Not much new here, but...

Worthy of note anyway. I pointed most of this out in an earlier post , it never hurts to repeat an important message.

Jaws of Defeat

The United States and Israel and every sentient being in the path of the Islamist crusade are teetering on the brink of a massive defeat in Lebanon and thus in the war on terror. Lest it be forgotten, this is a war that began with the Ayatollahs’ revolution in Iran in 1979 which established the first radical Islamic state whose masters’ war cry was “Death to America” and the establishment of a global Islamic empire. Nearly thirty years later, Iran is on the verge of acquiring nuclear weapons and its imperial war is now being waged on Iran’s Lebanese frontier by its Hezbollah proxy. One month into the fighting which began with the attacks by Hamas and Hezbollah on the state of Israel, the scenario for the West’s defeat in this phase of the war is quite obvious and quite simple.

The appeasers of Islamofascism, who have been calling for a ceasefire and bewailing “civilian casualties” in Lebanon and Gaza, will succeed. Hezbollah will agree to turn over its arms to the pro-Hezbollah Lebanese army. The pro-Hezbollah UN will establish a security zone on Lebanon’s southern border to keep the area clear of non-government militias, of which the Hezbollah “militia” is the only one. The credulous in the Western camp will greet this as a victory for the peacemakers. But exactly the opposite will be the case.

Take the time to read the link.

Dang - I was thinking the same thing

Don Surber: Mel Gibson pulls a Ramsey Clark

So Mel drinks and drives... take away his license, throw him in jail for a year, but he doesn't remotely qualify as the biggest offender.

Well, Damn!

Hoping to be wrong I posted this , only to come across this!

THE KINGDOM OF SAUDI ARABIA CALLS ON ALL TO ACT IN ACCORDANCE WITH HONEST, CONSCIOUS AND INTERNATIONAL MORAL AND HUMANITARIAN LAWS. IT ALSO WARNS ALL THAT IF THE PEACE OPTION IS REJECTED DUE TO THE ISRAELI ARROGANCE THEN ONLY THE WAR OPTION REMAINS AND NO ONE KNOWS THE REPERCUSSIONS BEFALLING THE REGION, INCLUDING WARS AND CONFLICT THAT WILL SPARE NO ONE INCLUDING THOSE WHOSE MILITARY POWER IS NOW TEMPTING THEM TO PLAY WITH FIRE.

The OIL hammer is swinging, where it might land is still open to question. We need to remember that this is for the English speaking world... what are they telling the Arabic speaking world?

Prescience is unbecoming for a mere mortal, but damn!!

Lessons learned or stating the obvious?

I'm no big time analyst, but I do read.

Israel has learned the lessons of Iraq, and forgotten those of it's own history, it seems to me.

'Shock and awe' style air campaigns are not a replacement for 'boots on the ground'! War is NOT an antiseptic endeavor that can be promulgated with little loss.

Israel is on verge the of losing it's first war, and in doing so the rest of the west will suffer. At first we we're told Israel was simply 'prepping the battle space', but what has followed is not the efforts of the Israel of decades past. Israel has even announced publicly that it would not 'expand' it's efforts. As each hour and day passes and the rockets still fall their resolve seems further weakened.

In the first few days even many Islamic countries were condemning Hizballah, however, as Israel falters that is fading. International pressures for a cease fire is growing, with even the U.S. growing louder.
Iran will be further emboldened, and that's not a good thing. Indeed, the Sunni and Shia factions have been given time to consider the old Bedouin proverb "I against my brother I and my brother against our cousin, my brother and our cousin against the neighbors, all of us against the foreigner" in a new light.

A cease fire that doesn't remove the threat, even with 'peace keepers', marks the end of a bold experiment. Israel may continue to exist, but be seen as a toothless martyr to those countries that surround it.

Israel has been a beacon of sorts, rather like our efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan if they're allowed to continue. Combined they constitute a positive view of the 21st century and the future. Tribal societies trying to recreate a centuries old Islamic world that never really existed must keep trying to extinguish those beacons.

And the bigger truth has little to do with the individual Israeli warrior, who are collectively, second to none.

There's a positive note I can end with... I've been wrong before.

Anyway:

Many have noted that Bill Whittle has an update: here!

As usual grab a beer or a cup of coffee and enjoy.

Interesting - via FR

Can anyone state President Bush's foreign policy with enough citations and clarity to make this case?

Dump Condi: Foreign policy conservatives charge State Dept. has hijacked Bush agenda

Conservative national security allies of President Bush are in revolt against Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, saying that she is incompetent and has reversed the administration’s national security and foreign policy agenda.

The conservatives, who include Newt Gingrich, Richard Perle and leading current and former members of the Pentagon and National Security Council, have urged the president to transfer Miss Rice out of the State Department and to an advisory role. They said Miss Rice, stemming from her lack of understanding of the Middle East, has misled the president on Iran and the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Read it, I'm sure not convinced!

