S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
1 | 5 | 12 | 16 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 |
|---|
| Monthly Archives | [−] |

| [−] |
| [−] |
| [−] |
Comments and e-mails are welcome, but all such communication is to be assumed to be 1) the original work of any who initiate said communication and 2) in the public domain, with free use granted for publication in electronic or written form. If you do NOT wish to have your message posted, write "CONFIDENTIAL" in the subject line of your email.
Original content copyright © 2006 - 2008 by the respective authors. Fair, not-for-profit use of said material by others is encouraged, as long as acknowledgement and credit is given, to include the url of the original source post. Other arrangements can be made as needed.
Site contact: greyhawk at mudvillegazette dot com
Investigating and hopefully punishing leaks of sensitive materials is the intelligence and security version of the "broken windows" theory of crime reduction. If you don't sweat the small things, neither will those inclined to leak.
CAMP PENDLETON, Calif. -- The Marine Corps said Monday that it has ordered a probe into how a government report on the killings of Iraqi civilians in the town of Haditha was leaked to the news media.
Leaks are kind of like Illinois Nazis, I hate em both.
Lt Col P interviews fellow milblogger Kurt Wheeler on Al-Anbar:
...you can't measure our success by the number of attacks received because our increased activity, "taking the fight to the enemy," has as much to do with the level of violence as does enemy will/actions. We could reduce attacks on our forces by staying on the FOBs, but that's not how you win a COIN fight. Many commanders are describing the insurgents as fighting desperately to hold onto areas and neighborhoods that they once controlled without question.
A Marine who went to Harvard? I think my head might explode.
Contentions, the blog for Commentary Magazine, is having a "week-long discussion of the state of the Iraq war and its regional and global implications." Boot is a bit more pessimistic than Hanson, but here are some excerpts from the opening exchange.
From Hanson's first post:
So where does that leave us? In a race of sorts. On the one side, the Democrats realize that anger over the perceived stasis in Iraq has brought them the Congress and possibly the White House in 2008. On the other side, the administration’s personnel changes, the surge, and a belated public-relations counteroffensive have bought six months to a year (at most) to secure and quiet Baghdad. Democratic critics claimed that they wanted more troops, Rumsfeld’s resignation, and mavericks like General Petraeus in charge—thinking, probably, that President Bush would probably never accede. Now that he has, it will take a few weeks for the Democrats to re-triangulate and refashion credible new opposition to their own earlier demands. (And they must tread carefully while doing it: if the surge works as planned, the Democrats will end up looking foolish on the eve of the 2008 election.)
From Boot's first post:
There hasn’t been a whole lot to cheer since the Cedar Revolution in Lebanon and the elections in Iraq in 2005. In fact both achievements have been undermined in the past year by relentless violence on the part of anti-democratic militias—Hizballah in Lebanon and various Sunni and Shiite factions in Iraq. Lebanon is on the verge of a civil war (as is the Palestinian Authority) and Iraq is already in the early stages of its own civil war.
I am especially crestfallen to see how the situation in Iraq has deteriorated over the past few years. According to the UN, over 34,000 Iraqi civilians died violently last year, more than 36,000 were injured, and more than 470,000 were displaced from their homes. It is scant comfort to say that the violence is confined to four or five provinces out of eighteen. Even if that were true (and recent fighting in Karbala and Najaf undermines the claim), it would be like saying of 9/11, “What’s the big deal? Only two American cities were struck. Hundreds of others remained safe.”
Worth checking out.
The anxiously hyperventilating title of 'Battle suggests new sectarian divides in Iraq' (CS Monitor) is mildly amusing. For the ink spent trying to justify the headline, there are some good bits of information in there. I'm not a dedicated 'Iraq Hand' and there are many far more knowledgable on the various groups, sects and clans than I, but I know enough to do some legwork and listen. So, then, the skinny:
It's not sectarian violence, much to the dismay of every reporter who has written of the Najaf...thing. Murphy calls it "cultish" in the article. Quite generous of him, I guess. Look, it's a cult. Think of Abu Qamar al-Yamani and Jund al-Sama (Army of Heaven) as Jim Jones, David Koresh and Hal Lindsay in a mosque and you'll get the picture. As wrong as he is on so many things, Juan Cole actually makes an important point that Murphy failed to drive home enough to paint an appropriate picture.
"In Shiite Islam there is this very strong millenarian trend, similar to Christian movements that think Christ is about to return,'' says Juan Cole, a professor of Middle East history at the University of Michigan. "So just like some millenarian evangelicals think that the pope is the antichrist, they would see the ayatollahs as ... usurpers of his rightful role."
And that is central to what this whole....thing...was about. But then the wheels come off Cole's wagon.
By the way, in the speech, you spoke about the Democrats. You said, you congratulated the Democrat majority. And I notice your prepared text said Democratic majority. I surely think that you know that for the Democrats, they think when you say Democrat, it's like fingernails on the blackboard. They don't like it. They like you to say Democratic.We certainly don't want to upset the Democratics.
Man, do I need a training program to get you guys up to speed on this whole innernets movie phenomenon?
If you want folks to follow your links, you gotta give a sample of what awaits (especially during the MilBlogs Movie Festival...)
No official word from US sources yet:
MR. WILLIAMS: All right, Mr. President, the reports that 300 militants were killed, an American helicopter shot down yesterday in Najaf – that's one of the deadliest battles of the war, what can you tell us?But regardless of the numbers, a significant action has occurred - and Iraqi forces were very much involved.PRESIDENT BUSH: You know, Juan, I haven't been briefed by the Pentagon yet. One of the things I've learned is not to react to first reports off the battlefield.
You'd think it might be hard to turn victory into defeat, but where there's a will there's a way:
The incident is a reminder of the swirling agendas now at play in Iraq and the turbulent political waters US troops are wading into as more soldiers arrive and President Bush has vowed to stand by Shiite Islamist Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.That from a Christian Science Monitor story headlined Battle suggests new sectarian divides in Iraq.