The "Petraeus/Crocker" Report: Handicapping the Winners and the Losers

Oh, this much anticipated report. What will they say? Will progress be the word of the day? Or, more of the same? If I were a gambling man (and I am), I'd lay some odds that some folks will come out of next month's report on progress in Iraq as winners, and some will come out losers. Here are the odds of various outcomes and what could be at stake:


David Petraeus: Winner. No matter what his report actually says, this man comes out looking like a shoo in for Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. At age 56, he's even a likely candidate for 2012 if he wants a shot at the Big Chair. The "scholar-warrior" has done a remarkable job of soldiering and politicking in an environment that has become something of a graveyard for those who sport more than two stars on their resume. 10-to-1 Winner.

Ryan Crocker: Tossup. While Crocker has done a generally good job of working the Washington-to-Baghdad connection, the sense is that he has not done quite the job of fostering reconciliation among Iraq's sectarian divides. But frankly, he's been given a more difficult job than Petraeus. While Petraeus need only conduct a counterinsurgency as a military leader, Crocker has had the difficult task of attempting to help forge political reconciliation at a national level, something that few have ever asked of an Ambassador. 7-to-6 Winner.

Nouri al-Maliki: Loser. Make no mistake about it--this man is just a placeholder. When the last U.S. combat troops leave Iraq, Maliki is unlikely to be the Prime Minister. Sunni Arabs see him as a deeply biased sectarian leader. The Kurds tolerate him, but just barely. He has shown favoritism to Shi'a sects in ways that have still not been published. He's an honestly brave man, as his life and the lives of his family are on the line daily. But he is just not suited for the tasks he's been given, and rather than letting a true unity government coalesce around him, he has managed to alienate everyone. He told the American press that the surge stopped the Iraqi civil war. That civil war was one he would have been complicit in allowing. He is no statesman. He is just a placeholder and even a glowing report by Petraeus cannot save him. 8-to-3 Loser.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid: Loser. "This war is lost." pfff. Not even close. 12-to-1 Loser.

Nancy Pelosi: Loser. Standing side-by-side with Harry Reid was one thing. Traveling to Syria to meet with an unrepentant human rights abuser was another. Holding vote after vote to let left wing Democrats show their moonbattiness was almost too much. Scratch that. It was too much. 10-to-1 Loser.

President George W. Bush: Winner. Steadfast in his support of underlings, even to a fault. Bush will keep trying to find the right people for the right job no matter how withering criticism of his previous choices, some of which have been somewhat embarrassing. Sanchez and Abu Ghraib. Casey and the refusal to fight a counterinsurgency with counterinsurgents. Bush has always trusted the men who worked for him to tell him the truth, and finally he has found one who tells the real truth: That Iraq is a dangerous place and calls for a serious effort to address the real issues. Grant saved Lincoln. Will Petraeus' appointment save Bush? Sometimes you swing at two pitches before making resonant contact. Regardless of how Petraeus comes out of next month's testimony, Bush appears to be a good bet to come out looking better than anyone expected. If Iraq actually emerges from this as a stable democracy, some coins will be minted with his likeness. 5-to-1 Winner.

Hillary Clinton: Slight Loser. She has so far deflected criticism of her initial support of the war. But the onslaught of the left against it has cost her dearly. As a result, she's flip-flopped worse than a green ling on a center console in the Gulf of Mexico. Her "I will end the war" canard during late 2006 and early 2007 and anti-surge rhetoric has cast her as someone who can't be trusted to do anything more than stick her finger in the wind to test the breeze. 7-to-5 Loser.

Barack Obama: Loser. As someone who has never waivered from his anti-war stance, having such a respected General come to the Senate and explain how well things are going in Iraq--and just how wrong Obama has been--is an unmitigated disaster. He has already shown considerable naivete in his statements on a willingness to meet anyone, anywhere, anytime and then coming this close to threatening an ally who is hanging onto power by a thread. Even if Petraeus' report is a middling thing, Obama comes out on life support. 8-to-1 Loser.

John Edwards: Loser. Ok, the $400 haircut joke aside, the man was for it, then against it, and then for it again, then against it again. He's a trial lawyer so no one expects the truth out of him to begin with. But his comments about the Global War on Terror being a bumper sticker slogan resonated with exactly 20% of the electorate. He can't come out of anything other than a disastrous report looking good. He just can't. 10-to-1 Loser.

Blue Dog Democrats: Slight Winner. While nominally moderate but generally supporting the military, this group of middle roaders has been sorely tested the last seven months. Sorely. Their party affiliations have led them against their principled beliefs, and some have waivered. As a whole, they will probably come out Ok. A few of them could see serious problems if Petraeus' report is even better than expected. My gut sense is that these people mainly have their fingers on the pulses of their constituents. They should come out no worse for the wear. 9-to-7 Winner.

Snowe, Hagel, Warner, Lugar, Voinovich: Losers. Though they vote Republican in organizing the Senate, they don't come across as a trustworthy bloc of support for anyone. They have called for policy changes in ways that annoy the GOP faithful but don't quite toe the Reid line. Lugar and Warner will likely be hurt the worst. They had been strong supporters of Bush's policy in Iraq and lost faith at the worst possible moment. It is always darkest just before dawn; he who loses faith at that moment suffers the worst. 8-to-5 Losers.

GOP "Top Tier" Presidential Candidates: Winners. While platitudinally voicing support for the Global War on Terror, most of the GOP candidates for President have managed to gain a modicum of separation from Bush while the counterinsurgency devised by Petraeus has run its course. Each has spoken glowingly about our men and women in uniform. Each has pledged support for maintaining an offensive strategy in the conduct of the effort. Whether by political mastery or sheer dumb luck, they've had enough separation from the current administration to let them voice support while not getting too close. The exception is John McCain who, while badly damaged by his stance on the doomed immigration bill and occasional criticisms of Bush's overall policy in Iraq, has remained one of the President's staunchest war allies on the Hill. An overwhelmingly positive report could allow McCain to jump start his campaign and compete seriously next winter and spring. Guiliani's support for the war is unquestionable. Romney's ramblings are worrisome. Thompson's position is unbloody known. 11-to-8 Winners.

Major New Offensive Underway

---

MNC-I conducts Operation Phantom Strike
Multi-National Corps – Iraq PAO

BAGHDAD – Multi-National Corps-Iraq launched a major offensive, Operation Phantom Strike, on August 13 in a powerful crackdown to disrupt AQI and Shia extremist operations in Iraq. It consists of simultaneous operations throughout Iraq focused on pursuing remaining AQI terrorists and Iranian-supported extremist elements.

Recent Coalition offensive operations, such as Fardh Al-Qanoon and Phantom Thunder, have reduced the effectiveness of extremist groups. The operations denied AQI safe havens, disrupted extremist support zones and supply lines, captured or killed significant AQI and Shia extremist leaders, and liberated large segments of the Iraqi population from AQI. These combined operations included the coordinated and synchronized efforts of Coalition and Iraqi Security Forces, appreciably improving the lives of the Iraqi people.

“Coalition forces and Iraqi Security forces continue to achieve successes and pursue security throughout many areas of Iraq”, said Lt. Gen. Ray Odierno, commander of Multi-National Corps-Iraq. “My intent is to continue to pressure AQI and other extremist elements throughout Iraq to reduce their capabilities.”

Operation Phantom Strike is a joint Iraqi Security and Coalition Forces operation to eliminate remaining elements of AQI and other extremist groups, preventing them from causing further terrorism and inciting sectarian violence. Additionally, it will intensify pressure on extremist networks across the entire theater.

Phantom Strike comes on the heels of Operation Phantom Thunder, the first major offensive undertaken by coalition forces after the deployment and positioning of the five new brigades of combat troops known as the surge.  Between Phantom Thunder and Phantom Strike, coalition forces undertook a series of shaping operations, designed to push insurgents into areas of the country where Phantom Strike held near complete advantage.