Mind you I'm not defending Rice so much as trying to get a 'baseline' for a valid judgment.

The LawDog Files: Ah feel, Ah say, Ah feel faint.

The LawDog Files: Ah feel, Ah say, Ah feel faint.

This is good. :-)

Three from Jihad Watch

If you don't regularly check Jihad Watch you should. If you do, sorry for the repeat.

Why Israel's Reaction is Right

The natural reaction to the current violence in the Middle East is one of horror. It's time for a cease-fire, right? Not necessarily. Pacifism would only help the radicals.

When it comes to Israel, public opinion in Europe walks a fine line. Israel's overreaction and use of overwhelming force, say most, is to be condemned and criticized. But in the same breath, Hezbollah's provocation is likewise reviled and rejected as the militant group's unceasing attacks on Israeli civilians are cited. Both sides are judged using the same criteria and both sides come out stained with some blame for the current conflagration.

But this seemingly nuanced point of view is misleading. In reality, German and European public opinion does take sides -- and it tends to side with the apparent underdog and against Israel.

Iranian Revolutionary Guards killed in Lebanon, flown back to Iran via Syria

JERUSALEM - The bodies of Iranian Revolutionary Guard soldiers killed by the Israeli army in Lebanon have been transported to Syria and flown to Tehran, senior Lebanese political sources said.

Israeli and Egyptian security officials confirmed the news, which follows a report that first appeared in The New York Sun, that Iranian forces posted to southern Lebanon have been aiding Hezbollah terrorists in their attacks against Israel, including helping to fire rockets into Israeli population centers.

Suicide armies launched

TEAMS of Iranian suicide bombers were heading for Lebanon’s war zone last night in a terrifying bid to spark meltdown in the Middle East.

Twenty-seven martyrdom-seekers have been sent to Syria on their way to front line positions.

The mad fanatics, belonging to the Iranian Martyrs of Islam World Movement, have been training for months to wreak maximum havoc on military and soft civilian targets. Their aim is to spark terror which will detonate all-out war and suck Western nations into a final bloody showdown.

A spokesman for the martyrs group said yesterday: “Two teams of 18 and nine have gone to Syria separately.

Useful perspective

This is a longish piece that deserves the time to read it.

Changing the Rules in the Lebanese Arena

The current situation in Lebanon isn’t the result of Israeli actions. Israel was dragged into taking military action in the wake of a Hizbullah attack and the kidnapping of its soldiers last week; every military strategist, and even every neophyte commentator, has known for years that Israel has been ignoring the growing threat on its northern border, like a bear that has decided to hibernate for the winter on top of a barrel of explosives. Things that have been said in the past need to be repeated now: by unilaterally withdrawing from Lebanon in 2000, Israel traded the tactical threat to IDF soldiers for a strategic threat that developed over the years and today endangers almost the entire Israeli home front.

For the past six years, the advocates of the withdrawal have been praising the fact that, with the exception of a few encounters with Hizbullah, the border has been quiet. They interpret this as proof of the withdrawal’s effectiveness and justness, even if it was executed hastily and without an agreement that is binding upon the Lebanese and/or Syrian government. From the sidelines of the disengagement, they taunted those who cautioned them from the gates, saying they had mistaken the shadow of a mountain for a mountain. These advocates were not prepared to recognize the fact that this was simply the silence before the storm and a temporary situation that would deteriorate in the future. Indeed, they resemble the person who committed suicide by jumping off a skyscraper. As he fell past one of the building’s many windows, someone called out, “How are you?” and he replied, “Fine - for now.”

However, that was not Israel’s only problem in dealing with the Hizbullah. Over the years (and even before the withdrawal from Lebanon), the Hizbullah has succeeded in creating a situation in which it deters Israel more than Israel deters it. It is unprecedented for a terrorist organization to deter a state and not vice versa. This phenomenon was expressed on two levels simultaneously. First, Hizbullah used terror attacks to make it clear to Israel that any effective offensive move against it (for example, the 1992 assassination of the organization’s former leader, Abbas Moussawi or the 1993 Israeli Air Force (IAF) attack on the organization’s training camp in the Bekaa Valley, in which dozens of Hizbullah activists were killed) would be followed by an severe response from the organization against Israeli or Jewish targets abroad (such as the terror attacks in Buenos Aires in those same years).

...

Israel could end this chapter of exchanging fire by reaching a ceasefire agreement with the Hizbullah. There are many parties who would be happy to help mediate such an agreement. However, it would be a strategic mistake for Israel to agree to a ceasefire before it achieves its main goals:

• Destroying the Hizbullah’s missile system or significantly reducing their capability to fire missiles.
• Creating credible arrangements that will guarantee that the Hizbullah will not be able to rehabilitate its military infrastructure and perhaps even be disarmed by the Lebanese government.
• Preventing or at least minimizing Iranian involvement in and Syrian support for Hizbullah.
• Creating broad international consensus for labeling Hizbullah as a terrorist organization that is not legitimate and that targets Israeli civilians.

