The Empty Throne

The following is Kerry's latest position on Iraq, as he explained it to Tom Brokaw this past week. Something I saw reminded me of this today:

Brokaw: This week you've been very critical of the president because of the missing explosives in Iraq.The fact is, senator, we still don't know what happened to those explosives. How many for sure that were there. Who might have gotten away with them? Is it unfair to the president, just as you believe he's been unfair to you, to blame him for that?

Kerry: No. It's not unfair. Because what we do know, from the commanders on the ground, is that they went there, as they marched to Baghdad. We even read stories today that they broke locks off of the doors, took photographs of materials in there. There were materials. And they left.

Brokaw: The flip side of that is that if you had been president, Saddam Hussein would still be in power. Because you...

Kerry: Not necessarily at all.

Brokaw: But you have said you wouldn't go to war against him...

Kerry: That's not true. Because under the inspection process, Saddam Hussein was required to destroy those kinds of materials and weapons.

Brokaw: But he wasn't destroying them...

Kerry: But that's what you have inspectors for. And that's why I voted for the threat of force. Because he only does things when you have a legitimate threat of force. It's absolutely impossible and irresponsible to suggest that if I were president, he wouldn't necessarily be gone. He might be gone. Because if he hadn't complied, we might have had to go to war. And we might have gone to war. But if we did, I'll tell you this, Tom. We'd have gone to war with allies in a way that the American people weren't carrying the burden. And the entire world would have understood why we were doing it.

As I said, I was reminded of that incoherent ramble today, when I saw this:

A very necessarily empty throne in Baghdad. It's not that hard to understand, is it?

Make sure your neighbors do too.

All you have to do is click

Today is the last day to double efforts!

As you may know, October marks the Pink Ribbon Challenge at The Breast Cancer Site , where every daily click is doubled thanks to our premiere sponsor, National City. This month, more than ever, telling your friends about a simple daily click will save lives. Our goal is to give 500 mammograms this month and we'll meet and beat that goal with your help. Please tell your friends about the Pink Ribbon Challenge and keep clicking!

According to their goal marker, they have only reached 475 hundred and today is the last day. I'm sure we could help them reach their goal of 500 and then some. It takes less than a minute to go to their site and click on "donating a mammogram" for free (pink window below or on our side bar). This doesn't cost you a thing. Their corporate sponsors/advertisers use the number of daily visits to donate mammogram in exchange for advertising, and every click counts double in the month of October!

Here's the web site! Pass it along to people you know.

UPDATE: Thank You

Trick or Treat (Part IV)

Now go away, or I shall taunt you a second time!
- Osama Bin Laden, from his latest video

OK, in reality he's saying things about goats. (I'm sure few people in the world know more intimate details about goats than Osama.) Just in time for Halloween he's come out swinging, one would assume with his best stuff, and lo and behold it's Michael Moore quotes. Ironically following on the heels of Kerry's own desperate plea , this should be a wake up call to the slumbering Left. Jim Geraghty is right, look in the mirror. I'd like to think they'll follow his advice, but the trouble is every time I've thought they would look into that mirror they haven't. When the real wake up call comes they choose to snooze, preferring to delay the inevitable confrontation with the not joking, real-world nightmare.

Will this time be different?

Unfortunately I think not. Because the American Left has never failed to disappoint me. It follows that I think Mr Geraghty is wrong in this statement: "A Bush landslide is now exponentially more likely..." though he chose his words carefully so as not to actually predict said landslide, I'm convinced that the Left that wants to believe that the President of the United States was acting with Saudi royals and Osama Bin Laden on 911 will certainly not stay home or change their votes just because Osama made a campaign video quoting Mike Moore supporting Kerry.

Likewise it doesn't matter whether Cronkite was joking or not when he told Larry King "I'm a little inclined to think that Karl Rove, the political manager at the White House, who is a very clever man, he probably set up bin Laden to this thing." Plenty of Americans believe it.

I think all the minds that matter (real voters on both sides) were made up weeks ago, Osama's not a difference maker any more than Guardian Readers were, and bottom line, I'm going to believe the election is close up until the time I see the results.

By the way, the Kerry campaign, via phone polling, has decided to play the Osama video as real, not a Rove plot. They do think he could be a difference maker, and here's how they decided:

Planning and strategy; deciding if it was Rove or Real:

Let me just mention that, as part of that, and we're very cautious about this - we added a question - this poll was intended to be fielded independent of the events - we added a question this morning that was only in the 250 interviews that was conducted on Saturday and I read it just to try to suggest that we ought to be a little bit cautious in interpreting what we think will be the consequence of these events.

We read following question:

I'm going to read you paraphrasement about Osama Bin Laden's videotape - this is a poll that was conducted by Democracy Corps, I'm going to read you a paraphrasement about the release of Bin Laden's videotape, please tell me what comes closer to your view: One, it makes me think that George W. Bush took his eye of the ball in Afghanistan and diverted his resources to Iraq; Two, it underscores the importance of George Bush's approach to terrorism

By ten points, 46-36 percent, voters responding to the survey agreed with the first statement, rather than the second.

And (que the candidate), 3, 2, 1... Action!:

"As I have said for two years now, when Osama bin Laden and all Qaeda were cornered in the mountains of Tora Bora, it was wrong to outsource the job of capturing them to Afghan warlords," he told a rally in Appleton.

For the record, from my point of view I have a two word response to the Osama tape, it's non-partisan, and its not printable here.

Let's look at more from the venerable Cronkite. His call on the election results comes in a quote that follows immediately after the Rove statement above - so perhaps he remains in a 'tongue-in-cheek' mode:

CRONKITE: Well, I think it's one of the biggest messes we've had in a long time. I believe that we're undoubtedly not going to know the results of this election. I don't want to knock you off the air on Monday night or anything, or Tuesday night. But I suspect that we're not going to know who the next president is, whether it is Bush or the new man, until very probably sometime in the early spring. There's so much controversy that they're planting, deliberately planting at the polls, that there's almost certainly to be a suit going back to the Supreme Court eventually, going through the other courts slowly first.

And later

KING: Do you expect a huge turnout?

CRONKITE: What?

KING: A huge turnout?

CRONKITE: Oh, yes, I do. I think so. The only thing that could damage the turnout would be the threats that might be implied, as many of the new registrees are challenged as to their various things. Their spelling of their name and the state where they really come from, whether they're immigrants or not, do they have passports, all that kind of thing. If they are challenged at the polls, as they line up to go into the polls, they may fear having to answer all those questions. Particularly if they do have anything wrong about them and shouldn't vote.

We pause now for this brief reminder:

Do not hit that snooze button.

More to come.

Dawn of the dead

My daughter is the pretty one.

Zee Planes, Zee Planes...

Insurgents in Iraq continue to score victory after victory:

Iraqi officials will meet Boeing executives next week as the government considers whether to go with the company's aircraft or those of Europe's Airbus for a national fleet, Iraq's transport minister said yesterday.

Due to too-few-troops-stretched-too-thin the nation is descending into chaos:

Competition between Boeing and Airbus could heat up in Iraq if the country relaunches its national carrier and secures its airports.

Iraqi Airways, which owned a formidable fleet before the 1990 Gulf war, operates several flights a week to Amman, Jordan, and Damascus, Syria, using two used Boeing 737s acquired three months ago.

Most Iraqis have given up hope, in the face of an occupier who has no plan:

"Our plan is to return Iraqi Airways as a leading carrier and for Baghdad Airport to become a regional service center," he said yesterday.

Clearly the wrong war, wrong place, wrong time...

Happy Birthday Dad !

I love and Miss you.