Unlike prior offensive engagements, U.S. commanders were quite nondescript in the locations where the operations were to take place and few details were given on which units were to be involved.

Another key difference in Phantom Strike is a new focus on Shiite insurgents, which the U.S. Commanders accuse of being linked to, trained and supplied by Iranian Quds Forces.  Shiite militants laid low during Phantom Thunder and Operation Fardh Al Qanun, only to emerge from obscurity after Al Qaeda and Sunni insurgents had been neutralized.  Phantom Strike is a simultaneous operation against both sectarian groups of militias.

Iraqi People Prove Liberals are Misguided

Liberals, God bless'em, are looking in the wrong direction for political progress in Iraq. Remember, all liberals believe that good things only come when government is in charge of the political process. Look no further than our own candidates for the Democratic nomination for President of the United States. Every single one of them advocates some sort of Government-controlled, taxpayer-funded, "universal" healthcare system.

While grudgingly acknowledging that the surge of troops in Iraq is making military progress (they're kinda late to the game, but welcome aboard anyway), liberals and their MSM supporters bemoan the fact that little progress has been made by the Government of Iraq to pass oil sharing legislation, allow for provincial elections and permit some members of the former Ba'athist Party to return to government posts. Without this political process coming from the top down, the long term chances for success in Iraq appear doubtful.

Lo and behold, the Iraqis are proving them wrong. In this week's blogger roundtable with General Kevin Bergner in Baghdad, the General discusses some of the developments he's seen on the ground in in Iraq.

GEN. BERGNER: Well, we have seen steady developments at the local level. And if you just went back over the last four weeks and kind of walked around west and northern areas of Baghdad, you would find that in Ramadi, they completed the Ramadi Covenant, which was a tribal-led but government-of-Iraq-involved and coalition -- or security-force-involved commitment to stop the violence and to work together. In Taji, about three weeks ago the sheikhs of Taji got together. They all signed a map, put their name next to the town that they represent. In Khalis, northwest of Baghdad, a similar commitment, I think by some 16 sheikhs representing 70-some others. And then in Baqubah, we've talked before about the tribal sheikhs and the provincial government and their security forces having reached some agreements on how they're going to work together and stop the violence.

So I could take you through Baghdad, as well. We've seen similar -- similar arrangements being grouped together in Amiriyah. We see similar ones in Ghazalia. The Ghazalia volunteers are now part of this local security force that's working with Iraqi and coalition forces. And then if I took you to south of Baghdad, in General Rick Lynch's area of operations in MND-Center, I could show you different groupings of 100 here, 400 there, where different individuals from the community have stepped forward and said, we want to stop help the violence, we want to work toward some sort of accommodation.

So there is a steady development at the local level as security improves and people feel like they can step forward and take that on. So we are encouraged by that. And you know overall in Anbar what that -- how that has profoundly changed. We've talked about that several times. And that's probably the most striking example of a place which just eight or 10 months ago nobody could have foreseen the change there. So, lots of momentum.

Much of it is enabled by the tactical momentum that the surge of operations is providing. But again, much work still to do. Still some very difficult ways ahead.

GRIM: I'd like to ask a quick follow-up about that. Under Saddam and, you know, for what amounts to living memory in Iraq, Iraq has been kind of a top-down society where the central government set the tone. What you're talking about is a lot of local efforts that are going to be kind of brought to bear -- I don't want to say against central government, but on the central government. Do you think that the nature of Iraqi society is changing in this regard, that it's becoming more of a bottom-up society, a locally driven society?

GEN. BERGNER: You know, that's a very good question, it's an interesting one, because on one level, it has been a centrally governed country, without question, but in this country the tribe, the family have always been the most powerful bond that the Iraqi people have felt. And so you have kind of a duality of centrally directed but, if you ask the people who they trust and who they want to work with, it's at the family, tribal and community level. So both of those exist and both of them are very real parts of the nature of Iraqi society.

What I hope you got a sense of in my initial comments was both of those are working, and if you looked at Baqubah as a pretty vivid example, that's a place where the local tribes and security forces are coming to these kinds of arrangements. And once they've gotten to that point, the Iraqi government, the central government, is coming in to connect and figure out so how do we provide this public distribution support that you need, because, as you said, that is a centrally directed food distribution program; how do we help improve the availability of fuel, because, as you said, that is a centrally controlled fuel distribution system still. So both of those are at work here, and that's really why it's so important to get them connected because you really need -- you need that confidence at the local level being reinforced and supported. They need to know their central government is going to actually do something for them.

In this post, I relate a story from MNF-Iraq that describes a meeting in Tikrit between 18 tribal sheikhs, representing 14 of the largest tribes in Diyala Province. A similar, larger such meeting was held in Khalis. Yet another was held in Taji, which included leaders of both Shiite and Sunni groups. At each meeting, the tribal and family leaders pledged to work together. They unite against the common foe Al Qaeda and to work with the embedded Provincial Reconstruction Teams. Slowly but surely, political reconciliation is coming. But like I have explained in this space many times, it is coming from the bottom up!

These are grassroots level developments. Individually, they may not mean much. But since a major thrust of Petraeus' counterinsurgency strategy is getting local leadership on board, these kinds of developments are taking place in virtually every major town and village in the country. We are the facilitators, but the people making the commitments and making the differences are the Iraqis. Over time, these developments will generate bases of support for national leaders. The national leadership, working on the knowledge that they and their counterparts are all working with the support of a growing, grassroots coalition, will try to work out those pesky oil sharing and reform issues.

No wonder liberals don't see any political progress being made. They're looking in the wrong direction.

They hate us because of our... Foreign Policy?

This notion is wrong on so many different facets.  But most of all, it fails to acknowledge that Islamists need no pretext for war other than the target's refusal to submit to the rule of Allah. That is what Islam's god and prophet command.

When Islamists slaughtered the pagans of Arabia who wouldn't submit to Allah, was that the fault of Pagan-Arabian foreign policy?

When Islamists enslaved and slaughtered the Christians and Jews of the Holy Land, was that the fault of "People of the Book" foreign policy?

When Islamists enslaved and slaughtered the Zoroastrians of ancient Persia, was that the fault of Persian foreign policy?

When Islamists enslaved and slaughtered the Christians, Jews, and animists of North Africa and Egypt, was that the fault of North African foreign policy?

When Islamists slaughtered 70-80 million Hindus in India, was that the fault of Indian foreign policy?

When Islamists subjugated and slaughtered the people of the Iberian Peninsula (it took Spain 800 years to finally defeat the Moors and take back their land), was that the fault of Iberian foreign policy?

When Islamists enslaved and slaughtered the peoples of eastern Europe (up to Vienna in the seventeenth century, but including Greeks, Armenians, Slavs, et al), was that the fault of their failed foreign policies?

When Islamists raped, enslaved, and slaughtered the people of the Great City Constantinople, was that the fault of Byzantine foreign policy?

When Islamists enslaved millions (one estimate puts it at a billion) of Europeans over the centuries, was that the fault of European foreign policy?

When, if not for Martel and Sobieski and countless other heroes, Europe would have fallen to Allah, would that have been the fault of European foreign policy also?

When Islamists enslaved and slaughtered American sailors in the earliest days of the nation, was that the fault of American foreign policy?

When Islamists enter a Sudanese village (back before Darfur was fashionable), ask a woman, "Muslim or Christian?" and then gang rapes, sexually mutilates, and leaves her to die in the street those who answer wrongly, is that the fault of Sudanese villagers' foreign policy?

When Islamists behead Christian schoolgirls in Indonesia to shouts of "Allahu Akbar!" is that the fault of schoolgirl foreign policy?

When Beslan schoolchildren and teachers are raped and slaughtered in the name of Allah, is that the fault of Russian foreign policy?

When American, English, Spanish, Australian, and Israeli civilians are targeted because their countries are defending themselves and hunting down the "misunderstanderers" of the Religion of Peace, whose fault is that?

You hope that the hordes of Allah slaughter due to something we've done because that means we might have some way to make them stop hating us. That's wishful thinking.