...

Israel is caught in a dilemma – it cannot swallow or vomit out the Hizbullah. In such a situation, it must focus on military operations against Hizbullah’s missile launchers and missile and weapons storehouses, with the aim of harming the organization’s activists with aerial, sea, artillery and ground operations. At the same time, Israel must halt the Hizbullah’s ability to recover both by taking military action and by putting diplomatic pressure on Lebanon, Syria and Iran. However, above all, Israel must strive to reach a ceasefire agreement from a position of strength that will enable it to achieve the goals listed above and, first and foremost, change the rules of the game between Israel and the Hizbullah and disarm the Hizbullah. The address to turn to reach such a ceasefire agreement is not the Hizbullah or even Iran, but Syria and Lebanon. Therefore, Israel must effectively pressure Syria by wisely using all of the means at its disposal – sticks as well as carrots - in the military, political, economic and diplomatic arenas.

In the past Christians and Christian militias have supported Israel.

HEZBOLLAH PENETRATES CHRISTIAN AREAS IN LEBANON

Hezbollah has deployed in Wadi Chahrour - Blaybel area in Mount Lebanon. On Monday at 10.30 Hezbollah launched three rockets. At 10:45 AM Hezbollah launched another rocket from the same Christian area.

On Sunday Hezbollah redeployed in some areas in the southern suburb of Beirut, and shut down the access to the area. Hezbollah also has obtained a safe house in Kesrwan.

On Monday, Hezbollah elements went to Mansurieh (Northern Metn) and asked the representative of the Aounist "Tayyar" to provide some reconnaissance help because they wanted to settle some rockets launchers on Mansourieh 's hills.

Soundtrack mini-project

We Old Dogs have each have a sound track we associate with our lives. For us 'Nam vets it's as varied as our experiences.

And it's still echoing. I am listening to Big and Rich - 8th of November. This tune kick started a few synapses. It has nothing to do my experiences, but rings a bell. Shucks, everything from Barry Sadler's "The Ballad Of The Green Berets" to the Ditzy Chix's Traveling Soldier get me going in odd ways.

My pal Mike Morningstar (1st Cav) wrote this tune many years ago.

As I age the soundtrack keeps changing, but the Bellamy Brothers captured a moment with Old Hippie, and Steve Earle's Copperhead Road was another snapshot.

Just curious? Does YOUR life have a soundtrack?

Should add, not restricted to 'Nam vets.

The elephant in the room

This statement was released several days ago, and yet to be fulfilled, or be talked about much.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadi-Nejad has declared he will make an announcement - earliest on Wednesday July 19th, 2006 or in the next few days which:

"WILL LET THE MOSLEM WORLD AROUND THE GLOBE KNOW THAT AFTER THE ANNOUNCEMENT THEY WILL NOT HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT ISRAEL'S NUCLEAR ARMS OR NUCLEAR CAPABILITY EVER AGAIN"

There are several possibilites contained in those words.

Some of those are discussed here.

I can't vouch for the veracity of many of the details he mentions, but it's worth a read.

Don Surber: Further proof that the CIA hates us

Don Surber: Further proof that the CIA hates us

Heads Up - Damn it!

H/T FR

Mosques with Foreign Flags: Islam in Europe and America

As I looked at the mosque with its Turkish flag flying proudly, the high walls, the iron gates and the stoic faces, I suddenly realised that this was not a mosque but instead a sort of embassy, a foreign enclave, an extension of Turkish sovereignty in the heart of Germany. In the US one may occasionally find a US flag on a mosque, but never that of a foreign country. The only mosque that has foreign flags is the Islamic Center in Washington DC which was established by diplomats from Muslim countries.

The article is a bit dated, but relevent.

Hizballah in North America

From Counterterrorism Blog

Hizballah Activity in North America

Beyond the rallies and protests mentioned elsewhere the criminal activities are of note.

This one struck me:

Mexico: Human Trafficking:

* Mexico v. Salim Boughader Mucharrafille, Tijuana, Mexico: Boughader, proprietor of a Lebanese restaurant in Mexico, ran a smuggling ring into the U.S. Before he was arrested in December 2002, Boughader had trafficked roughly 200 Lebanese nationals, including Hizballah-linked individuals, across the border and into the U.S. Boughader admitted transporting a former employee of al-Manar television, which is owned and operated by Hizballah and currently designated by the U.S. government as a terrorist entity. Boughder is quoted as saying, “[f]or us, Hezbollah are not terrorists."

A book review, sorta?

The Sapper Sargent is on his way back from R&R on his way to Ramadi.