Military Families

A tip of the hat to the Washington Post for putting this story on page one:

LONDONDERRY, N.H. -- Shona Emery, short and blond, a mother of four whose youngest most often sleeps curled beside her in bed, wakes up at 1:40 a.m. and pads to the computer. She taps out an e-mail to her husband, Jesse.

"Hey babe."

Jesse's answer pops up two seconds later on her screen. "Hey babe. I am leaving for the airport in 5 minutes."

"Cool. Running a little late?"

"I got delayed already, car bomb near the front gate of the airbase. It's clear now though."

"Great."

"I love you," he writes.

"Love you," she responds. "Be safe."

"I will," he writes, "I will."

Shona's life plays like that now. She drops the kids off at school, hauls groceries at Shaw's Supermarket, and handles the play date and soccer game and breakfast-lunch-dinner regimen. Then she catches a snatch of AM radio or cable news and hears about another soldier killed and she sucks in her breath and waits to hear whether the attack occurred near her husband's base.

<...>

New Hampshire ranks second per capita in the percentage of National Guard members serving in Iraq. These soldiers -- diesel mechanics, auto parts managers and school counselors -- have left behind families in states -- such as New Jersey and Pennsylvania and Wisconsin -- that are divided with almost mathematical precision between Republican and Democrat, hawk and dove, President Bush and John F. Kerry. The families may or may not swing an election. But there is little doubt where most stand. Polls show that two-thirds of them favor Bush.

Shona is no different. She may absorb a grim vision of war in her early-morning e-mail exchanges with her husband, but she remains a ready vote for Bush, even if Jesse does another tour.

"My husband's a hunter and a warrior," she says. "He's totally pro-Bush."

<...>

Shona gave a speech when Bush came to New Hampshire and Pease Air National Guard Base this month. Her view of the war's progress is not as sunny as Bush's -- her man takes too much incoming fire to see victory in the offing. But that's okay.

"People laughed at Ronald Reagan for fighting the Cold War," Shona says. "We won't beat the terrorists in one year."

Jennifer listens and nods. "If it takes three, four, five years over there, get the job done," she says. "I'd rather have my husband fight than my children."

And the rest is well worth reading. Three years into the war on terror and this is the first honest reporting on military families I have ever seen in a major daily.

Foreign Fighters

This seems like a good idea

The U.S. military has agreed to hand legal custody of some suspected foreign fighters to the interim Iraqi government, which has controversial plans to broadcast the men's names and photos on television, American and Iraqi officials said Thursday.

The transfer came after Prime Minister Ayad Allawi's government demanded to have the prisoners so it could prove to the Iraqi public that security forces have captured foreign militants.

Despite claims by the Bush administration and Allawi's government that Arab Islamic extremists are responsible for much of Iraq's mayhem, many Iraqis remain skeptical. Showing Syrian, Sudanese and other Middle Eastern detainees on television would be a public-relations coup for Allawi, whose image as a strongman has suffered amid bombings and other attacks on his forces.

And because it seem slike a good idea you can bet the UN will condemn it:

International law prohibits the U.S. military, which will retain physical custody of the foreign detainees, from releasing information on inmates. The Iraqi government said public demands to see foreign fighters outweighed human-rights concerns. The government hopes to film the detainees as early as next week.

''We are going to show these Arabs on TV,'' said Qassim Daoud, the Iraqi minister of state for national security. ``We are under a lot of pressure from the public regarding these detainees. They want to see them. We are trying to match human-rights standards, but at the same time we need to show these foreign fighters to the public.'

We certainly wouldn't want to violate any foreign fighter's human rights. And if you think (like I did) that 20 is an awfully small number, there's this:

The Iraqi government initially demanded legal custody of all foreign detainees, but the U.S. military has agreed to cede control of only about 20 percent of the 150 or so foreigners in American-run detention centers, said Iraqi politicians and a senior U.S. military official who spoke on condition of anonymity.

And finally,

Once legal custody is transferred, the detainees will appear before Iraqi judges to face criminal charges, said Nouri Abdulrahim, a spokesman for the Justice Ministry.

Those with longer memories will recall the media outrage over display of images of the captured Saddam and the corpses of his sons.

Fear In Baghdad

They live daily with kidnappings and car bombings, but one of the biggest fears among Baghdad residents is a John Kerry presidency.

Lawrence Kaplan in the Wall Street Journal :

We know what John Kerry thinks of Iraq. But what does Iraq think of him? Since he may soon be presiding over a war there, the question merits an answer. Yet, while the press has devoted page after page to the electoral preferences of the French, the opinions of those who count most overseas have received nary a mention.

Partly this derives from the simple fact that, as polls show, the overwhelming majority of Iraqis don't care who wins our election. Their concerns run closer to home -- especially how to stay alive. There's an exception, however: the thousands of academics, lawyers, rights advocates, and other educated elites leading the effort to create a new Iraq -- nearly all of whom have hitched their fortunes to our own and nearly all of whom hope that President Bush wins.

Liberal Iraqis repeat the same question: Will the U.S. leave? These, after all, are the Iraqis building institutions, occupying key positions in ministries, and cooperating openly with the U.S. And they're the Iraqis with the most to lose in the event John Kerry makes good on his pledge to "bring the troops home where they belong."

This prospect, once unimaginable, has become very real in Iraq. The fear of abandonment has transformed meetings between Iraqi and U.S. officials, until recently arenas for grievance, into forums for the expression of solidarity. Leading Iraqis stayed up late into the night to watch the presidential debates. "Sophisticated Iraqis are listening closely," Iraqi national security adviser Mowaffak Al-Rubaie says in a telephone interview. "Any discussion of withdrawal worries them." Echoing this, Manhel al-Safi, who recently left his post as an aide in the PM's office for a job in the Foreign Ministry, says, "There's a level of fear -- people in the government are afraid the Americans will leave Iraq." He adds a personal plea to Sen. Kerry: "Mr. Senator, destruction is easy; building takes a long time."

Such fears haven't been spun out of whole cloth. As far as Iraqi elites are concerned, President Bush brought democracy to a land that knew only dictatorship. From Sen. Kerry, however, they hear no commitment to build a liberal state or, for that matter, any state. What they hear instead is a presidential aspirant who complains about "opening firehouses in Baghdad and closing them down in the United States of America," even as his campaign aides dismiss Iraq's prime minister as an American "puppet."

To be fair, not everyone in the country is against Kerry:

Not surprisingly, surveys by the Iraqi Center for Research and Strategic Studies find that, where George Bush garners the most support in the Kurdish north and from Iraq's well-educated urban elites, John Kerry draws his strongest support from what the Center's Sadoun al-Dulame calls Iraq's "hottest places" -- hotbeds of resistance to the U.S. A poll taken earlier this month in Baghdad, for example, finds that while President Bush would win a higher tally in New Baghdad's Christian precincts, Sen. Kerry carries Sadr City hands down.

Kaplan closes with a proposal for how the candidate can restore his credibility on Iraq:

But if John Kerry, who famously demanded that the U.S. "stop this blind commitment to a dictatorial regime" in Vietnam, imagines history repeating itself in Iraq, he really ought to visit the place. Having passed through eight time zones and one looking glass, what he will find is not the reactionary playground of his fantasies, but a country where thousands of idealistic young men and women go to work each day in the hope of creating a democratic society. One of them, Mustafa Al-Khadimiy, who risks his life cataloging the depredations Saddam Hussein inflicted, has this to say: "The terrorists want to destroy everything and we're dying every day. If we're going to have democracy, the Americans cannot leave." Alas, he won't be voting on Tuesday.

No, but thanks to President Bush and the U.S. military he will be voting in January.

You will be voting on Tuesday.