Islam blames its victims when they fight back.

h/t to Amillenialist.

Al Qaeda and Regime Change in Iraq Update

NOTE TO READERS: I am reposting these two articles by request. Enjoy. -Dave

From Badgers Forward:

An Undeniably Bad Case of Denial

"[The] characterization of Al Qaeda as an "obscure group" and as "relatively limited in their global and regional pull defies every American's ability to interpret events for themselves. It is now of course well known the plans for the events of September 11, 2001 were first proposed in 1996 when Khalid Shaikh Mohammed first suggested the attack to Usama bin Laden. The plot was over five years in the making and spanned three continents.

Al Qaeda is a highly organized and disciplined military organization; four large commercial aircraft are not commandeered in mid-flight, three of which are then redirected into buildings, due to luck. For the events of that day to be successful, a high degree of coordination and security was required. To dismiss that as pure luck is pure folly and naive. Quite possibly though, that day is too emotional for some people to analyze critically.

Go back though to August 7, 1998, to the East African Embassy bombings. Somewhere between 225 and 303 people were killed that day in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam. AQ began the mission planning for that attack in 1993, again five years before the attack. The planning only required travel across two continents.

In Al Qaeda in Iraq and Regime Change, I wrote that "[t]he question is not whether Al Qaeda would have toppled Saddam Hussein. Given the opportunity to depose a sectarian (and therefore infidel) government in such a culturally and religiously important place, Al Qaeda would have jumped on it. I believe the evidence shows that they were doing just that. The question is whether Al Qaeda could have achieved regime change and the installation of the Caliphate of Baghdad."

Badger 6's post makes a compelling case for regarding Al Qaeda as a serious military threat by pointing out the planning capabilities of the group. Complex operations take time, effort and resources that often defy the understanding of non-military minds. Soldiers however, recognize the planning and logistics requirements of operations almost instinctively. In refuting the LA Times undeniably foolish Op/Ed piece, Badger 6 makes it clear that 9/11 was as carefully planned as Al Qaeda's earlier attacks, and that such planning capabilities demonstrate that Al Qaeda is not "little more than an obscure group of extremist thugs... relatively limited in their global and regional political pull."

As this relates to my theory that Al Qaeda was plotting regime change in Baghdad, the fact that Zarqawi was in Iraq months before Operation Iraqi Freedom began casts things in a new light. We know Al Qaeda is capable of planning operations well in advance and uses assets spanning multiple continents. We know Al Qaeda operatives were in Iraq as much as a decade before 9/11, Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom. If they were planning the attacks in Nairobi, Dar es-Salaam and Yemen for years, what were they doing in Baghdad?

Al Qaeda and Regime Change in Iraq

There is considerable debate over whether Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda had a "working relationship" prior to the U.S. led invasion that toppled the regime. Predictably, the American left is in a complete state of denial. Al Gore called such suggestions "blatantly false." Richard Clark snarled that there was "absolutely no evidence that Iraq was supporting al Qaeda, ever." The media chimed in too, from the Wapo to the LA(tino) Times; from CBS News to the troubled New York Times syndicate.

In The Connection, author Stephen F. Hayes makes a convincing case that America's two most menacing enemies were, if not in direct collaboration, at least on quite friendly terms. Most of Hayes' research centers on the question of whether Al Qaeda and Hussein may have worked together on the 9/11 plot, and evaluates evidence collected by the intelligence community going back roughly a decade before 2001. The preponderance of the evidence would be enough to sway any reasonable person trying the facts. Quite clearly, Al Qaeda was interested in Iraq, and as that country grew increasingly isolated by the west and moderate Arab nations of the middle east, that interest grew.

I would like to posit another theory on Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein. I am becoming increasingly convinced that Al Qaeda was alive and well in Iraq in 2001, and when the loosely knit terrorist group got their collective ass kicked in Afghanistan, moved from Tora Bora to Anbar and Diyala. My theory is that, having lost the protection of the Taliban, Al Qaeda regrouped. They abandoned the expendable, non-Arabic Pashtuns and started looking in
Arab lands for a new home. Al Qaeda sought its own regime change in Iraq, and the United States found itself in a race to depose Hussein and take Iraq before Al Qaeda did the deed.

Here's the logic behind my theory:

• Iraq forms a better basis for Al Qaeda than Afghanistan. It is an Arab country, with Arabic speaking people and Arab customs. It lies at the geographic center of Islam, and it is as culturally important to Islam as Saudi Arabia and the Levant region.
• 
  
• Al Qaeda is primarily a Sunni Islamic movement, and Sunnis are a minority in Iraq. Moreover, it is a minority that everyone knew would be marginalized by any non-Arabic intervention and regime change.
• 
  
• Saddam Hussein's regime was crumbling. His ability to govern came under increasing pressure from economic sanctions and isolation by the civilized world. His rule over the national Ba'athist Party was absolute, but he faced sagging loyalty from those in provincial and local authority.
• 
  
• Increasingly corrupt provincial leaders made inviting targets for Al Qaeda's "diplomatic overtures." With infrastructure literally crumbling under their feet and economic disaster brought on by international sanctions, Al Qaeda bribes and offers of protection from the security apparatus were more attractive than the distant Baghdad threat.
• 
  
• Tribal and sectarian rivalries within Iraq made fertile ground for more bribes and alliances between Al Qaeda operatives promising power and control.
• 
  
• The whole world, to include Osama bin Laden and the Al Qaeda network, believed Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and had an active program to develop additional WMD technology. Al Qaeda desperately wanted that capability to wage its global jihad against the U.S. and it's allies.
• 
  
• In May 2002, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, future leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq, traveled to Baghdad to receive "medical treatment" and stayed two months. During this stay, dozens of Al Qaeda operatives arrived in Baghdad and its suburbs to establish a base of operations.
• 
  
• Sometime between May 2002 and the March 2003 invasion, al-Zarqawi met in Iran with Bin Laden's military chief, Saif al-Adel (Muhammad Ibrahim Makawi). The purpose of the meeting: To coordinate the transition of Al Qaeda terrorists from Afghanistan and Pakistan through Syria.
• 
  
• al-Zarqawi, on many occasions, expressed a desire to topple the monarchy of his native Jordan, and from their launch relentless attacks on Israel. Saddam's alleged WMD program could supply the weapons he needed to spread that terror through the region.

It is my conviction that Al Qaeda wanted Iraq, and wanted it badly. The stated goal of the coalition invasion was regime change. It was not to take away the WMD. It was not about oil. It was about removing a brutal dictator who twice invaded neighbors, slew hundreds of thousands of his own people and starved thousands more, actively sought horrible and illegal weapons, and lost his moral authority to rule. Perhaps also, the objective was to get to Baghdad and topple Hussein before Al Qaeda did.

The question is not whether Al Qaeda would have toppled Saddam Hussein. Given the opportunity to depose a sectarian (and therefore infidel) government in such a culturally and religiously important place, Al Qaeda would have jumped on it. I believe the evidence shows that they were doing just that. The question is whether Al Qaeda could have achieved regime change and the installation of the Caliphate of Baghdad. While Hussein's power over the party apparatus was absolute, the loyalty of the downstream apparatus is questionable, at best. It is certainly possible that with the right bribes and the right tribal alliances, a well placed truck bomb and a small amount of good fortune could have taken Hussein out. During the power vacuum of the immediate aftermath, Al Qaeda could have sprung also to kidnap, kill or cajole anyone who might make a grab at the seat of power, including Saddam's sons, Uday and Qusay.

Would it have happened? Sooner or later, I believe they would have tried. Could it have happened? Thank God we will never know.

Imperial History of the Middle East

From Maps of War:

Citizens Serve Eviction Notice to Terrorists

---

BAGHDAD — Fed up with violent and indiscriminate terror tactics, a group of more than 80 residents of the Adhamiyah district, on the east side of the Iraqi capital, banded together Sunday to oust suspected terrorists from a local mosque.