The Abolition of Man, I'm Agin It (though it wouldn't be a bad idea to abolish Hezbollah)

Everything you ever wanted to know about Hizbollah. Alternatively, Hezbollah. [Zero sayz: refers to a link in his post]

How can we take a political party seriously if we can't even figure out how to transliterate their name?

Pardon me if I'm cranky. Someone dinked up the thermostat here, and Kuwait is currently set on 350 degrees, coincidentally the same temperature as the oven is when baking Banana Nut Bread. Jen and I made a double batch (actually, I did about 80% of the work making the batter, and Jen baked them all) according to her Grandmother's recipie. They turned out pretty decent.

Don't have much to add. He's on his second visit, and his wife came back from Iraq in January.

Toooo funny.

Okay there's a touch of irony, perhaps, but I'd vote for her!

Don Surber: Why porn stars are Republicans v2.0

Perspectives

Michael Yon offers a broad view of Jihad well worth the read, as usual.

The subtitle: The lust for self-destruction and someone to blame, conveys the meat of the article.

And VDH weighs in with a broader view with National Clarity.

Again the subtitle does it's job well: Bush Needs to Explain the Broad Context of War.

The Bush administration should stop repeating that it is fighting the war on terror for truth, justice and the American way. Instead, the president and his staff should be blunt and explain that, since Sept. 11, it has had to choose between options that are bad or far worse.

By all means, the administration should invite critics to suggest constructive alternatives to the way it has handled this war. But it should also point out that those who have honed in on flaws in current U.S. anti-terror policies have so far been bereft of other workable ideas.

Your Tax Dollars at work - in Mexico

North American Investment Fund Act (Introduced in Senate)

S 3622 IS

109th CONGRESS

2d Session

S. 3622

To authorize the President to negotiate the creation of a North American Investment Fund between the Governments of Canada, of Mexico, and of the United States to increase the economic competitiveness of North America in a global economy.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

June 29, 2006

Mr. CORNYN (for himself and Mr. COLEMAN) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations

A BILL

To authorize the President to negotiate the creation of a North American Investment Fund between the Governments of Canada, of Mexico, and of the United States to increase the economic competitiveness of North America in a global economy.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `North American Investment Fund Act'.

SEC. 2. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE NORTH AMERICAN INVESTMENT FUND.

The President is authorized to negotiate with the Government of Canada and the Government of Mexico to establish a North American Investment Fund (referred to in this Act as the `Fund') by--

(1) agreeing to certain amendments to the November 1993 Agreement Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the United Mexican States Concerning the Establishment of a Border Environment Cooperation Commission and a North American Development Bank; or

(2) negotiating an agreement with the Government of Canada and the Government of Mexico to establish and administer the Fund.

SEC. 3. PURPOSES.

The purposes of the Fund shall be--

(1) to increase the economic competitiveness of North America in a global economy;

(2) to reduce the income gap between Mexico and Canada, and between Mexico and the United States; and

(3) to promote economic development in Mexico in the areas of infrastructure, education, technology, and job training.

SEC. 4. PROJECTS FUNDED.

(a) In General- Grants shall be awarded from the Fund for projects to carry out the purposes described in section 3, including projects--

(1) to construct roads in Mexico to facilitate trade between Mexico and Canada, and Mexico and the United States;

(2) to encourage the development and improve the quality of primary, secondary, and post-secondary education throughout Mexico;

(3) to expand the deployment of communications and broadband infrastructure throughout Mexico, with emphasis on rural and underserved areas; and

(4) to expand job training and workforce development for high-growth industries in Mexico.

(b) Project Selection-

(1) IN GENERAL- The agreement described in section 2 shall include guidelines for determining which projects will receive financial assistance from the Fund.

(2) PRIORITY- In selecting grantees to carry out projects described in subsection (a)(1), priority should be given to projects in the interior and southern regions of Mexico that connect to more developed markets in the United States and Canada.

SEC. 5. CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE FUND.

(a) In General- The agreement described in section 2 shall require the Governments of Canada, of Mexico, and of the United States to contribute to the Fund, subject to the limitations under subsection (b).

(b) Limitations on Contributions by the United States and Canada- The agreement described in section 2 shall include provisions that permit Canada and the United States to contribute to the Fund if the Government of Mexico--

(1) increases the tax revenue collected by such Government, with the goal of annually collecting an amount of such revenue that is equal to 18 percent of the annual gross domestic product of Mexico; and

(2) carries out a program of reforms to increase private investment and economic growth, reduce poverty, and maintain economic stability in Mexico.

SEC. 6. TERM OF THE FUND.

The agreement described in section 2 shall require that the Fund--

(1) operate for an initial period of 10 years; and

(2) cease operations at the end of such 10-year period, unless the Governments of Canada, of Mexico, and of the United States agree to extend the period of operation beyond such initial period.

SEC. 7. REPORT.