A Long Night Draws Closer for Fallujah

Watch the British media the next few days for the real coverage from Iraq. Without an election looming tons of missing explosives have made barely a ripple in the news pond there. From page one of the London Daily Telegraph:

Iraq's government yesterday offered the leaders of rebel-held Fallujah a "last" chance to negotiate as an American military commander described the city as a cancer that had to be dealt with.

Iyad Allawi, the Iraqi prime minister, indicated that time was fast running out for those who were harbouring insurgents there.

"This chance could be the last," he said in a statement, imploring "the leaders and notables of Fallujah to use it to find a political solution".

But with military preparations at an advanced stage and American officials suggesting a major offensive could begin next week, there appeared little hope of a deal.

"Fallujah is a cancer," said Maj Gen Richard Natonski, commander of the 1st Marine Division, who would lead any ground attack. "We can't have a sanctuary for the enemy and expect to make progress."

He said he had received no request from the Iraqi government to carry out military operations and offered no opinion on whether a peaceful solution was possible. "I don't know who they're negotiating with."

But he made clear that his men were ready for action in Fallujah. "It's a rats' nest but if we have to go in and clear it out we will." He urged the foreign elements in Fallujah and those loyal to Saddam Hussein's regime to come out and fight.

"We can take these guys on if they show their faces. Not a problem whatsoever. That's why they've resorted to the tactics they have [suicide bombings and landmines] because they know every time we face them we kill them."

The shadows grow long in Fallujah, the day is at it's end.

al QaQaa, All the Time

Whether you side with Mohamed and John or believe George and Tom (That's ElBaradei and Kerry or Bush and Franks, of course) the one undeniable truth on the Al QaQaa story is that it will be weeks or months before truth is known - if ever. This is not RatherGate, (except that both stories illustrate the opposition's misunderstanding of all things military) and despite great efforts from all sides the Blogosphere isn't likely to be a player in this one. In the latest developments, The Washington Times published satellite photos today:

U.S. intelligence agencies have obtained satellite photographs of truck convoys that were at several weapons sites in Iraq in the weeks before U.S. military operations were launched, defense officials said yesterday.

The photographs indicate that Iraq was moving arms and equipment from its known weapons sites, said officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

According to one official, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, known as NGA, "documented the movement of long convoys of trucks from various areas around Baghdad to the Syrian border."

Defense officials tell us the disclosure this week of the 380 tons of missing high explosives from Iraq was the work of International Atomic Energy Agency director Mohamed ElBaradei, who is said to be opposed to the United States.

Officials speaking on condition of anonymity said they believe Mr. ElBaradei, an Egyptian, sought to influence the outcome of the presidential election when his agency called on the new Iraqi government to account for the stored high explosives at Al-Qaqaa.

"There's no question that most people here think the whole [Iraqi explosives] thing was cooked up," one official said.

The IAEA wrote a letter to Iraqi Science and Technology Minister Rashan Mandan Omar, who then had his chief monitor, Mohammad Abbas, write back.

It was Mr. Abbas who claimed that the explosives were looted after the U.S.-led invasion, a claim defense officials dispute.

The Bush administration has been frustrated that Mr. ElBaradei has been slow to deal with the growing crisis over Iran's nuclear program and the refusal of Tehran to halt uranium enrichment in violation of IAEA rules.

Mr. ElBaradei also has not been tough on North Korea, for its rogue nuclear program.

An IAEA spokesman could not be reached for comment.

The speed with which the campaign of Sen. John Kerry exploited the issue also has raised suspicions in the Pentagon that U.S. intelligence agencies helped the Kerry campaign with the story, at least until it began to fall apart shortly after the report appeared in the New York Times on Monday.

Actually there is one other thing that's certain: We'd never have heard of al QaQaa if John Kerry had been running this country the past four years.

Unreal…

Stunning quotes from John Kerry on Beldar’s blog. Don’t miss it.

Brokaw: This week you've been very critical of the president because of the missing explosives in Iraq.The fact is, senator, we still don't know what happened to those explosives. How many for sure that were there. Who might have gotten away with them? Is it unfair to the president, just as you believe he's been unfair to you, to blame him for that?
Kerry: No. It's not unfair. Because what we do know, from the commanders on the ground, is that they went there, as they marched to Baghdad. We even read stories today that they broke locks off of the doors, took photographs of materials in there. There were materials. And they left.

Brokaw: The flip side of that is that if you had been president, Saddam Hussein would still be in power. Because you...

Kerry: Not necessarily at all.

Brokaw: But you have said you wouldn't go to war against him...

Kerry: That's not true. Because under the inspection process, Saddam Hussein was required to destroy those kinds of materials and weapons.

Brokaw: But he wasn't destroying them...

Kerry: But that's what you have inspectors for. And that's why I voted for the threat of force. Because he only does things when you have a legitimate threat of force. It's absolutely impossible and irresponsible to suggest that if I were president, he wouldn't necessarily be gone. He might be gone. Because if he hadn't complied, we might have had to go to war. And we might have gone to war. But if we did, I'll tell you this, Tom. We'd have gone to war with allies in a way that the American people weren't carrying the burden. And the entire world would have understood why we were doing it.

Later this:

Brokaw: Someone has analyzed the President's military aptitude tests and yours, and concluded that he has a higher IQ than you do.

Kerry: That's great. More power. I don't know how they've done it, because my record is not public. So I don't know where you're getting that from.

Hard to believe this race is close.

Slarrow

I'm slow, but eventually I catch on...

Slarrow, who's insightful comments are always welcome here, has a blog , and in this post points to a number of his poems.

I'll steal one verse, for a sample:

Two it takes to make a fight, but one to make a beating.

Evil thrills when peaceful lambs come to the slaughter, bleating.

And let you find the rest for yourselves.

Because Tonnage Matters

100,000 Iraqi ciilains dead. If they weighed an average of 120 pounds that would mean 6,000 tons of Iraqi civilians killed. Undoubtedly though most were babies and all were undernourished because of the sanctions that were working war. Thus 2,500 tons is more likely a good estimate.

More here. Do read, please .

Apparently most of the deaths were in Fallujah. Expect the total to increase to at least 650 billion civilian dead if the Marines take that town. Perhaps more.

More European support for America

As much as they might dislike President Bush or America, more Europeans are realizing a free world defended by John Kerry will not long be free.

It is partly Mr Bush’s character. The perils of war really do demand leadership and moral clarity. It is partly, to be honest, the quality of his opponent. The more you see of John Kerry the more troubling the thought of his presidency becomes. Behind a lifetime of careful, calculated decision-making it is clear that he harbours a deep suspicion about the very idea of moral clarity in foreign policy.

It is partly what Mr Bush has done. Afghanistan is an infinitely better and less threatening place today than it was four years ago. Iraq, despite the catalogue of errors, is still heading that way.

But above all, in this oppositional sort of age, when it is often easier to be defined by what one is against rather than what one is for, I have to say it is his enemies who most justify Mr Bush’s re-election.

The list of those whose world could be truly rocked on Tuesday is just too long and too rich to be ignored. If you think for a moment about those who would really be upset by a second Bush term, it becomes a lot easier to stomach.

The hordes of the bien-pensant Left in the universities and the media, the sort of liberals who tolerate everything except those who disagree with them. Secularist elites who disdain religiosity except when it comes from Muslim fanatics. Europhile Brits who drip contempt for everything their country has ever done and long for its disappearance into a Greater Europe.Absurd, isolationist conservatives in America and Britain who think the struggles for freedom are always someone else’s fight. Hollywood sybarites and narcissists, self-appointed arbiters of a nation’s morals.

Soft-headed Europeans who think engagement and dialogue with mass murderers is the way to achieve lasting peace. French intellectuals for whom nothing has gone right in the world since 1789.

