Category Archives: Iraq

Where’s the terrorism?

Six years after 9/11, the Dictator’s Club (also called the UN) still doesn’t even know how to define it.

Where’s the beef, George?

"The Bush Presidency is running out of time to act if it wants to stop Iran from gaining a bomb. With GIs fighting and dying in Iraq, Mr. Bush also owes it to them not to allow enemy sanctuaries or weapons pipelines from Iran. If the President believes half of what he and his Administration have said about Iran’s behavior, he has an obligation to do whatever it takes to stop it."

Less talk and more action would be a good idea, both for the present and for the future. 

Hollyweird’s anti-war offensive

"Hollywood acting as a collective voice stakes out an anti-victory position on the current war in Iraq, continuing its deplorable 40-year streak of working against the United States’ strategic objectives at a time of war. Congratulations to every heroic studio exec and heroin-addled reality star for being ahead of — and helping to move — the polls."

Read it all

Betrayus

The plot thickens. Seeming success in Iraq breeds efforts to undermine it. Leftist MoveOn, for instance, didn’t invent the slur "betrayus" for Gen. Petraeus that they used in their execrable ad in the NYTImes. They got it from some of his old enemies within the military, who had long used it as a nickname for him, say the usual anonymous sources. Chief among those antagonists is his boss at CENTCOM, Admiral William Fallon. As VHD might say, Gen. Sherman likewise was despised by more than a few generals in the Union army. Only his boss, Gen. Grant, held them at bay while Sherman led his devastating march through the South. P.’s boss does not back him, but President Bush does. Will it be enough?

The battle of the sources

Anonymous ones, that is. I don’t know what to make of it when little media and big media square off with their anonymous sources, and new media picks up little media’s charges without scrutiny. Big media, of course, uses anonymous sources all the time. This time the small, conservative American Spectator magazine is claiming two unidentified sources to support its assertion that the NYTimes gave the leftist MoveOn group special treatment in its purchase of a full-page display ad calling Gen. Patraeus a "Betray Us" traitor. The newspaper denies it. The first anonymous AS source, characterized as "a MoveOn organizer," says the group got a $100,000 discount for the ad. The second unidentified source, called "a former NYTimes ad staffer," says a coalition of conservative Pro-Life groups were turned away for any ad, let alone a discounted one. The magazine also adds, without any attribution, that Swift Boat Veterans for Truth were similarly turned away before the 2004 presidential election. Instapundit and other conservative blogs have picked up the Spectator’s charges without qualification, though Instapundit did insert the word "apparently" in its item about it. The conservative NYPost picks up the story, but also relies on anonymous sources. What is the truth? Your guess is as good as mine. To me, the use of anonymous sources makes it hard to sort it out, whichever media claims to have it.

MORE: However much MoveOn paid, Fred says the ad was reprehensible. Of course it was.

UPDATE: Rudy raised a big enough stink about the ad that he’s getting the same rate to run his own defending Petraeus. 

Grunt work

In the Marines, it’s Military Occupational Speciality 0311. In the Army, it’s MOS 11 Bravo. Doesn’t matter what you call it, it’s still the infantry. And, though the ancient Greeks used men of all ages in the phalanx, theirs was a different kind of war. Nowadays, it is, as W. Thomas Smith Jr. says, young man’s work.

Via OpFor. 

The kingdom of the blind

I was ambivalent about President Bush’s recent invocation of the Vietnam post-war catastrophe (re-education camps, thousands escaping in rickety boats, piles of corpses in next-door Cambodia) as the definitive example of what could happen if we similarly slam the door on Iraq as the Dems want to do. But the Seablogger, linking to a recalcitrant Christopher Hitchens and a matter-of-fact Mark Steyn, reminds me that the Dems feel free to flee because they have never admitted to any connection between their anti-Vietnam war effort and the horrors that followed. They would just turn their other blind eye to Iraq.