progress that we, hand in hand with the Iraqis, are making in Iraq.

Do you disagree that the shared sacrifice in WWII facilitated support for the war?
If so, then it is not a “Left wing gripe” to argue that it would have done the same for the Iraq War.

You vehemently support the war, I do not. Wouldn’t it be more appropriate that you lead by example? More to the point, since that would be a meaningless gesture on either of our parts, it was the Commander in Chief’s responsibility to set the tone of shared sacrifice for the nation. That is what leaders do.

I did not say that there are individual psychopaths in Iraq. That would be stating the obvious. I said something more serious. I said that Iraqi society in dysfunctional, even psychopathic. We ignored that reality going in and are in a state of denial about it now. I thought it was the liberals who had touchy-feely, warm and fuzzy ideas about human nature? Yet you cling to the belief that because everyone wants freedom, something with which I agree, everyone is capable of procuring it for themselves, or as in Iraq, can be lead into it by an occupying power.

Over 50 killed in bombings last week and 49 this week, all in Baghdad. That is peace only in the world of “1984,” where words mean their opposite. In addition to the 2 million refugees, whose plight you blithely dismiss, there are up to 2.77 million internally displaced persons. If Iraq is at peace as Mike baldly states and you imply, why don’t they just go back to their homes?

I don’t advocate withdrawing precipitously and abandoning the Iraqis, but we cannot formulate a coherent policy unless we admit the facts on the ground. I do not trust this Administration to develop such a policy, nor do I trust John McCain to give us anything other than more of the same.