The United Nations, which, if it had its multilateral way, would still be faithfully minding a world in which half the population lived under or in fear of Soviet aggression. Most of Belgium.
Above all, of course, Middle Eastern militants. If your bitterest enemies are the sort of people who hack the heads off unarmed, innocent civilians, then I would say you are probably doing something right.

This may sound petty. It is not. This constellation of individuals, parties and institutions has very little in common other than the fact that it has contrived to be wrong on just about every important issue of my adult lifetime.

And so, perhaps for the wrong reasons, perhaps less because he has been right and more because those who hate him so much have been so wrong, I want this President re-elected.

Go on America. Make Their Day.

News from Germany

Readers here should know that like so many American military families we're stationed in Germany. These days it's not an unusual situation for an American to leave his family in one foreign country while fighting in another; as tough as that situation might be it's certainly no hardship to be here in this beautiful country. Though it will be good to be back in the USA when the time comes there will be more than a little pain associated with leaving. Especially when I look around now and realize this is my last fall season here. My favortite season.

In local news from here in Germany the nation's largest newspaper has endorsed President Bush. Among the reasons given:

Bush has clear priorities. He sees the inhuman Islamic fundamentalism and the murderous mullahs as the largest danger for the Western world.

Bush has learned the lessons of history. Military strength, not pleasant talk, is the only thing that helps against violent fanatics. And with Bush -- unlike with Kerry -- there is no doubt about this.

Bush has learned that America can defeat every country in war, but needs allies in peace. Thus, his second term will be characterized by cooperation with international partners. But he will not depend on how Syria or Libya vote at the UN.

With Bush, we know what to expect. With Kerry, nobody knows what he stands for and where he wants to lead America – and the world.

The Germans have always been a bit more supportive of U.S. efforts than the American press would like you to believe. The country took a decided swing to the left with re-unification and the flood of former East German voters into the electorate, but every day the German Army guards at the American military installations remind us by their presence, since the beginning of this war, that our long-time cold war allies are still with us against this newer evil. I have great respect for them.

Visit Medienkritik for all the details.

General Franks

REMARKS BY GENERAL TOMMY FRANKS

IN INTRODUCING THE PRESIDENT

AT VICTORY 2004 RALLY

Westlake Recreation Center

Westlake, Ohio

October 28, 2004

GENERAL FRANKS: Well, what a treat it is to be in northern Ohio. (Applause.) Indeed, it's an honor to be standing here today with you. You know, I'm not a politician, but I know what a Commander-in-Chief looks like, and there's only one on this ballot -- that's George Bush. (Applause.)

You know, I would guess by the enthusiasm that I see represented here today that victory is headed our way in just about five days. (Applause.) If you think about character, if you think about courage, if you think about consistency, if you think about honesty, you think about George W. Bush. (Applause.) If you talk about a leader who knows something about the global war on terrorism, it would be George W. Bush, and he knows it's global. (Applause.)

You're talking about a leader who knows that terrorism has been more than a nuisance for more than two decades. (Applause.) You're talking about a leader who does not want to roll back terrorism to the times of Beirut in 1983, Khobar Towers in the mid-1990s, East Africa in 1998, the USS Cole in the year 2000, and doesn't want to roll it back to 9/11/01. Terrorism is not a nuisance. (Applause.)

George W. Bush is a leader who knew that Saddam Hussein was a threat to the world and to the United States of America, and removed him from power. (Applause.) George W. Bush is a leader who knows that our troops, as of right now, have cleared 10,000 ammunition and weapons sites in Iraq. He knows that they have destroyed 240,000 tons of munitions in Iraq. He knows that they have under control -- (applause) -- he knows that they have under control another 162,000 tons of munitions in Iraq. We're talking about George W. Bush who knows, who understands that we do not yet have all the facts about 380 tons of munitions in Iraq. And he is a President who will look at you and say, we don't yet have the facts, but we will get the facts. George W. Bush. (Applause.)

In George W. Bush, you're talking about a leader who does not step out every day of his life and make more wild accusations. You're talking about a leader who actually cares about our troops, about their families, and about our veterans. You're talking about a leader who actually respects all those who serve our country with dignity and with honor. You're talking about George W. Bush. (Applause.)

The past three years have been hard years for America. The past three years have been a tough time for our country. I've looked into the eyes of our President, my Commander-in-Chief, and I have seen that character, that courage, that consistency that I just described. It's the courage that it takes to win a war, not tie one. And we have to win the war against terrorism in this country. (Applause.)

Now, I'll tell you, I don't know Senator Kerry's plan for victory. I don't know what it is. I don't know what it is, but I do know -- but I do know that his criticism of military conduct of our global war on terrorism denigrates, disrespects our troops. (Applause.) And, ladies and gentlemen, I also know that he cannot lead troops to victory in a war when he has made it perfectly clear that he does not support the cause. (Applause.)

Ladies and gentlemen, this is going to be a close election, and every vote counts. Those who wear the uniform of service of the United States of America deserve a Commander-in-Chief, and it's my honor to introduce one -- President George W. Bush. (Applause.)

Blood Moon Rising

The moon was eclipsed over Baghdad in the pre-dawn hours this morning. Just prior to setting the disk was completely in shadow, an awesome sight low above the horizon. We knew it would happen, of course, absolutely inevitable and completely predictable, astronomy having come a long way from the earliest days... here in the cradle of civilization.

That full moon marks the mid-point of Ramadan. For all the talk of violence and pre-election attacks the month has been relatively quiet. Certainly not without incident, but nothing like the worst that so many expected. We're half way through the month, so there's another way to look at the situation: there are still a few weeks to go.

But from all indications, this is the key question that should be asked:

"How badly have we crushed the "insurgency"?" If the New York Times is to be believed, the insurgents have some share (if not all) of 380 tons (or if you prefer ABC, 3 tons) of high explosives at their disposal, and have had for over a year and a half. In all that time they have killed a number of captives and certainly captivated a sizable platoon of news reporters but accomplished absolutely nothing in the grand sweep of history.

Now in reality none but the dullest would imagine for a minute these people have 380 tons of high explosive at their disposal, else why are they being ground up in the wheels of the great machine?

And the coalition strategy over the past weeks may prove to be not just decisive, but a textbook example for dealing with such situations. Here's what's coming together, lining up as surely as the Sun, Moon, and Earth to bring an eclipse to the "insurgency":

1. A treaty with Sadr - brought about by overwhelming victory in Najaf and the resulting loss of hope on his part for gaining the support of the population - leading to less concentration of military assets in the Sadr City area of Baghdad.

2. A hugely successful "practice run" in the city of Samarra includes U.S. and Iraqi troops in a coordinated effort, destroying an organized and entrenched opposition.

3. Our British allies agree to move large numbers of troops northward, further freeing American GIs to turn their attention elsewhere. (Side note: this story is largely ignored in the American media, but a big story in Britain where the press is free to state the obvious: any coalition victory is a loss for the Kerry campaign in America. The story there is spun as Blair risking British boys to help buddy Bush but regardless of motive the result is devastating to the insurgents – their American allies are merely collateral damage).

All signs point to go time, and the target is Fallujah. It's not hard to imagine this scenario: all over the country the remnants of the failed insurgency (predominantly regime loyalists with no future and Syrians with less) are crawling to Fallujah, the beacon of death in the desert for their cause. And that death is coming, and all involved know it. If you need any more proof, look at the spin the New York Times has begun to apply in this piece from Edward Wong:

RAMADI, Iraq, Oct. 21 - The American military and the interim Iraqi government are quickly losing control of this provincial capital, which is larger and strategically more important than its sister city of Falluja, say local officials, clerics, tribal sheiks and officers with the United States Marines.

