Target Centermass

Category: War on Terror

  • Discerning the Kerry Doctrine

    I’ve gone through John Kerry’s acceptance speech, sifting out anything related to defense and the war against terror. In analyzing his own words, I’m hoping to gather an idea of how Kerry hopes to lead our military and our country as president and commander-in-chief.

    I will be a commander in chief who will never mislead us into war.
    ….
    I will have a secretary of Defense who will listen to the best advice of our military leaders.
    ….
    My fellow Americans, this is the most important election of our lifetime. The stakes are high. We are a nation at war, a global war on terror against an enemy unlike any we have ever known before.
    ….
    And in this journey, I am accompanied by an extraordinary band of brothers led by that American hero, a patriot named Max Cleland. Our band of brothers doesn’t march together because of who we are as veterans, but because of what we learned as soldiers. We fought for this nation because we loved it and we came back with the deep belief that every day is extra. We may be a little older now, we may be a little grayer, but we still know how to fight for our country.

    Nothing yet except window dressing, but I included the above portion because it is related. Also, note the backhanded slams on the Bush administration, especially the opening salvo implying that Bush lied about Iraq, which could only serve to undermine our efforts there. Also, regarding the SecDef listening to military leaders, I would suspect that Rumsfeld has listened; he just hasn’t always agreed. The Army wanted the Crusader artillery program kept intact, but Rummy decided it was not needed in the foreseeable future and would provide no advantage in any conflicts currently on the horizon.

    Now we get to the heart of Kerry’s defense statements.

    Remember the hours after Sept. 11, when we came together as one to answer the attack against our homeland. We drew strength when our firefighters ran up the stairs and risked their lives, so that others might live. When rescuers rushed into smoke and fire at the Pentagon (news – web sites). When the men and women of Flight 93 sacrificed themselves to save our nation’s Capitol. When flags were hanging from front porches all across America, and strangers became friends. It was the worst day we have ever seen, but it brought out the best in all of us.

    I am proud that after Sept. 11 all our people rallied to President Bush’s call for unity to meet the danger. There were no Democrats. There were no Republicans. There were only Americans. How we wish it had stayed that way.

    Bush laid out his plans for combating terrorism before Congress. The Dems and Reps were generally in agreement then. His strategy and focus has not changed, and he has held true to one course. If we are divided now, it is because others have sought to venture in another direction.

    Now I know there are those who criticize me for seeing complexities and I do because some issues just aren’t all that simple. Saying there are weapons of mass destruction in Iraq doesn’t make it so.

    Saying there are not weapons of mass destruction, unfortunately, does not make it so, either. How many more must be found?

    Saying we can fight a war on the cheap doesn’t make it so. And proclaiming mission accomplished certainly doesn’t make it so.

    How about not proclaiming the mission accomplished but instead saying it continues? Enough of the politics, can we get to ideas? As you said, we are a nation at war.

    As President, I will ask hard questions and demand hard evidence. I will immediately reform the intelligence system so policy is guided by facts, and facts are never distorted by politics.

    Generally agree here. Much needs to be done to repair our intelligence services. However, Kerry helped weaken them and now, with the implication without evidence that the facts were politically manipulated, he politicized the intelligence community needlessly.

    And as President, I will bring back this nation’s time-honored tradition: the United States of America never goes to war because we want to, we only go to war because we have to.

    How “time-honored” is this tradition? It seems we were itching for 1812, raced into the Spanish-American, could’ve dodged our duty in Korea and Viet Nam, left Grenada alone, and skipped the Balkans.

    I know what kids go through when they are carrying an M-16 in a dangerous place and they can’t tell friend from foe. I know what they go through when they’re out on patrol at night and they don’t know what’s coming around the next bend. I know what it’s like to write letters home telling your family that everything’s all right when you’re not sure that’s true.

    As President, I will wage this war with the lessons I learned in war. Before you go to battle, you have to be able to look a parent in the eye and truthfully say: “I tried everything possible to avoid sending your son or daughter into harm’s way. But we had no choice. We had to protect the American people, fundamental American values from a threat that was real and imminent.”

    So lesson one, this is the only justification for going to war.

    A strategy of waiting for danger to become imminent, of letting trouble fester? Wasn’t that what we did in the 1990s, allowing things such a the USS Cole and 9/11 to develop? Isn’t this in conflict with the conclusions of the 9/11 commission?

    And on my first day in office, I will send a message to every man and woman in our armed forces: You will never be asked to fight a war without a plan to win the peace.

    And it has to be a fool-proof plan, because the party out of power reserves the right to savage the administration over any setbacks or struggles, right?