The uprising led to a string of events over the next 12 hours that ultimately resulted in the arrest of 44 suspected terrorists and the capture of three weapons caches.

The initial takeover of the Abu Hanifa Mosque occurred at about 2 p.m., apparently triggered by news that terrorists had murdered two relatives of a prominent local sheik. As the news spread, angry residents joined the sheik to storm the mosque, long believed to be a sanctuary for terrorists operating in the area, and ousted the suspected terrorists inside from the building.

Iraqi Army troops from 1st Battalion, 1st Brigade, 11th Infantry Division, responded quickly to control the situation and secure the area around the mosque. Residents led them to several individuals among those ousted from the mosque who were suspected of being involved in terrorist activities. Thirteen suspects eventually were detained.

After order was restored, the Iraqi Army received a tip about a weapons cache hidden near the mosque. At about 7 p.m., Iraqi forces returned to the Abu Hanifa Mosque and uncovered a massive illegal weapons cache in an outside courtyard. The cache contained several already-assembled improvised explosive devices, dynamite, mortars, rockets, landmines, bomb-making materials, and various weapons.

Shortly after midnight, acting on information volunteered by Adhamiyah residents, Iraqi and U.S. Army forces from 3rd Squadron, 7th Cavalry Regiment, 3rd Infantry Division, attached to the 82nd Airborne Division's 2nd Brigade Combat Team, mounted a combined cordon-and-search operation of the Al Assaf Mosque, in the nearby Maghrib neighborhood. Iraqi Soldiers entered and cleared the mosque and who took three suspects into custody.

Immediately afterward, Iraqi and U.S. forces returned to the Abu Hanifa Mosque area to investigate reports of additional weapons caches. Iraqi Soldiers again entered the building to search the mosque compound and the cemetery behind it.

They discovered two more weapons caches, which contained two IEDs, 16 mortars, two hand grenades, a sniper rifle, remote detonation devices, radios and more than a dozen weapons. Twenty-eight suspects were taken into custody.

"I think this was a turning point," said U.S. Army Lt. Col. Jeff Broadwater, commander of 3rd Battalion, 7th Cavalry. "The people of Adhamiyah have made their stand, and they've showed by their actions that terrorists are not going to be able to come into their backyard and engage in violent acts any longer."

Will Engineering Efforts Be Coalition’s Legacy In Iraq?

By Norris Jones
Gulf Region Central

BAGHDAD, Iraq – “You are the pros coming from all corners of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers world,” said Brig. Gen. Vincent K. Brooks, speaking to the diverse group of civilians and military comprising the Gulf Region Central district in Iraq. Brooks, the deputy commanding general for Support, Multinational Division Baghdad, was a keynote speaker for a two-day senior leader conference hosted July 1-2 at the GRC headquarters on Victory
Base Complex, Baghdad.

He talked about the years of decay in Iraq’s infrastructure. “And so the challenge you face, in concentrating your efforts as world-class engineers to leave the situation better than you found it, is harder than you could ever imagine,” said Brooks. “You have to be an All-Star Team because average work is simply not going to be adequate. Only above average work, superb work, excellent work, will give us even a chance to progress further than we are right now,” said Brooks. He also said that Iraqis have very high and often unrealistic expectations of the United States.

He encouraged those attending to partner with the 20 Brigade Combat Teams in Iraq, local Iraqi Neighborhood and District Councils, the Provincial Reconstruction Teams, the Amanat (City of Baghdad’s government), Beladiya Director Generals, and various Iraq National Ministries in ongoing reconstruction efforts.

“This is a rich country. It has all kinds of resources. It has everything every other country in the world wishes it had. They haven’t been able to tap into their own wealth because of internal politics and the decrepitude I spoke about due to their inheritance from a socialist regime,” said Brooks. “They have oil, water, arable land, an industrious people, and a history unparalleled throughout the world - it’s all here.”

Brooks said the riches of Iraq had not been committed at this point and “we have to stimulate that commitment.”

His final point touched on the long-term legacy of the Coalition’s investment in Iraq, having lost 3,750 lives and expended billions of dollars. According to Brooks, he often hears about the British experience at the end of World War I. And many of Iraq’s strongest institutions were generated at that point. Bridge construction became the legacy of the British. There’s a term they refer to the British at that time – they call it ‘Abu Naji.’ They harken back to the excellent engineer work of Abu Naji, not Abu Naji’s benevolence, not the things that helped them build government, but the bridges.

“I wonder what the legacy will be whenthey think back to the experience of the United States, 80 years hence. If it’s like Abu Naji, it’s going to be what the engineers left. It will be things that are iconic of presence and commitment, especially if it’s done well and it endures over time,” said Brooks.

Following his talk, Brooks opened it up to questions and spoke about the importance of providing access and context to media, especially Arabic language journalists, so those in Iraq and neighboring countries know and understand what is going on here. “It’s not their responsibility to provide context, it’s yours,” he charged. Brooks, the U.S. Army’s former Chief of Public Affairs, pointed out that Multinational Division Baghdad has more embedded reporters since November when they took over than the previous three years combined. “We opened the doors up … access plus context gives the potential for accurate content.”

Colonel Lewis, GRC commander, thanked Brig. Gen. Brooks for making GRC part of his team. “That has made it possible for us to do so much more,” she said.

Why success is important and how it's going to happen

---

The message of Radical Islam is that Mulsims are suffering because the west has led them away from the Sunna--the path of Muhammed. We desecrate their lands by our mere presence. The riches of the world--i.e., oil--belongs to the people of faith and we are only in the Middle East to steal it from them. We are evil imperialists who wish to "impose" democracy on the faithful. Cooperating with us will only lead the faithful farther away from Allah, further impoverishing his people and continuing to cause suffering and hardship.

Iraq is western civilization's exercise in proving everything the imams tell Muslims is false. If we are ever going to defeat radical islamic terrorists, we must do so by breaking the back of the message of radical islam.

The country sits in the heart of the ancient Caliphate. Iraq is home to some of Islam's most significant religious and historic shrines. A few of the most important battles in the history of the region were fought in the Mesopotamian region. There are few places in the Middle East with greater significance to Islam than this ancient and storied land.

The United States and its coalition partners have established a secular democracy in Iraq, with millions of Iraqis voting in free elections for the first time in history. The region's only other "secular democracy" is Turkey, but the Turkish military enjoys independent status in that country and democratically elected governments have been overthrown by military coup. Iraq's form of government places the military firmly under civilian authority. It is a free and sovereign nation now, with duly elected officials serving the people who elected them--as best they can amid a wicked insurgency.

The coalition is also spending billions repairing and upgrading the country's infrastructure. The effort to restore Water, electricity, roads and bridges, schools, hospitals, teaching facilities, oil infrastructure, even telephone and cell service is being financed by the IMF, IRRF and other international funding sources. The purpose of this undertaking is to demonstrate to the Muslim world that the west is committed to improving the lives of Muslims, not destroying them.

This is why succeeding in Iraq is so important. As westerners, we know the truth about western-style democracy. It's not the perfect system of governance, but it's the best one man has. A government that serves by the consent of the governed is the only system that allows mankind to recognize and thwart tyranny. Democracy has made its share of mistakes, and some of those mistakes have led to human suffering. But the human suffering that occurs under tyranny is no mistake. The oppressed are always and everywhere the target of totalitarianism. People suffer under tyrants because the tyrants want it that way.

For the first time since Saddam was ousted from power, the US and Government of Iraq are fighting the counterinsurgency as a counterinsurgency. It is doing so under the capable leadership of General David Petraeus, the architect of the surge and the Army's Field Manual 3-24, Counterinsurgency. The doctrine being followed calls for reconciling segments of the population who are reconcilable, convincing them to join forces against the common enemy: Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda has made this a fairly easy sell. Their record of indescribable cruelty is well known to the tribal leaders who once looked to Al Qaeda as an ally.

The process of reconciliation occurs from the ground up. Nouri al-Maliki's government can no more institute reconciliation than a string can be pushed up a hill. That process has to come at the tribal and local levels. Neighbors have to come to the conclusion that their best ally against tyranny and oppression is their neighbor.