"The city is chaotic," said Sheik Ali al-Dulaimi, a leader of the region's largest tribe. "There's no presence of the Allawi government," he added, speaking of Prime Minister Ayad Allawi.

While Ramadi is not exactly a "no go" zone for the marines, like the insurgent stronghold of Falluja 30 miles to the east, officers say it is fast slipping in that direction.

So see? If Fallujah falls then Ramadi is the real important city and we've lost it.

But the truth is Ramadi's turn will come too. And if you believe differently then you too could be Wong...

But for now its Fallujah that draws the flies home. And from all over the country they are moving, crawling to Fallujah, joining together for an orgy of death, a result as certain as the dawn of a new day in a newly freed nation - the inevitable end of the night.

We may see some brief flicker of the insurgent flame yet, some last-ditch effort before Tuesday. If so it would be a good time to remember this: immediately after Al Qaeda castrated Spain with a few well-placed bombs the organization released a tape claiming the victory. That tape included this phrase: "You love life and we love death,." Anyone who ever served in the US Armed Forces knew the instant response to that, heard George C. Scott quote Patton, establishing the obvious common ground between American Forces and Al Qaeda corpses: "Your job is not to die for your country. Your job is to make the other poor bastard die for his country".

"You Love life, we love death"

The Marines will bring the love to Fallujah.

Oh, and speaking of Spain,

Vote

Pennsylvania's Democrat governor Edward "Fast Eddie" Rendell has learned that attacking the US Military can result in a counterattack. His attempt to disenfranchise his states military absentee voters is under assault from an Army Specialist serving in Kuwait and another serving in Iraq:

Two soldiers from Pennsylvania serving abroad filed a motion in federal court yesterday to force the state to accept overseas absentee ballots received after Tuesday's election.

Without an extension, U.S. Army Specs. Matthew J. Schramm of Schwenksville, Montgomery County, and Steven J. Reitz of Venango County, probably won't have their votes counted, according to the court petition filed by lawyers with the Republican State Committee.

"With the war in Iraq a major issue in this election, it is especially imperative that the members of the military actually waging that war have their votes counted," according to the motion, which asks the court to extend the absentee ballot deadline until Nov. 17.

Schramm and Reitz, who are serving in Kuwait and Iraq, respectively, become the first faces put on the controversial ballot issue that until now has dealt in the abstract realm of potentially disenfranchised voters.

State election law requires that each county send out its overseas absentee ballots by Sept. 20. They must be returned by Oct. 29 for votes to be counted for all offices on the ballot, or by Election Day for only the Presidential vote. The delays in getting ballots out have been blamed on uncertainty over whether Ralph Nader's name would be on the ballot.

A sad state of affairs when those on the front lines fighting the war on terror have to fight a war on the home front too, but Spc. Schramm and Spc. Reitz have allies in America too.

U.S. Rep. Curt Weldon (R., Pa.) yesterday threatened to "use my power" to withhold National Guard funds from coming into the state "to support this governor" if any overseas military votes go uncounted. And, at a separate news conference, U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum (R., Pa.) accused Rendell of using "heavy-handed partisanship" in opposing the extension.

Rendell was not available for comment yesterday, but last week he said he finds them "personally repugnant."

The battle has just begun, it remains to be seen whether these young American heroes will be able to vote this year. You should have less difficulty.

MilBlogger Kids Email the Front III

From my soon-to-be-17-year-old daughter, in response to my question: "Are there any new music CD's you'd like for your birthday?"

Answer: "Just surprise me. If you like it I'll like it".

Fellow parents of teenagers are likely as stunned as I was by that one.

The Great Bambino is Smiling from Above

At Last!

Pigs can fly, hell is frozen, the slipper finally fits,
and Impossible Dreams really can come true.

I dedicate this to my mother

and my sister-in-law

Here's something easier than going to the polls and voting, and less controversial too. For a long time now we've had a link to the Breast Cancer Site on our sidebar. That link is in place in honor of my mother and Greyhawk's sister, both of whom are survivors. Now I have a message to pass on from the site:

As you may know, October marks the Pink Ribbon Challenge at The Breast Cancer Site , where every daily click is doubled thanks to our premiere sponsor, National City. This month, more than ever, telling your friends about a simple daily click will save lives. Our goal is to give 500 mammograms this month and we'll meet and beat that goal with your help. Please tell your friends about the Pink Ribbon Challenge and keep clicking!

According to their goal marker, they have only reached 400 hundred and the month is almost at it's end. I'm sure we could help them reach their goal of 500 and then some. It takes less than a minute to go to their site and click on "donating a mammogram" for free (pink window below or on our side bar). This doesn't cost you a thing. Their corporate sponsors/advertisers use the number of daily visits to donate mammogram in exchange for advertising, and every click counts double in the month of October!

Here's the web site! Pass it along to people you know.

Choices

The election story you probably haven't heard, from last weekend: Five years after a massive bombing campaign led to five years of UN control, the future of Kosovo remains in doubt, at best. Riots and slaughter left 19 dead and 800 wounded as recently as last spring, gunfights break out between members of the UN contingent , and now a significant percentage of the population has boycotted the elections in fear for their safety.

One of the key post-election priorities in Kosovo should be to ensure more harmonious relations between the province's ethnic communities, UNMIK chief Soren Jessen-Petersen said Monday (25 October). Describing Saturday's vote for Kosovo's 120-seat parliament as a "turning point" for the UN-run province, he said it had highlighted the need for a "dramatic improvement" in conditions for Kosovo Serbs.

Fewer than 1 per cent of the Kosovo Serbs took part in the province's second parliamentary elections since the end of the 1998-1999 conflict. Citing security concerns following the mid-March riots, Belgrade officials and the Serbian Orthodox Church urged the community to boycott the poll.

Though they successfully buried it, even the AP had a tough time trying to paint this story as anything but bleak:

PRISTINA, Serbia-Montenegro (AP) -- Britain's European affairs minister appealed to Kosovo's leadership Tuesday to improve security for the U.N.-run province's beleaguered Serb minority, which boycotted the weekend's elections.

Dennis McShane urged ethnic Albanian leaders to implement a set of standards created by U.N. officials, including progress in areas such as rule of law and protection of minorities.

U.N. officials have made improvement on such issues a prerequisite for opening talks on Kosovo's final status. Progress is to be reviewed in mid-2005.

"Please move forward on standards," McShane said. "Find a guarantee that no Serb living in Kosovo has to walk in fear, no Serb has to worry about his church being destroyed, no Serb has to worry about his house or feel to be under threat."

There will be few immediate repercussions outside of Kosovo, of course, since "underreported" is an understatement when it comes to the international failure in Europe.

In contrast (in contrast as far as results, since reporting was also somewhat low-key on this one) comes this story from Afghanistan:

HERAT, Afghanistan, Oct. 24 -- President Hamid Karzai has won a majority of votes in Afghanistan's election, clinching a five-year term and becoming the country's first democratically elected president, according to preliminary results released Sunday.

With 94.3 percent of the votes counted, Karzai was winning 55.3 percent, or 4.2 million, of the votes cast, enough to avoid a runoff, the Joint Electoral Management Body reported. Any showing of less than 50 percent would have required a runoff between the top two vote-getters, according to the Afghan constitution. Even if all the votes that are currently uncounted went to his rivals, Karzai would still win a majority. An official announcement may be made later this week.

Karzai's closest rival, his former education and interior minister, Yonus Qanooni, conceded defeat. Qanooni was far behind with 16.2 percent, or 1.2 million, of the votes cast, the results showed.