Not later than 180 days after the date on which the Government of Mexico complies with the criteria described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of section 5(b), and once every 180 days after such date of compliance and before the finalization of the agreement described in section 2, the President shall submit a report to Congress detailing the progress made by the Government of the United States to establish the Fund in accordance with this Act.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:S.3622:

right next door

Most Americans in Lebanon Are Hezbollah Supporters; U.S. Taxes Shouldn't Fund Their Return

One thing is lost in all the press coverage of the whining Americans who went to Lebanon of their own accord and now want us to pick up the tab to get them out.

THE MAJORITY OF AMERICANS IN LEBANON ARE HEZBOLLAH SUPPORTERS.

Most of them are Shiite Muslims, many of whom hold dual U.S. and Lebanese citizenship. Many are anchor babies born here to Muslims in the U.S. illegally. Some are illegal aliens who became citizens through rubber-stamping Citizenship and Immigration Services (and its INS predecessor) coupled with political pressure by spineless politicians.

Of the 25,000 American citizens and green-card holders in Lebanon, at least 7,000 are from Dearborn, Michigan, the heart of Islamic America, and especially Shia Islam. These 7,000 are mostly Shi'ite Muslims who openly and strongly support Hezbollah. Ditto for many of the rest of the 25,000 that are there.

Spooky, to say the least, read the rest and consider.

A book review about war?

Mark Steyn offers a book review that struck me apropos as a reality check.

Before the white man came? War

The subtitle says pages: "We've deluded ourselves into believing in the myth of the noble and peaceful primitive"

"Forgetfulness occurs when those who have been long inured to civilized order can no longer remember a time in which they had to wonder whether their crops would grow to maturity without being stolen or their children sold into slavery by a victorious foe. . . . That, before 9/11, was what had happened to us. The very concept of the enemy had been banished from our moral and political vocabulary."

by hook or by crook

If true, some good news from Iraq.

Man Responsible For Killing, Mutilating Two U.S. Soldiers Dies

BAGHDAD, Iraq -- A Jordanian who killed two U.S. soldiers last month was fatally wounded in a clash with security forces, a senior Iraqi official said Tuesday. Diyar Ismail Mahmoud, known as Abu al-Afghani, was identified as the killer of the two soldiers, National Security Adviser Mouwafak al-Rubaie told reporters. The two soldiers' mutilated bodies were found after they were captured in a clash near Youssifiyah, southwest of Baghdad.

Stupidity without borders

H/T FR
Stupidity Without Borders – The Alliance of Utopias

Written mainly from a European perspective this article offers some well thought out analysis of illegal (and legal) immigration.

Even in developing countries such as fast-evolving China, population growth is falling, and in the Indian subcontinent, Muslims have higher growth rates than Hindus or other non-Muslims. We thus have a situation with an explosive population growth in failed countries, while many of the most economically and technologically advanced nations, Eastern and Western, have stagnating populations. This strange and possibly unprecedented situation, which could perhaps be labelled “survival of the least fit”, will have dramatic consequences for the world. It is already producing the largest migration waves in history, threatening to swamp islands of prosperity in a sea of poverty.

Lenin stated that “Marxism is based on internationalism or it is nothing.” “The emancipation of the workers is not a local, nor a national, but an international problem,” wrote Marx. Karl Marx has defined the essence of Socialism as abolishing private property. Let’s assume for a moment that a country can be treated as the “property” of its citizens. Its inhabitants are responsible for creating its infrastructure. They have built its roads and communications, its schools, universities and medical facilities. They have created its political institutions and instilled in its people the mental capacities needed for upholding them. Is it then wrong for the citizens of this country to want to enjoy the benefits of what they have themselves created?

According to Marxist logic, yes.

Imagine you have two such houses next to each other. In House A, the inhabitants have over a period of generations created a tidy and functioning household. They have limited their number of children because they wanted to give all of them a proper education. In House B, the inhabitants live in a dysfunctional household with too many children who have received little higher education. One day they decide to move to their neighbors’. Many of the inhabitants of House A are protesting, but some of them think this might be a good idea. There is room for more people in House A, they say. In addition to this, Amnesty International, the United Nations and others claim that it is “racist” and “against international law” for the inhabitants of House A to expel the intruders. Pretty soon, House A has been turned into an overpopulated and dysfunctional household just like House B.

This is what is happening to the West today. Europe could become a failed continent itself, importing the problems of Africa and the Islamic world. The notion that everybody should be free to move anywhere they want to, and that preventing them from moving into your home is “racism, xenophobia and bigotry,” is the Communism of the 21st century. And it will probably have the same effect, only on an even large scale.

...

It is strange that those who call for stricter limitations on immigration in general and for an end to Muslim immigration are denounced as “anti-democratic forces” when it is the other way around. No nation, regardless of political system, can survive if it does not uphold its territorial integrity. Democracy has proved to be a superior system in promoting economic progress through liberty. But will democracy also prove strong enough to survive when faced with uncontrolled mass-immigration from failed states?