In a post about Clausewitz's "Culminating Point," I mentioned three developments in Iraq that showed how the process was working. The counterinsurgency has been successful in turning Sunni insurgent groups against Al Qaeda. Other recent developments, including this USA Today story, show how the coalition has convinced Sunnis to work with the Shiite-dominated government, as well as gaining the cooperation of Sunni and Shiite groups together. The goal calls for building consensus at the grassroots level, getting local and tribal leaders to put aside sectarian differences and work together.

Success in Iraq is important from a global security and historical perspective. That success will come about because ordinary Muslims, tired of violence and brutal repression, finally put down their weapons and start working with their neighbors to ensure peace. When the national politicians see that the base of their support seeks reconciliation, then reconciliation can occur at the national level. Reconciliation comes from peace, and peace comes when brothers make a pact of social order between them and work for common good.

Business Leaders meet to help Iraqi Banking System get back on track

By Maj. Sean Ryan 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 2nd Infantry Division Public Affairs

Dr. Muhammad, (left), Karadah District council leader speaks with Kathryn Herhusky, the business and finance advisor, and Lt. Col. Dean Dunham, the deputy commander, both from the 2nd Infantry Brigade Combat Team, 2nd Infantry Division, at a banking forum in the Karadah District of eastern Baghdad July 28. More than 30 local bankers and business leaders attended the forum seeking to improve the financial institutions in Baghdad and help the development of Iraq. Photo by Maj. Sean Ryan, 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 2nd Infantry Division Public Affairs.

Dr. Muhammad, (left), Karadah District council leader speaks with Kathryn Herhusky, the business and finance advisor, and Lt. Col. Dean Dunham, the deputy commander, both from the 2nd Infantry Brigade Combat Team, 2nd Infantry Division, at a banking forum in the Karadah District of eastern Baghdad July 28. More than 30 local bankers and business leaders attended the forum seeking to improve the financial institutions in Baghdad and help the development of Iraq. Photo by Maj. Sean Ryan, 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 2nd Infantry Division Public Affairs.
FORWARD OPERATING BASE LOYALTY — Banking institutions are vital to any country’s economy and stability. Iraqis have been working steadily over the past four years to stabilize their country’s security and essential services, but some Iraqis are focusing their efforts now on the country’s banking system.

A bankers’ forum was held and attended by more than 30 leaders from state, privately-owned banks and other Iraqi financial entities, as well as business leaders and district council members, in eastern Baghdad’s Karadah District July 28. Representatives also included members from Embedded Provincial Reconstruction Team and leaders from the 2nd (Infantry) Brigade Combat Team, 2nd Infantry Division.

The event was the brainchild of Dr. Muhammad, Karadah District leader, and Kathryn Herhusky, a business and financial advisor for the 2nd IBCT.

“This event is Iraqi-driven and we are just here to provide support in case they need it, Herhusky said.” The banking system in Iraq has not been independent in (the) past 30 years due to the former regime and recently, for security reasons.

Currently in Iraq, cash is still king but the bankers in Baghdad would like to change that and not only get citizens to trust in the system, but also help them rebuild former businesses which have been lost. Unlike in the United States, where you can bump into an automatic teller machine on nearly every street corner, a number of banks in Baghdad are still not open, much less ATMs.

One major concern for all attendees is the loan rates offered to restart their business. Most banks are willing to offer loans, but due to the fragility of the market and security concerns, they are asking double digits percentages in return.

For businessmen like M.J.Shakery, the owner of Dijlha Leather Industry, a renowned traditional Iraqi footwear maker since 1936, the rate is too much.

“A loan with lower interest rates would enable him to buy machinery, spare parts and start paying staff,” he said.

Shakery has six production lines that could work today and can produce more than 600 pairs of shoes per day, if fully operational.

“We could hire anywhere from 450 to 600 workers soon, which would greatly help the unemployment rate,” he said.

Currently, personal loans rates are offered at four percent, but business loans are being offered at four times that amount, which most of those in attendance felt needed to be changed. Provincial Council Economics Chairman Dr. Shabibi, who chaired the “Iraqi Financial Institutions and their Role in Economic Reconstruction”-themed event added, “In these times of unusual circumstances, it’s better to reduce the rates, get more businesses going, and the immediate objective is to reduce unemployment.”

“Other factors, such as investment laws, must be implemented, reduce imports and ensure everything goes through quality checks,” said the president of the Industrial Union. “It is something Iraq should strive for.” Many of those in attendance at the forum agreed with that assessment.

While not every topic was fully agreed upon, this event is a major step to helping businesses get started since the majority of the major banks are in Baghdad.

“We need to be like other countries around the world,” Shabibi said at the end of the session, “and regulate interest rates to help out all Iraqis.”

Congress gets a Hat Trick

Survey shows just 3% of Americans approve of how Congress is handling the war in Iraq; 24% say the same for the President

A majority of American adults (54%) lack confidence in President Bush’s ability as Commander in Chief of the U.S. military, a new UPI/Zogby Interactive poll shows. A majority (60%) said they do not trust the president’s judgment when it comes to the war, while 38% say they have faith in his military decisions.

Just 24% give the president favorable ratings of his performance in handling the war in Iraq, but confidence in Congress is significantly worse – only 3% give Congress positive marks for how it has handled the war. This lack of confidence in Congress cuts across all ideologies. Democrats – some of whom had hoped the now Democrat-led Congress would bring an end to the war in Iraq – expressed overwhelming displeasure with how Congress has handled the war, with 94% giving Congress a negative rating in its handling specifically of that issue.

The online survey was conducted July 13–16, 2007, and included 7,590 respondents. It carries a margin of error of +/– 1.1 percentage points.

More at Zogby.

Wow. Just... wow.

Tribal Leaders continue reconciliation efforts across Diyala

TIKRIT— Eighteen paramount tribal leaders representing 14 of the major tribes in Diyala province, Iraq, swore on the Quran and signed a peace agreement unifying the tribes in the battle against terrorism during a meeting at the BaqubahGovernment Center Aug. 2.

The meeting, led by Ra’ad Hameed Al-Mula Jowad Al-Tamimi, governor of Diyala; Staff Maj. Gen. Abdul Kareem, commander of Iraqi security forces in Diyala province; and Col. David W. Sutherland, commander of coalition forces in Diyala, was attended by sheiks representing three Shiite tribes, 11 Sunni tribes and 60 of Diyala’s 100 sub-tribes.

“Let’s build this tent and live under it like one family – all the tribes and all the people of Diyala. You have to be one family,” said Ra’ad Hameed Al-Mula Jowad Al-Tamimi, governor of Diyala, who stressed the importance of the sheiks in the country’s efforts towards stability and security.

“Problems can be solved by the sheiks because they have great influence on their tribes,” Ra’ad continued, stating the tribes are the key to success in Diyala.

“Those tribes that do not choose to participate in the way ahead for a secure Diyala will be left behind,” said Sutherland as he spoke to the tribes. “Don’t say, ‘I need,’ until you say, ‘I’ve done.’ Do for your families, do for your tribes, and do for Diyala.”

“The tribal leaders can change the hearts of the people,” said Sheik Mahmood Abdul-Shinba Al-Hassani. “Instead of cheering for the terrorists driving through the streets, the people will cheer for the Iraqi security forces in the streets.”

“The terrorists are not that many,” said Sheik Adnan Abdul-Mehdi Al-Anbaki. “We have to stand together and we need to kill the terrorists. We know who they are.”

After discussing tribal differences and why it is important to unite, the sheiks signed a reconciliation agreement and swore over the Quran as a promise to uphold the agreement.

As stated in the Quran, “And hold fast, all together, by the rope which God (stretches out for you), and be not divided among yourselves,” the sheiks agreed to ten conditions.