<...>

Qanooni acknowledged his defeat, according to his spokesman, Sayed Hamid Noori, the Reuters news agency reported.

And what of the USA? This story certainly isn't encouraging :

Supporter: I?m just worried there?s going to be riots afterwards.

Elizabeth Edwards: Uh.....well...not if we win.

How does one respond to such a bleak pronouncement? Or on related issues, how should any American react to stories of possible intimidation, or fraud at the polls? What is the proper response to Democrat's demands for UN monitors for the US elections? The time for words has passed; there are now two options for action next Tuesday:

Stay home Kosovo style, or vote, like the free people of Afghanistan.

I mailed my ballot from Baghdad. Where's your voting booth?

Missing Munitions?

I may offer more on this topic tomorrow, but for now NZ Bear has the definitive coverage and a fine round-up on the latest news in the NY Times' rather flimsy attack on the capabilities of the US Military.

Hugh Hewitt's point is worth noting:

Throughout the run-up to he war, Frank Gaffney would again and again warn on my radio show that the most telegraphed punch in history was having consequences we could not calculate.

As I said, more on this from me tomorrow. Perhaps.

For now this thought:

One could argue, accurately or innacurately, that the missing munitions are a result of the war, whether they vanished before or after the arrival of U.S. forces on the scene. What's not up for debate is the fact that Saddam would certainly have them without that invasion.

Meanwhile, care to speculate exactly what reason he had them for? National defense is not the answer, because he didn't use them for that purpose when he most certainly had the chance. Assuming they were there, of course. Right?

Anybody?

Bueller?

Now go read.

UPDATE:
Russian special forces troops moved many of Saddam Hussein's weapons and related goods out of Iraq and into Syria in the weeks before the March 2003 U.S. military operation, The Washington Times has learned.

UPDATE:
Brett Baer on FNC reports that the Pentagon is reviewing sattelite imagery which reveals considerable truck activity in the days leading up to the Iraq war. The DoD is considering releasing the photographs.

UPDATE:
Oct. 27, 2004 ? Iraqi officials may be overstating the amount of explosives reported to have disappeared from a weapons depot, documents obtained by ABC News show.

UPDATE:
A Power Line reader writes from a .mil address:

I am a reservist stationed at CENTCOM. I did a search on SIPRNET the other day and I came up with a document with the following (unclassified) subject:

IIR 7 921 0164 03/DRAGON HUNTER - DUPLICATE U.N. WEAPONS INSPECTOR SEALS ENABLED IRAQI REGIME TO RELOCATE PROHIBITED MATERIALS.

UPDATE:
At the NRO, Kerry Spot reader R.L. points to the January 27, 2003 report by the International Atomic Energy Agency to the U.N. Security Council.

Drinking

No beer here, but from the latest care package from the Mrs we're enjoying this.

Thanks darlin'.

Perspective

This story seems more significant to me today than missing explosives (or anything else for that matter). I think the signal to noise ratio needs a bit of improvement and offer this in hopes of achieving that goal.

Kenneth Edelle Foster, 51, a retired Army sergeant whose wife lost her life at the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001, died Oct. 10 at his home in Arlington, Tex., of pulmonary fibrosis and congestive heart failure. He had lived in the Washington area since 1972 and moved back to North Texas, where he grew up, in 2003.

A civilian Army policy analyst, Mr. Foster was working in his office in the Hoffman Building in Alexandria on Sept. 11 when he got word that a plane had hit the Pentagon, where his wife, Sandra Nadine Hill, had worked for 25 years. He jumped into his truck and raced toward the billowing black cloud he could see in the distance, going the wrong way on Interstate 95.

He ended up spending nearly two days and nights helping rescue efforts while desperately searching for his wife. Because he wasn't supposed to be there, a woman gave him T-shirts from the Salvation Army and the Red Cross to wear so he could blend in with the rescuers.

Mr. Foster and his wife -- whom he affectionately called Duchess -- had met in 1985, when both worked for the Defense Intelligence Agency at the Pentagon. They married in 1991. As a senior management officer with the agency, his wife worked in an office on the third floor of the E Ring, directly in the path of American Airlines Flight 77.

She had left two messages on her husband's voice mail at work that morning. "Something strange is happening," she said in one of the messages.

Mr. Foster told The Washington Post a few days later that she was probably calling to tell him about the World Trade Center attack. He called her back immediately, but he got her voice mail, which was unusual. Then he heard a woman in his office screaming that a plane had crashed into the Pentagon.

Mrs. Foster's body was found at her desk a week later; medical authorities told her husband that she had died instantly. She was buried at Arlington National Cemetery.

Mr. Foster sank into a debilitating depression after his wife's death. He tried to commit suicide two months later on his favorite holiday, Thanksgiving. After he survived a game of Russian roulette while home alone that day, he sought help and was admitted to the intensive care unit at Walter Reed Army Medical Center. He then went to counseling twice a week, started reaching out to the many people concerned about him and decided to move back to Texas. He told the Fort Worth Star-Telegram that staying in the Washington area meant he was dying slowly each day as he relived the events of Sept. 11.

He set up a $25,000 annual college scholarship named for his wife, given to a senior girl from a District public school. His wife, he told The Post in 2002, valued education above everything else.

Mr. Foster had planned to travel to Washington on Sept. 16 for the second annual fund-raising banquet in his wife's memory, where he planned to award another Sandra Nadine Hill Scholarship.

He also planned to attend the Monday night Dallas Cowboys-Washington Redskins game. He was an avid Cowboys fan; his wife was just as devoted to the Redskins. He was going to buy two tickets and leave one seat empty.

He was hospitalized shortly before he was to leave and was unable to make the trip.

Mr. Foster was born in Fort Worth and attended Draughn's Business College there for a year. He joined the Army in 1971, serving in Japan, Saudi Arabia and elsewhere. A Persian Gulf War veteran, he retired in 1993 and began his civilian position with the Army that same year.

Both Fosters were big basketball fans, and Mr. Foster often coached girls' summer-league basketball. His wife, who played basketball at Dunbar High School in the District, often sat on the bench beside him as his assistant. During the 2000-01 school year, he also worked as an unpaid coach with the girls' junior varsity basketball team at Wakefield High School in Arlington.

Mr. Foster's first marriage, to Paulette Foster, ended in divorce.

Survivors include two sons from his first marriage, Kyle Parrish Foster of Capitol Heights and Kellen Patrick Foster of Landover; his mother, Charlotte Anderson of Fort Worth; two brothers; and a sister.

Mr. Foster's friends and family were fully aware of the seriousness of his lung disease, which got worse after he lost his wife, but they don't believe his illness caused his death.

"He could have got over his physical ailments, I believe," his mother said, "but he just didn't want to live. He died of a broken heart. We all know that."

Trick or Treat (Part III)

One of the last things I accomplished before leaving home was a visit to the legal office to update the Will and prepare a Power of Attorney for the Mrs. While there we noticed a rather agitated gentleman who seemed to be having trouble with the legal folks. He was older, a civilian, possible retired, and standing next to him at the reception counter it was impossible not to overhear the issue. Seems he was trying to establish his state of legal residence, having been in Germany for nine years, but he was unhappy with the option he was getting from legal. They were telling him his "home state" was "state A" - the one he lived in immediately prior to coming overseas, while he wanted to be a resident of "state B" - because he did not want to pay the nine years of taxes he would have to pay were he to be declared a resident of state A.

That's all I know of the situation. At this point one of the lawyers appeared and ushered the man off to an office, presumably to do all they could do within the limits of the law to assist him.

Why this man was suddenly eager to be a citizen of a certain state after nine years of living in Europe is up to the reader to decide. Why he wanted to be a resident of a state with no income tax (are there any other than Florida?) seems a bit more obvious. Or perhaps not.