This is a powerful dilemma for democratic states in the 21st century, one that is not exclusive to Western nations. India, too, has big problems with millions of people crossing into the country illegally from Islamic Bangladesh, which is why the Indians want to build a border fence. Democratic states will either be strict enough to control their own borders, or they will cease to be democratic, perhaps cease to exist at all.

It's a lengthy article, but worth the time.

Ouch!

Arab world fed up with Hizbullah

With the exception of the Palestinians, the Arab world appears to be united in blaming Iran and Syria for the fighting in Lebanon. Until last week, Arab political analysts and government officials were reluctant to criticize Hizbullah in public. But now that Hizbullah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah and his top aides are in hiding, an anti-Hizbullah coalition is emerging not only in Lebanon, but in several other Arab countries as well.

The Palestinians and Hizbullah feel that their Arab brethren have once again turned their backs on them. On Monday, hundreds of Palestinians who marched in downtown Ramallah in support of Hizbullah chanted: "Hassan Nasrallah is our hero, the rest of the Arab leaders are cowards" and "O beloved Abu Hadi [Nasrallah's nickname], bomb, bomb Tel Aviv." The second battle cry is reminiscent of the famous slogan the Palestinians used during the first Gulf War: "O beloved Saddam, bomb, bomb Tel Aviv."

Hizbullah and their supporters were hoping that the massive Israeli military operation in Lebanon would trigger large-scale protests throughout the Arab world, creating instability and threatening to bring down some of the Arab regimes.

But the response on the Arab street has been so disappointing for Hizbullah that its leaders are now openly talking about an Arab "conspiracy" to liquidate the Shi'ite organization. The few Hizbullah supporters in Ramallah, the Gaza Strip and some Arab capitals have therefore been directing most of their criticism against the Arab presidents and monarchs, accusing them of serving the interests of the US and Israel.

It IS from the Jerusalem Post, but still... it may explain some things that are not immediately visible.

Murtha stuff

Over at BootMurtha there a coupla updates of note including Captain Bailey's briefing.

This is the one I've been waiting for: Operation Street Corner.

Some downloads are already available.

Sooner, rather than later, I'll be festooning my truck and driving around Murtha's district.

I'd did it with Kerry and I'll do it with this Jackass.

There's another rally in the works and I'll be there too.

funny stuff

From Syberghost

This just cracked me up:

The Israeli Ambassador at the U.N. began, "Ladies and gentlemen before I commence with my speech, I want to relay an old Passover story to all of you ...

"When Moses was leading the Jews out of Egypt toward the Promised Land, he had to go through the nearly endless Sinai desert. The people became thirsty and needed water. So Moses struck the side of a mountain with his staff and a pond appeared with crystal clean, cool water. The people rejoiced and drank to their hearts' content.

"Moses wished to cleanse his whole body, so he went over to the other side of the pond, took all of his clothes off and dove into the cool waters. Only when Moses came out of the water, he discovered that all his clothes had been stolen. 'And,' he said, 'I have reasons to believe that the Palestinians stole my clothes.'"

The Palestinian delegate, hearing this accusation, jumps from his seat and screams out, "This is a travesty. It is widely known that there were no Palestinians there at that time!"

"And with that in mind," said the Israeli Ambassador, "let me now begin my speech."

A Little too Early?

H/T FR

ISRAEL'S NEW FEAR

SOMETHING big hasn't happened in the current round of fighting between Israel and its terrorist foes. That absence represents a potentially fatal change in Israeli policy.

For all of the air-attacks on targets in Lebanon, the Israeli Defense Force has not sent in ground troops. If IDF tanks don't thrust across the border in force in the next few days, it will reflect the greatest crisis of will in Israel's history.

Israel is signaling its enemies that it's afraid to risk its soldiers' lives. And the terrorists read the message clearly. This caution will only encourage Israel's enemies - just when the seemingly inevitable advent of Iranian nuclear weapons poses the greatest threat to Israel since 1948.

Seems to be 'jumping the gun' a bit, but I linked to the article because the authors point is quite valid. While not quite rising to the Clinton era tactic of 'lobbing a few cruise missles' to send a message, it would be adding fuel to the terrorists fire if Israel doesn't commit ground forces after prepping the battlespace.

Time will tell, but an earlier post here by Russ brought up at least one apparent anomaly that is of a similar vein.

Oh Shit!

I just spilled my after-exercise beer! That's truly sad, but not the point of this post.

H/T LGF

This piggybacks on my last post, and I couldn't pass it up.

I am just so out of touch, or something?

In an apparent reference to Israeli military action deep inside Lebanon, Dean said:

“If you think what's going on in the Middle East today would be going on if the Democrats were in control, it wouldn't, because we would have worked day after day after day to make sure we didn't get where we are today. We would have had the moral authority that Bill Clinton had when he brought together the Northern Irish and the IRA, when he brought together the Israelis and the Palestinians.”