Some conditions of the peace treaty include ending tribal conflicts and attacks; cooperating with the ISF; fighting al-Qaida, militia groups and other terrorist organizations; working with the security forces to eradicate corrupt members; returning displaced families to their homes; reporting and removing improvised explosive devices; and respecting all sects, religions and women’s rights.

“This is the time my government needs me,” said Sheik Mazen Rasheed Al-Mula Jawad Al-Tamimi, paramount sheik for the Tamimi tribe. “Why should I stand by and watch when my people tell me everything – the good and the bad?”

“We have to consider the fact that local people are helping us. We have to work with them hand-in-hand and go forward,” Ra’ad said. “If anyone is standing in our way as an obstacle, then we will have to take that obstacle away from our path.”

Related Post: Diyala Turning.

---

Female combat medics in the fight daily; earn respect

Story by Spc. Mike Alberts
3rd Brigade Combat Team Public Affairs

KIRKUK — Temperatures exceeded 115 degrees during the five-hour mission in Amerli that day. More than 50 Soldiers were on site and tensions were high; Amerli was the scene of a massive suicide truck bombing just four days earlier.

Soldiers kept alert, but visibly struggled under the weight of dozens of pounds of battle gear. Throughout the sun-scorched day, all but two Soldiers limited their movement as much as possible. All but two could afford that luxury.

“Bolo” and “Collver” continuously walked up and down the lines of men. “Drink water,” they repeated. “Are you feeling OK?” they asked. They were the two Soldiers charged with ensuring that each man stayed hydrated and returned safely to base. As usual, they were the mission’s only dedicated medical personnel.

Spc. Vanessa Bolognese and Spc. Aimee Collver, combat medics, Personal Security Detachment, 3rd Infantry Brigade Combat Team, 25th Infantry Division, kept all their male counterparts healthy “outside the wire” that day in Amerli just as they do every day in the Kirkuk Province, Iraq. Neither is doing exactly what she thought she’d be doing in the Army, but neither would trade her job for another.

“Before I enlisted, I was going to school to become a [registered nurse],” said Bolognese. “I wanted a medical job and my [military occupational specialty] is called health care specialist,” said the 21 year-old from Chino Hills, Calif. “In fact, the first time I heard the term ‘combat medic’ was during [advanced individual training] at Fort Sam Houston. They pretty much told us there, ‘You will be deploying. You will be working in Iraq.’” Bolognese’s colleague and roommate had similar motivations.

“I’d been working in a nursing home after high school,” said Collver. “When I walked into the recruiter’s office I knew that I wanted a medical job,” explained the 23 year-old from Puyallup, Wash.Iraq is anything like what I thought.” “The health care specialist job was available, and I was told that I would be working in a hospital setting,” she said. “Of course, I don’t work in a hospital and nothing out here in

What each combat medic is doing in Irag is working as the designated medical asset to the 3rd Infantry Brigade Combat Team’s Personal Security Detachment (“PSD”). The PSD’s primary mission is to transport certain members of the brigade’s command group around 3IBCT’s area of operation. The PSD also provides personal security for the command group to and from their various destinations and while on site, according to Staff Sgt. Jeremy Brandon, non-commissioned officer-in-charge, PSD, 3IBCT.

Brandon is a native of Jacksonville, Fla., and is serving his third combat deployment. He’s charged with supervising both Bolognese and Collver and explained why each Soldier is vital to mission success.

“We often conduct operations as an independent element,” explained Brandon. “For that reason, we need to have our own dedicated medical support. Bolognese and Collver are that support. We always have one of them with us wherever we go,” he said. And Brandon couldn’t be happier with their performance.

“Both Soldiers are everything that one could ask for in a medic,” he continued. “They have done an outstanding job staying on top of their skills. They’ve constantly taken it upon themselves to retrain and stay certified, and have done an excellent job both outside the wire and back here on the [Forward Operating Base] by taking the initiative to give us various medical classes.”

Brandon’s PSD Soldiers agreed.

“We all respect them for their abilities as medics and as Soldiers,” said Sgt. Brian Tabor, squad leader, PSD, 3IBCT. Tabor is a five-year veteran serving his second combat deployment. “We haven’t had any issues because they’re female,” emphasized the Sacramento, Calif., native. “Bottom line: They’ve been a valuable asset to the PSD and it’s been a good thing having them with us.”

As for Bolognese and Collver, even though neither is working in the comfortable confines of a hospital, each loves her job and wouldn’t choose to do anything else.

“Of course, the job is mentally challenging because of the unknown anytime you leave the wire,” said Collver. “But I love being with this group because there’s so much camaraderie. I take a lot of pride in knowing that they’re well taken care of because I’m there for them,” she said.

“Their well-being depends on me when I’m with them,” echoed Bolognese. “In that sense, it’s wonderful to know that when I look back at my deployment I can say that I did go out there every day and risk my life to take care of other Soldiers,” she said. “That’s a lot more than most people can say.”

---

Editors note: Ok. Brave chicks are HAWT. And I should know, since I have four daughters who have the HOO AHH to stand up to me.

The End of a Candidacy

You may not have to dig through much Presidential Election history to find such an early and precipitous end to a candidacy, especially since this campaign is starting so early. But Barak Obama has, in the span of five days, given the Democratic Presidential nomination to The Tempest in a B-Cup. He has done so much damage to himself that he is unlikely to even be considered a viable VEEP candidate.

In the span of just five days, he:

1. Said he would meet with the leaders of rogue nations with no consideration given to how such meetings might be used for propaganda.
2. Said he would attack targets in Pakistan (a staunch if beseiged ally in the war on terror), without the approval of that country's sovereign government.
3. Said he would consider the use of nuclear weapons in defense of this country in the war on terror, then reversed himself and said nukes were off the table.

In five days, he has shown everything the Clinton campaign has alleged about him: That he is not ready to be President of the United States. The President is just better than the Presidents of Syria, Iran and North Korea. Head of State is a title with a pecking order, at which our President sits on top.

You don't go around destabilizing allies who, upon being deposed in a coup, has the keys to nukes snatched from his cold dead hands. And, you never take our greatest deterrent off of the table when our enemies seek that technology for offensive capabilities. Islamist radicals must be grinning ear to ear.

I am no fan of The First Bitch. At all. I think she gets way too many passes from the MSM on her own flip-flops. She has said the same things Obama has, and flipped her opinion more than a Waffle House hasher has.

When that machine pins a label on an opposing candidate, that opposing candidate ought not go ahead and accept it like a badge of honor. Unfortunately for Obama, and for anyone else hoping for serious competition for Clinton, Obama pinned the badge on and didn't even realize it.

Senator John McCain took nearly the whole month of May to sink his campaign with the torpedo of immigration amnesty. It has taken Obama only five days.

He is done.

Iraqi Army, Stryker Leaders Assess Progress

Friday, 03 August 2007

Sgt. Armando Monroig, 5th Mobile Public Affairs Detachment BAQUBAH — Leaders from the 5th Iraqi Army Division and the 3rd Stryker Brigade Combat Team, 2nd Infantry Division, traveled together to assess progress in several neighborhoods of Baqubah, Iraq, July 31. As Operation Arrowhead Ripper continues, the effort has shifted from combat operations to reconstruction and humanitarian missions. The Iraqi Army, Iraqi Police and provincial council members are leading the majority of the projects. Many residents have joined in to do their part to improve their city. Lt. Col. Wa’el Hashim, the civil affairs officer for the 5th IA Div., and members of the division visited west Baqubah neighborhoods Khatoon and Mufrek to confirm whether or not damaged infrastructure has been fixed and to determine what other services require immediate attention such as water, power, food and reparations to civilians. During this mission, Wa’el rolled up his sleeves and got his hands dirty as he helped pull out a damaged water main line from the muddy ground, helped residents carry bags of rice and flour at a food distribution point and helped the division engineers get started in clearing streets of debris and trash. “You’ve got the (Iraqi Army) embracing civil military operations and fixing to help the community,” said Lt. Col. Fred Johnson, deputy commanding officer for 3-2 SBCT, from Fort Lewis, Wash. “And you have a very active municipal government working with the Army.” Johnson believes these neighborhoods are heading in the right direction. “What wins the war is normalcy, the work that’s being done by the Iraqi army, the municipal government, the civilians – by those people that want to take hold of their future – that’s where the war is won,” Johnson said. “And it’s not by us doing it. It’s by the Iraqis doing it.” Johnson said leaders at the government center in downtown Baqubah are taking the recent Iraqi soccer team win of the Asian Cup to heart. “The assistant to the governor for the provincial distribution system was the one who said it – ‘We can be just like the soccer team. The soccer team has Sunni, Shia, Kurdish – and there’s no sectarian issues. We need to be more like our soccer team. That’s the same thing we need to do as a nation.’” Johnson said it’s this kind of thinking that will lead Baqubah and the rest of Iraq to a stable and secure future. With leaders like Wa’el, he believes it will happen. “The last three weeks here in Baqubah have, without question, been the most rewarding three weeks of my career, because I’ve seen what good Iraq leadership looks like.”