The fact that the Kerry campaign has been making furious efforts to register overseas voters is certainly one possibility. A fellow military blogger in Germany describes some of those efforts here :

The Kerry campaign is sending waves of operatives to other countries to request absentee ballots for ex-patriots, non citizens who were falsely registered as voters due to flaws in the motor voter registrations, and any other absentee voter they can muster. Since I have a personal friend directly involved in this effort, who refused to disclose the source of the funding because of legal questions (both foreign and domestic), I know for sure that this is actively going on in many countries as we speak. This same person showed me the voter registration card of his non-citizen wife, that had been issued to her because she got a Driver's License. The card came to his home long after she had returned to her country of citizenship.

In contrast, I know of no efforts whatsoever by Republicans to rally overseas voters - though some might claim the military's extraordinary efforts to ensure it's people vote this year is a de facto Republican effort.

But not completely. Here's an example, a young man who works in my "shop" who I suspect is a Kerry supporter (he's been known to say things like "I'm voting for Kerry", which leads to my assumption). However, as I was completing my absentee ballot I asked him if he had sent his in yet. Turns out he hadn't. In fact, he was not going to vote after all.

The hell you're not, I explained calmly to him. "You're telling me, standing here in the sands of Baghdad, that you aren't going to exercise your right?"

I was happy to see him later with his completed ballot in hand, headed for the mailbox. Even knowing it was likely going to essentially cancel the vote I had just cast myself.

Some of you may wonder how I could make such a statement. Believe me, the idea of an American GI not voting in this election is repulsive to me. Others might wonder why I never took the time to educate the youngster on his confused ideas regarding American politics. Undue influence is the simple answer. Though I did set the young man straight on the number of grievous inaccuracies in Fahrenheit 911 I would not for an instant attempt to sway a junior troop to my political point of view. I never talk politics with the troops, in fact that's one of the main reasons I use a pseudonym on this site.

So, given that I've now sort of cancelled my own vote, what can I do to ensure Mrs. Greyhawk's nightmare doesn't come true?

Just this: To all you folks who've offered your kind words, thoughts and prayers to me or any of the thousands of Americans fighting the War on Terror, I have this one request. Worth more than any care packages, books, wet wipes, or sunblock you could send us, do not let us down.

It's never mattered more.

Good News From Iraq?

Two articles, two sources, one theme: "Not all the news from Iraq is bad." Does this signal a tidal shift in attitude at some media outlets? An acknowledgement that they might have overdone the "we're losing the war / its a quagmire" angle? Is it a response to alternative information sources (ahem)?

Or a cynical attempt to establish "balance" claims for the preponderance of "we're losing war / it's a quagmire" coverage still to come?

U.S. News & World Report starts here:

Targets. On the highways, there is only tension. To soldiers, every broken-down car is a potential bomb; every tumbleweed may disguise an artillery shell set to explode. With dozens of bombs found each week, soldiers have good reason to be anxious. The military has responded by adding armor plating on humvees and many transport trucks. But the improvised bombs have grown increasingly sophisticated; insurgents, for instance, are rigging explosives to highway overpasses to hit the exposed humvee gunners. "It's a matter of getting through as fast as you can," says Lt. Mike Byrnes, an officer with the 10th Mountain Division, who has escorted convoys both inside and outside Baghdad. Insurgents, he says, "are trying to disrupt the supply lines. They hit a big truck full of fuel, ammo, or food--that hurts us. We depend on these convoys. Without 'em, we don't get what we need."

In an apparent sign of the stress of such missions, 18 members of the 343rd Quartermaster Company, a reserve unit from South Carolina, are under investigation for refusing to make a 200-mile convoy run of fuel trucks to Taji, 15 miles north of Baghdad.

But then goes here:

Small talk. In the village of Salaam, just south of Baghdad, Army Capt. Scott Shaw patrols the streets tasked with the job of preventing insurgents from bringing down an airplane with a rocket. Shaw is a dynamic company commander who seems to genuinely enjoy interacting with Iraqis. "I know this village like the back of my hand," he says. Shaw walks around asking residents about the price of rice and eggs, checking for signs of inflation at the food markets. He relishes taking meals with people in his area. Strangely, it reminds him of home, Little Rock, Ark. "Iraqis eat more okra than anyone I've met," he says. "They have this soup of tomatoes and okra. I could eat that every day." He talks about the upcoming election, quizzing residents about whether they know the location of the polling place. Encountering the son of a local sheik, Shaw exchanges kisses with him in greeting and asks how the new water pump he secured for him is working.

Meanwhile the LA Times starts here:

Last week, the Onion offered a satirical story with a Baghdad dateline: "After 19 months of struggle in Iraq, U.S. military officials conceded a loss to Iraqi insurgents Monday, but said America can be proud of finishing 'a very strong second.' "

Not even Michael Moore would suggest that's about to happen.

Yet the reportage from Iraq is almost as bleak. Even as some media gurus accuse journalists of naively accepting officials' positive spin on the war, the sweep of coverage suggests that Iraq's occupiers have turned post-invasion chaos into a hellish nightmare and perhaps a quagmire ? and the consensus is that matters will only grow worse.

Then moves here:

At least a few less-intimately involved observers also glimpse hope amid the televised images of 24-hour carnage, among them Christopher Hitchens, Michael Rubin, Frederick W. Kagan and Gary Schmitt.

Hitchens

...On the other hand, there are some unambiguous gains. The Marsh Arabs, former inhabitants of the largest wetlands in the region and victims of an ecocidal assault, have seen their ancient habitat partly re-flooded. Politics has returned to the Iraqi Shiite discourse, which now has a reciprocal influence on the important debate within neighboring Iran. Iraq has been verifiably disarmed (not quite the same as taking Hussein's or Hans Blix's word for it) and the socially devastating epoch of Hussein-plus-sanctions (vamped on by the U.N. in its disgraceful Oil for Blood program) is over.

Democratic voices are being raised insistently, in Syria and Lebanon and Saudi Arabia, and though you may say this would have happened anyway, there is no doubt of what ignited the current debate...

Rubin

...Iraqis complain about security but are positive about the future. They reflect optimism not only in polls but also in actions. The new Iraqi currency, issued on Oct. 15, 2003, at 2,000 Iraqi dinars to the dollar, is free of Hussein's image. It is also free-floating, and even at the height of the April uprising and the battle for Najaf, it remained stable, trading between 1,400 and 1,500 dinars to the dollar. If Iraq is in trouble, don't tell the Canadians: The dinar regularly outperforms the Canadian dollar on international markets.

Iraqis also express confidence with investment, which spans the country. Electricity is unreliable, so restaurateurs have invested as much as $50,000 for top-model generators. A new clothing boutique represents a $200,000 investment. There are new hotels in Najaf and Karbala. Cigarette venders have traded pushcarts for tobacco shops. Kurdish investors are constructing a cancer treatment center in Erbil. In the slums of Sadr City, houses cost $45,000, nearly double their prewar value. In the swankier district of Mansur, new houses sell for more than 10 times that amount.

No Iraqi would invest his or her life savings if they feared civil war or perpetual lawlessness.

Freedom matters. Before the war, only the top 3,000 Hussein loyalists could access the Internet. Today, more than 100,000 households have dial-up connections. This number does not reflect the thousands of young Iraqi men who surf the Web (and try to pick up women) at cafes that dot cities, small towns and villages.

During Hussein's rule, 1 out of 6 Iraqis fled the country as refugees. Not only has there not been a mass exodus since Iraq's liberation, but more than a million refugees have returned.