I DID miss something after all. Clinton made the Palestinians stop attacking Israel! I reckon the Democrats will be so busy chatting with the Islamic imperialists that they won't notice the BOHICA alert?

If we're lucky these yahoos will run the country after November. And Peace will reign.

Things that make ya go HUH!

For Democrats, Wave Is Building

The money quote:

When there's no strong national issue at stake, local forces (a district's partisan makeup, the incumbent's reputation, the challenger's resources, etc.) dominate congressional elections. But a sharply negative nationwide referendum on the party in power -- causing a national vote swing of five percentage points or more -- buffeted local factors in the 1946, 1958, 1966, 1974, 1982 and 1994 midterm elections, producing losses of 26 to 56 seats.

Now I admit I'm no political wonk. I don't watch TV news, nor do I listen to talk radio, so maybe I've missed something. Candidly, I like to see EVERY congresscritter sent home and replaced by draftees (ala Jury Duty), and I think Bush has an agenda concerning our borders that I dislike.

But... There is a strong national interest at stake: SURVIVAL!!!

If the voters are unable to recognize, or refuse to acknowledge the threat, then let them gives us a Democratic House and maybe take the Senate as well.

While they're impeaching Bush and bringing home the troops, I'm going to be stocking food and ammo. When some liberal folks show up at my door saying "everybody shares, man", I'll be politically correct while shooting at their feet.

Rant off!

Read the whole article yourself, I really don't understand the disconnect involved, so again, maybe I missed something?

Useful Map

Courtesy DEBKA

Diplomacy - a Perspective

All Talk and No Strategy: The limits of diplomacy

As Israeli warplanes pounded Lebanon last week, European leaders called for diplomacy. U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan dispatched a three-member team to the region to urge all parties to exercise restraint. Even President George W. Bush said, "To help calm the situation, we've got diplomats in the region." Officials ritually promote diplomacy and dialogue, but absent an overarching strategy, these are no panacea. Indeed, diplomacy for diplomacy's sake can sometimes make matters worse.

On April 9, 2000, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah declared that Israel was a "cancerous body in the region . . . [which] must be uprooted." Like Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Nasrallah added, for good measure: "Jews invented the legend of the Nazi atrocities." But rather than ostracize him, Kofi Annan became the first senior international leader to shake hands with the terror chief. His outreach did not moderate Hezbollah, but rather emboldened the group and endowed it with newfound prestige.

Within the United States, the efficacy of dialogue is a mantra among the foreign policy elite. "Diplomacy is much more than just talking to your friends. You've got to talk to people who aren't our friends, and even people you dislike," former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage told the New York Times on May 26, shortly before the Bush administration announced its decision to engage the Islamic Republic of Iran. But just as Annan's intercession with Hezbollah made matters worse, Washington's perpetual willingness to give diplomacy a chance can backfire.

Many adversaries factor the West's preference for engagement into their strategies. In 1990, Saddam Hussein offered to negotiate a withdrawal from Kuwait, all the while consolidating his occupation. Had President George H.W. Bush heeded the advice of Colin Powell, then chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to accept Saddam's offer, Kuwait might still be Iraq's 19th province. As secretary of state, Powell was willing to entertain a second U.N. resolution on Iraq, which gave Baghdad, Damascus, and Tehran time to organize resistance.

Misplaced confidence in an adversary's sincerity can hamper rather than hasten solutions to international problems. Following the 1993 Oslo Accords, U.S. officials failed to calibrate their level of engagement with Palestinian chairman Yasser Arafat to his level of commitment to peace. President Bill Clinton in 1996 assigned the Central Intelligence Agency to train Palestinian security forces, but many graduates used their newfound skills to further terrorism, not to stymie it. After he graduated from a U.S.-led counterterrorism training course, Palestinian security officer Khaled Abu Nijmeh organized a series of suicide bombings and took part in the May 2002 siege of the Church of the Nativity.

Connecting the Dots

H/T FR
The Hand That Feeds the Fire

There's little new here, but it offers a view of recent history, and is a useful tool for connecting the dots.

Bush's decision to invade Iraq as part of the "global war on terror" made America a party to the conflicts on the ground as never before. Saddam Hussein's regime, loathsome as it was, provided a strategic balance to the power of a radicalized Iran. Now the invasion has put Washington head-to-head with Tehran. The confrontation is military, economic, political, ideological, direct and indirect, overt and covert—and on several fronts the Iranians appear to have outmaneuvered the administration. Prominent Iranian journalist Mashallah Shamsolvaezin, who is also an expert on Lebanese affairs, suggests that Tehran's next step, far from making war, will be to present itself as a peacemaker. "This will present another opportunity to show its regional power," he said. [emphasis added]

At the foreign ministers' meeting in Paris last week, there was general consternation at the Iranian-backed violence on the ground in the Middle East. "But what can we do?" one senior European diplomat asked. "It's all part of the same problem [with Iran], but we cannot tackle it all 'cosmologically.' We have to take it on piece by piece." Each set of players linked to Iran has its own interests, and the Tehran regime itself seems seriously divided. The Iranian challenge is not a Gordian knot that can be sliced through in one bold stroke. It's a bag full of knots, each of which has to be untied and, if possible, untangled from the rest.