Dreams for Democracy

Former son of Iraq reflects on changes in his native land

By Staff Sgt. Jon Cupp
1st Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division Public Affairs

CAMP TAJI — Like many immigrants before him, Rudy Lirato had a dream for his family-a dream firmly rooted in the ideals of freedom and democracy-when he left his native homeland of Iraq 30 years ago.

He is now serving as an interpreter and U.S. contractor who works with the 1st Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division. Lirato left Iraq in 1977 with his wife for the city of Windsor in Ontario, Canada.

“I had just gotten married to my sweetheart and knew that I would be drafted into the Iraqi army and that there was no future for me here,” said Lirato. “I filed for a visa with the Canadian embassy and my uncle had sponsored my mom and then my mom, in turn, sponsored me.”

Prior to his immigration to Canada, Lirato had just graduated from Baghdad’s Al-Zafrany TechnicalCollege with a degree in automotive engineer design. At the time, Saddam Hussein was only the vice president of Iraq, but Lirato explained that Hussein was the man “behind the curtain” pulling the strings and actually in control of what was happening in the country.

A few years later, in 1980, Hussein ruled Iraq completely, giving Lirato a reason to ensure that his father and other family members, still living in the totalitarian nation, made it safely out of the country.

“We had to get them out of Iraq because people were being beaten and killed for no reason. They would disappear if they criticized the Baath Party. They would be picked up by intelligence and you would never see them again,” he said. “You would never think about asking the government what happened, because if you did, you would disappear, too.

During his years in North America, Lirato, now a grandfather, and his wife raised four children. For his first two years on the American continent, Lirato worked odd jobs to make ends meet.

After saving money, he was eventually able to open his own convenience store and later a chain of them along with a doughnut shop franchise and a pizzeria. Selling the franchise business 18 years later, he began an Italian restaurant with three satellite stores for pick-up and delivery.

He was truly living the American dream, being successful in business, he said.

Eventually, after nearly three decades in Canada, Lirato and his family settled in Phoenix.

In 2004, he left the restaurant business behind because he saw the opportunity to help his former homeland after Sadaam Hussein’s regime fell in Operation Iraqi Freedom.

“The reason I came here was because this nation needed help,” he said. “The main reason I came to work with the Army was I believed in them and what they are doing as far as their wanting to help the people out of the goodness of their hearts.”

“The coalition forces helped Iraq get rid of a dictator, so their coming into Iraq was an excellent thing and many of the Iraqi people had been asking for U.S. help for years to get rid of Sadaam,” said Lirato.

Over his three years working with coalition forces, Lirato said he’s seen the good that they have been doing to help Iraq. In his current position for the 1st BCT, 1st Cav. Div., Rudy translates as a member of the brigade’s embedded provincial reconstruction team assisting them with current efforts to include reconciliation.

“They’ve been doing a thousand percent in trying to reach out to the people,” he said. “I couldn’t believe how much they were doing and at first, they basically just offered an open check to help the Iraqi people get back on their feet.”

Lirato has helped coalition forces to refurbish and refurnish schools, work on water projects, electrical stations and other major undertakings.

Some of the larger missions that Lirato has assisted have included accompanying a 45-foot trailer filled with medicine into the city of Mosul, Iraq. In addition, when he was working in Mosul, he saw the coalition donate $50,000 to help renovate a mosque.

“I’ve worked in efforts in Iraq that have involved thousands and thousands of dollars, giving free food rations out to the people,” he said. “There have been a lot of people out there in the U.S. and other nations with big hearts making donations to help Iraqis.”

One of the things that really surprised Lirato was the humane way in which coalition troops and Iraqi security forces treat insurgents when they are captured as enemy combatants. It was an eye-opening experience, he said, as compared to the old days under Hussein.

“When Sadaam captured his enemies, he would give them a slap in the face and a punch in the stomach and then send them to their deaths in meat grinders—after days and days of torture,” said Lirato. “When the coalition forces capture insurgents, suspects are given a toothbrush, food and water and humane treatment. Officers tell their troops not to yell, but be as nice as they can.

“Now, terror suspects are assured of getting a fair trial,” added Lirato, explaining that there is a noticeable difference between Iraq as a democracy, opposed to when it was under a totalitarian regime.

Another impression that sticks with Lirato, he said, was how much the coalition troops go out of their way to respect cultural differences inherent in Iraqi society.

“They have a great respect for and really do care about what happens to the people here,” said Lirato. But, he said, there needs to be a lot more participation on the part of Iraqis to move the country forward towards democracy.

“Reaching the younger generation will be key as they are the future of Iraq,” said Lirato. “Iraqis need to recognize that U.S. and coalition forces are there to help them and that they should grab the opportunity that’s at their doorsteps. The coalition forces will not be here forever.

“Freedom isn’t free, it has cost the Iraqis and coalition precious souls for a good cause,” he added.

With so many different people living in Iraqi society to include Kurds, Shia, Sunni, Tarakaman, Yazeady and Christians, one of the keys to success in Iraq will be bringing all of the different groups together and uniting them, according to Lirato.

“They need to take seriously what they have in their hands and start following a different path, first to help their country and their families,” Lirato said. “If they don’t they will be living in a lot worse situation than they are now.

“But hopefully they will awaken and put their differences aside, and take one united way to successfully live in prosperity,” added Lirato.

Lirato said he believes very much in the type of democracy and freedom that he and his family have experienced since moving first to Canada and then, the United States—he hopes one day people in Iraq can have a similar type of freedom to pursue their own dreams

One of the proudest moments in his life, he added, will come when he finally becomes a U.S. citizen in a few short months.

“I can’t wait to tell the judge, the president of the United States, the congress and everyone else ‘In God we trust,’” said Lirato. “It’s going to be a big honor for me and for

my family.”

Beauchamp, The Weekly Standard, EXPOSED

Micheal Goldfarb at the Weekly Standard publishes a summary of telephone and email conversations with TNR's Editor. TNR has completed their "investigation" of the story and found only one little detail to be disfactual: That the "melted woman" incident actually occurred at Camp Buehring in Kuwait before Beauchamp's unit deployed to Iraq.

Title: Foer the Record

UPDATE (09:44 CDT): Matt Sanchez has broken the story: Beachamp Investigation Concluded.

Complete fabrication.

---

UPDATE: (11:18 CDT): Confederal Yankee reports contact from Third Army USARCENT PAO in Kuwait. Melted Woman is "Urban Myth" at Camp Buehring.

Read that here.

Meanwhile, the leftwing is in a tizzy, with apparent homophobe Max Blumenthal whining about Matt Sanchez' past (as if it could somehow change the fact that Beauchamp is a liar and TNR is a rag).

Developing...

---

Liberal Arrogance

They want instant mashed potatoes, microwave popcorn, one hour
martinizing and Democracies Built in a Day. When they don't get what they want, they scream at waiters and berate dry cleaning clerks for making the coffee to strong, the taters too mushy and the starched shirts too stiff. And, they point to a "bunch of Arabs," sneer, and say "it will never work." They're talking about the Iraqi Parliament and Maliki government, who has been in office for a tad more than a year.