Even at the height of the insurgents' bombing campaign, young men lined up at recruitment stations, not only for the salary but also to make Iraq a better place.

The television cameras do not lie, but they fail to give full perspective. The fiercest critics of the situation inside Iraq are those who have never been there. The coalition has made mistakes, and Iraqis are frequently frustrated at the pace of change. But they do see light at the end of the tunnel...

Kagan

...The operational good news coming out of Iraq was the destruction of the Mahdi army that served the rebel Shiite cleric Muqtada Sadr. The militia had effectively occupied the holy cities of Iraq, including the Imam Ali Mosque in Najaf. The conventional wisdom was that the U.S. military would be unable to expel the rebels from their redoubts without causing an explosion of anti-Americanism in the Shiite world. Yet U.S. personnel combined measured force, diplomatic negotiations and skillful deployments to retake Najaf and recover the shrines without inflicting any substantial damage on them. There was no outcry in Iraq or the Muslim world at large, and some Iraqis even took to the streets to protest Sadr's actions. U.S. and Iraqi forces removed a threat to the development of a peaceful and democratic Iraq...

Schmitt

What's gone right in Iraq? Start with the obvious: Hussein is gone. Whatever the problems in Iraq, they pale in comparison with the history of Hussein's tyranny. Thousands upon thousands were persecuted, tortured and executed. Neighboring states were under threat and, twice, invaded at the cost of hundreds of thousands of casualties. Hussein spent massively for his own pleasure and weapons, while allowing the welfare of Iraq's citizens to deteriorate.

Nor, as the recently released Iraq Survey Group report makes clear, was Hussein a problem of the past. The sanctions regime was collapsing, and the former Iraqi president had every reason to expect he would soon be free again to rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction.

Waiting in the wings were Hussein's sons, Uday and Qusay, two predators equally involved in supporting their father's reign of terror, domestically and internationally. No, as Arizona Sen. John McCain has put it: "The years of keeping Saddam in a box were coming to a close?. Our choice wasn't between a benign status quo and the bloodshed of war. It was between war and a graver threat..."

I've only posted brief excerpts of these "good news" reports - but the entire collection is well worth the read.

Still while I'm glad to see some small mention of the truth in reporting from Iraq, why do the good news stories from this country, at least when reported in mainstream media, require several careful paragraphs explaining that it's an exception to the rule? That chaos is actually the order of the day?

And why is the above piece (surprisingly headlined "What's Going Right In Iraqi") in the Opinion section?

Baghdad School Days

They are hot and cool days :

Students hold protests and sit-ins, sign petitions, and go on marches - all new activities since the fall of Saddam Hussein. Last week, students from al-Mustansiriya University protested the use of dormitories by Iraqi national guard officers, saying the space should be reserved for students.

Debates are steeped in religion. Most universities have only two major political student associations: a Shiite Muslim group and one for Sunni Muslims. Each group advocates a different style of university life, and has a different view of how much religion should shape it.

Should women be required to wear head scarves, and should they be allowed to wear pants? May students put up posters of favorite candidates, or would that offend others? Can a Shiite student be treated fairly at a school administered by a Sunni president, and vice versa?

Politics has become so pervasive that the Higher Education Ministry has posted signs on all campuses that inform students of their rights, such as: "The freedom of opinion expression is a guaranteed right to the entire academic society, under the rule that this does not interfere with a student's education."

<...>

There are 20 public universities in Iraq, and the four in Baghdad have more than 70,000 students among them. During Hussein's rule, there was only one political party on campuses - his Baath Party. The government made decisions about university life, and students were forbidden to express themselves.

There were no courses on democracy; instead, Iraqi nationalism courses were required. Those have been replaced by courses on democratic governments and human rights. Some campuses have even dedicated departments to such topics.

Nadhum al-Abadi is an engineering professor at al-Mustansiriya and general secretary of the Green Crescent association at Baghdad University. That group advocates human rights and peaceful dialogue between students and professors.

"When the change happened, Iraq was like a big prison cell that suddenly opened, and people were finally free and able to express themselves," Abadi said. "It was like a pressure pot that exploded. With time, it will calm down."

If this sounds a little different from the typical news reports from Baghdad these days it might be because we skipped the first three paragraphs containing the obligatory exhortation to ignore all that follows because this country is going straight to hell. Here they are:

BAGHDAD - Within the relatively safe confines of Baghdad's university campuses, a picture emerges of what democracy could look like throughout the country if worries about security hadn't trumped everything else.

It's not pretty. It's messy, uneven, and at times angry. Students and professors are still learning what democracy is and are debating how to execute it on campuses - or discussing whether universities are ready for such debates at all.

Like American universities, Iraqi campuses provide a haven for open political thought. The discussions are much more progressive than they are off the grounds, in large part because campuses are among the few places that are not overburdened by security problems.

Though its nice to see the facts making something of a comeback it would be even better if the media could split the opinions and editorials into a separate section from the fact-based news. Of course, if American media hadn't abandoned that model we wouldn't have blogs, would we?

Another Massive Leadership Failure in Iraq

The naked facts from the NY Post:

The Pentagon is investigating an Internet porn site that is publishing nude photos of what it claims are three female GIs in Iraq, The Post has learned.

One would think if they were naked it would be obvious if they were females, but perhaps I've missed the point...

An inquiry began last Friday after Army personnel officials were informed that several provocative photos of the three women were posted on a Web site that specializes in "amateur pornography," and that the women were identified as soldiers serving in Iraq.

An Army spokesman said officials have not been able to confirm that the women on the Web site are actually GIs. He added that until that can be established, all other questions on the issue are "hypothetical."

But wait! There's more:

The women involved may also be victims. Wilson admitted that the photos on his Web site appear to have become public without their consent or knowledge.

He said one set of photographs was sent by a lonely female GI to her boyfriend or husband back home over a computer that is shared by other soldiers at their base in Iraq.

But as we learned from media coverage of Abu Ghraib, there's no way those fellow soldiers could have known that nudity would embarrass the victims, so obviously they were encouraged from the top. Clearly no one knows what's going on yet, but expect immediate demands for Rumsfeld's resignation and an apology from the president to follow.

Image Problems?

Careful if you get phone solicitations from this group: it's different in name only:

An Internet statement Saturday said an Iraqi group led by Jordanian militant Abu Musab Zarqawi has changed its name.

Jamaat al Tawhid wal Jihad has become Tanzim Qaedat al Jihad fi Bilad al Rafidain, which translates roughly as Qaeda Organization for Jihad in Iraq, said the statement posted Saturday on several sites used by Islamic militants.

On Tuesday, a statement was posted on one website giving a similar change of name for the group.

It was not possible to verify that either statement was true.

And meanwhile, in a related story, the LA Times has changed it's name to the "Newsletter for the Qaeda Organization for Jihad in Iraq"

But seriously folks, there must be big PR problems behind this one - these types of changes are not to be undertaken lightly. The cost in updating official letterhead alone deters most organizations from even considering the option.

Then there's this sort of thing to consider :

Brian: Are you the Judean People's Front?

Reg: ____ off!

Brian: What?

Reg: Judean People's Front! We're The People's Front of Judea! Judean People's Front, ___!

Rogers: Blighters...

Brian: Can I...join your group?

Reg: No, ____ off!

But never fear, here in Mudville we always look on the bright side of life.

Update: Position open with aggressive, recently re-organized religious organization. Apply immediately; if a free and democratic Iraq is something you don't want to see join now and we'll guarantee you'll never see it.

Trick or Treat (Part II)

The Mrs emails: "I had a nightmare last night..."

I'm thinking, Uh-oh, here it comes, signs of stress. Sure, I'm in Iraq and she's in Germany handling the kid