Imagine...

No, not the John Lennon version.

IDF: Residents south of Haifa will have one-minute rocket warning

Your town, your home; you'll have one minute of warning.

A senior Israel Defense Forces official said on Saturday evening that should Hezbollah guerillas fire rockets that reach areas south of Haifa, a warning siren will be heard one minute before they land.

Lines are being drawn in the sand, lines we might be facing if Israel falls.

Don Surber: WaPo is right on Israel

Don Surber: WaPo is right on Israel

And/or see: http://www.oldwardogs.us/2006/07/don_surber_on_t.html

Hiatus

Gonna be doing most of my posting at Old War Dogs. There are only so many hours in the day.

Don't know about the long term, but for now 'there it is'.

Stating the no-so obvious

Gates of Vienna: Putting the Pieces Together

And linked to Old War Dogs

Swiftboating? Oh yeah!

Bailey's Daily Briefing

Since the 2004 election, in which John Kerry’s spurious claims about his valor and sacrifices in the Vietnam War were publicly questioned by a group of American patriots calling themselves “Swift Boat Veterans for the Truth,” the left has introduced a new term into the lexicon of American political jargon: “swiftboating.”

Those traffickers in hate intended it to be a pejorative term, but it has turned out to be something rather different—thanks to conservatives who have appropriated it for their own honorable use! I, for one, am proud to participate in the process of “swiftboating,” since, to me, it means the marshaling of veterans to oppose those whose respect for the truth is something less than American voters deserve from their political candidates.

Boots on the ground, civilian boots

Cuivenar has a new post up. He offers a pretty unique perspective. Marine veteran, and now an Arabic speaking civilian contractor in Iraq.

Best of all he writes simply and clearly.

Stolen Valor

Law targets those with unearned military medals

Let's hope for, and work fo,r the passage of this bill.

Check it out!

A policy of lunacy via FR

A policy of lunacy

Instead, the Bush administration, responding to pressure from business interests that rely on illegal-immigrant labor, has essentially given up on employer sanctions. Ignore the recent high-profile arrests meant to score political points during the debate over immigration-reform proposals and contemplate these numbers: From 1999 to 2003, federal immigration-related work-site raids dropped off 95 percent, and the number of employers prosecuted for hiring illegal immigrants plunged from 182 to four. Want more? In 1999, authorities sought fines against 417 companies. How many were targeted in 2004? Three. How many people in Congress griped about this unannounced surrender? Not nearly enough to matter.

This is lunacy, on a par with the government subsidizing tobacco growers while imploring people not to smoke and suing tobacco firms over cigarettes' health toll.

The next time one of Darryl Griffen's brave agents is attacked and injured on the job, don't just blame the human-smuggling cartels. Blame the Bush administration. Blame the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Blame Congress. The job magnet is what drives the border crisis – and the reason the magnet is so powerful has everything to do with decisions made on this side of the border.

Another hmmmm

A 'hmmm' or similar amounts to 'what were they thinking?'

Or maybe a 'did everyone miss this?'

Or maybe just a 'stating the obvious!'
Communist Goals in 1963

If you have the time and the bandwidth

Grab a tissue and sit back for around 11 minutes.

Reveille.

It speaks volumes without saying a word.

Hmmmm

Va. Candidate Webb: GOP Can't Fix Iraq

Webb bolted the GOP in 2003 over Bush's decision to invade Iraq and this year announced he would challenge Republican Sen. George Allen, a conservative former governor who's exploring a 2008 White House bid. Opposition to the war is a cornerstone of Webb's campaign.

"I have believed strongly that when things aren't working well, it is the responsibility of our leaders to admit it, and to fix the problem," Webb said Saturday in the Democrats' weekly radio address. "Some say that speaking out against a war is disloyal to the troops. Whoever says that should consider what it's like to be a troop, wishing someone would speak the truth."

Webbs opposition to the war in Iraq is troubling. I have held Webb in considerable esteem over the years, but the turn he's taken has been a disappointment.

From his Website here.

America is fighting the wrong war in Iraq. But while we entered this war recklessly, we must leave carefully. This can only be achieved when the administration clearly states that the United States has no long-term plan to occupy Iraq. The Middle East nations in the region must then be engaged, along with our global allies, in finding the solution for the future of Iraq.

Sounds like half truths and double speak to me.

From Don Surber - Analysis and questions of the NYT

Don Surber: Can Keller spell war?