During this year, they have been battling a wicked insurgency, struggling to get the petroleum infrastructure up and keep a lid on sectarian mistrust that has existed for centuries. Meanwhile, the American left sits in comfortable, air conditioned offices and dismisses their efforts as meaningless.

The lack of Christian sectarian violence in western civilization is a fairly recent phenomenon. For centuries, Christian western powers fought religious wars against each other, killing each other in population proportions that make the sectarian bloodshed in Iraq look like a rush hour fender bender. Through a period of Rennaissance and Reformation, western civilization was able to rise above the propensity for violence and settle political, sectarian and religious disputes through a combination of tolerance and dialogue. We are not perfect, but we are not the barbarous slaughtering machines we were for the first thousand years or so after the founding of the Church.

It is the height of liberal arrogance to dismiss the efforts of the Iraqis to resolve their own differences. As our own history painfully points out, these things take time. Western civilization overcame its history. What makes us so special that we should believe Arabs can not do the same? These Arabs are the people who gave western engineers the concept of Zero. "Algebra" is an Arabic word. The most ancient Iraqis, the Sumerians, gave western civilization the written word. We are not talking about an ethnic group incapable of rational, intelligent thought. If we believe them intelligent and capable, then we should also believe them capable of working out their differences without killing each other. Mesopotamia is an ancient and beautiful land. Its people deserve the chance to live their in peace. It is in the United States' vital national interests to see the establishment of a peaceful and stable Iraq. But it is up to Iraqis to want that too, and want it badly enough to be willing to die for it. If they are willing to die for it, then they are willing to tolerate political and religious differences that do not, in the end, make them any less Arab or any less Iraqi than anyone else.

They are capable of doing that. To believe otherwise is the height of liberal arrogance and bigotry.

35th Street Market open for business

---

BAGHDAD — Seven weeks ago, the citizens of east Doura couldn’t walk down 35th Street. Seven weeks ago, there would have been an explosive or gunfire waiting for them.

Seven weeks ago, the Raiders weren’t in the area.

Full Story.

DID I SAY DAT?!?

---

Yes, Obama. You did.

ISLAMABAD (AFP) - Pakistan accused Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama of "sheer ignorance" for threatening to launch US military strikes against Al-Qaeda on Pakistani soil.

Obama warned Wednesday that if he is elected president, he would order US forces to hit extremist targets on Pakistan's frontier with Afghanistan if embattled military ruler President Pervez Musharraf failed to act.

"Such statements are being made out of sheer ignorance," Pakistan's Minister of State for Information, Tariq Azeem, told AFP. "They are not fully apprised about the ground realities and not aware of the efforts by Pakistan."

Full Story.

Obama the Magic Negro is a noob. The man has not been in the United States Senate for one full term and his noobness shows every time he opens his mouth. While I am not a fan of anyone running for the party of the Jackass, it is clear that this Urkelesque clown would be an unmitigated disaster in the White House. How fitting that Obama's threat came at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and Idealist Idiots.

Obama is desperate. The Tempest in the B-Cup is widening her lead over him in the race to become the next victim of the GOP's Pennsylvania Avenue Express, and she's finding some resonance in her public spat with the Pentagon over imaginary cut and run plans. So a little risk taking is to be expected. What I never expected was to see a brain fart like this. Pakistan has some serious issues to deal with. Pervez Musharraf is hanging on and managing to keep a semblance of peace in Islamabad while he deals with a serious Islamist threat to stability. Having a US Presidential candidate--even a long shot one like Obama--threaten military action against targets within his country is disgraceful to the Pakistani President. As Tariq Azeem eloquently stated: "Such statements are being made out of sheer ignorance."

Treachery Exposed

"I think there would be enough support in that group to want to stay the course and if the Republicans were to stay united as they have been, then it would be a problem for us."

So said House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.), in a video interview with the Washingtonpost.com website. Clyburn is referring to a report due to be given by MNF-Iraq Commanding General David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker. Clyburn was asked about how a positive report from the two might affect Congressional Democrats' efforts to end the war in Iraq.

WTF? If Petraeus and Crocker come back with a positive report, showing significant progress in quelling the counterinsurgency, Democrats would see that as a problem? Since when does being a Democrat trump being an American?

This sort of treachery is exactly what I wrote about in June.

If America succeeds in Iraq, Bush leaves office as the President who brought democracy to both Iraq and Afganistan, giving the middle east two bastions of freedom for the first time in history of the region. It results in two peaceful, stable and productive allies of the United States. For Iraq, it would place a large chunk of the world's proven oil reserves in the hands of a friendly nation and represent a regional influence with which to check the radical islamists in Iran. Those would be historically significant developments for the United States and southwestern Asia. And, they would provide a formidable legacy for Mr. Bush.

The overarching goal of Democrat shenanigans in Congress is not sound policy--it is all about gaining political points. As Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said, it's about "winning seats." The Democrats are not interested in winning in Iraq. They are only interested in winning in November 2008. The Majority Whip, in one of those "oops" moments, has exposed the treachery of the left and shown them for what they really are.

My question is simply this: How will the ordinary American who voted for these idiots last November going to react, when he sees this and realizes that he's been played?

Associated Press hit piece debunked

The headline read thus:

"Iraq refuses to take over many projects
Reluctance to assume control could cost U.S. billions, audit finds"

In the story, the Associated Press reported that the Government of Iraq's refusal to take over various reconstruction projects was going to cost the United States billions of dollars, citing a report from the Office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction.

I have obtained a copy of the report, entitled Transferring Iraq Relief and Reconstruction Fund Capital Projects to the Government of Iraq (SIGIR).

At no point in the report does SIGIR claim that the government of Iraq "refuses" to take over the projects, nor does the report state that the alleged refusal stands to cost American taxpayers "billions." Here's what the report does state:

"Delays in transferring completed projects mean that fewer assets are available to the [Government of Iraq] as leverage for loans and could result in additional sustainment expenses for hte U.S. government agencies that completed the projects." (SIGIR-07-004, July 2007)

I have been in contact with project management and finance & accounting officials at the Gulf Regional Division, US Army Corps of Engineers, in Iraq. Corps officials tell me that the GOI is not refusing to take these projects over--the GOI is budgetarily incapable of doing so. In what amounts to a disastrous success, the United States government has completed hundreds of projects worth billions of dollars in less than three years, overwhelming the new government. With insufficient tax and oil revenues flowing in to take over and operate all of the new projects, the GOI has asked for time and suggested turning over smaller, community-based projects to local officials. The US government has agreed to do so with numerous small projects. For the larger projects that exceed the locals' operation and maintainence capacity, the US agencies are carrying the O&M costs until transfer can be accomplished. Officials estimate that one to two years of O&M will be incurred, but denied that those costs would run into the billions even if transfers are further delayed.

Corps officials tell me that no one from AP contacted them for comment on the matter, despite the fact that the Corps is the lead agency in reconstruction efforts.

Clearly, the AP story, which ran on MSNBC, Yahoo! News, CNN and various other websites, was poorly researched and badly reported. While I am stopping short of accusing the AP of deliberately misstating the contents of the SIGIR report, the story stands out as yet another example of shoddy journalism on the part of AP.

Join the Victory Caucus

The Victory Caucus is back online. The site bills itself as a one-stop shop for news and information about the Global War on Terror, and delivers in spades. I strongly recommend that you visit the site, and register.

Asian Cup Champs

Remember how it felt to be an American when the US Hockey Team upset the vaunted Soviets in the 1980 Games at Lake Placid? Full of national pride and unity, Americans of all flavors enjoyed just being Americans.

Today, the Republic of Iraq gets to bask briefly in that light. No matter what happens tomorrow, today they are all Iraqis.

Read the game recap here.

Photo essay below.

Sometimes, it's better to let those thousand words in a row take a backseat to the images that capture a moment in history.