    I know what we have to do in Iraq. We need a president who has the credibility to bring our allies to our side and share the burden, reduce the cost to American taxpayers, and reduce the risk to American soldiers. That’s the right way to get the job done and bring our troops home.

    Here is the reality: that won’t happen until we have a president who restores America’s respect and leadership – so we don’t have to go it alone in the world.

    And we need to rebuild our alliances, so we can get the terrorists before they get us.

    I agree that alliances are useful, and we currently have built a coalition that is in the field in both the Afghan and Iraqi theaters of the war on terror. So it comes down to quibbling about who the members of the coalition are. Maybe a strategy should be in reconsidering the value of some of our old “allies” and examining their motivations.

    I defended this country as a young man and I will defend it as President. Let there be no mistake: I will never hesitate to use force when it is required. Any attack will be met with a swift and certain response.

    But what about not waiting for an attack? The war has started, it is decidedly to our advantage to choose the battlefield as we see fit.

    I will never give any nation or international institution a veto over our national security. And I will build a stronger American military.

    We will add 40,000 active duty troops, not in Iraq, but to strengthen American forces that are now overstretched, overextended, and under pressure. We will double our special forces to conduct anti-terrorist operations. We will provide our troops with the newest weapons and technology to save their lives and win the battle. And we will end the backdoor draft of National Guard and reservists.

    To all who serve in our armed forces today, I say, help is on the way.

    I agree with more troops. As a former Guardsman, I disagree that using the reserve components is a “backdoor draft” (a term, by the way, actually meant to refer to the application of stop-loss on personnel whose military commitment has expired). For the Guard or Reserve called up, it is certainly a hardship and a danger, but it is also a duty and a possibility to be known about from day one of joining the service.

    As President, I will fight a smarter, more effective war on terror. We will deploy every tool in our arsenal: our economic as well as our military might; our principles as well as our firepower.

    Words. What would Kerry do differently, unless by every tool he is wanting to utilize nukes? We are already operating through military missions, covert ops, economic pressures and inducements.

    In these dangerous days there is a right way and a wrong way to be strong. Strength is more than tough words. After decades of experience in national security, I know the reach of our power and I know the power of our ideals.

    We need to make America once again a beacon in the world. We need to be looked up to and not just feared.

    We need to lead a global effort against nuclear proliferation to keep the most dangerous weapons in the world out of the most dangerous hands in the world.

    We need a strong military and we need to lead strong alliances. And then, with confidence and determination, we will be able to tell the terrorists: You will lose and we will win. The future doesn’t belong to fear; it belongs to freedom.

    And the front lines of this battle are not just far away they’re right here on our shores, at our airports, and potentially in any town or city. Today, our national security begins with homeland security. The 9/11 Commission has given us a path to follow, endorsed by Democrats, Republicans, and the 9/11 families. As president, I will not evade or equivocate; I will immediately implement the recommendations of that commission. We shouldn’t be letting 95 percent of container ships come into our ports without ever being physically inspected. We shouldn’t be leaving our nuclear and chemical plants without enough protection. And we shouldn’t be opening firehouses in Baghdad and closing them down in the United States of America.

    Obviously we need to work on our security, especially if we are going to cease to take the battle to the terrorists.

    You don’t value families if you force them to take up a collection to buy body armor for a son or daughter in the service

    Political weapon that is apparently unsupported (thanks to Michelle Malkin).

    And our energy plan for a stronger America will invest in new technologies and alternative fuels and the cars of the future – so that no young American in uniform will ever be held hostage to our dependence on oil from the Middle East.

    I agree that we can look to alternative sources of energy; we can also look to alternative sources of oil, especially when we know there are untapped reserves here in the U.S.

    Okay, that’s it, every bit of Kerry’s acceptance speech related to defense, Iraq and his plans for the future of the war against terror. So, what have we learned about the Kerry Doctrine?

    • The president must go to war honestly, based only on confirmed facts, and only after all means of avoidance have been exhausted.
    • The military should be expanded, both in men and advanced equipment, and the intelligence services should be revamped.
    • Old alliances should be restored. How this is to be done when it seems apparent that France and Germany are trying to position themselves as the guiding strengths of the EU and trying to position the EU as a rival to the U.S. is unsaid. Also unstated is the problem of the growing Muslim populations and their militancy in Old Europe, which would hinder the Europeans’ willingness to be full partners with America in the struggle against Islamic fascism. Heck, also unsaid: any reference to the radical Islamist movement.
    • Definitely fight if attacked, and have the infrastructure ready to put out the fires and police the wreckage.
    • Get our troops out by getting others in the struggle. See above for the complications of guaranteeing the assistance of other nations.
    • Try to wean the whole world off the petroleum bottle.

    Well, there you have the Kerry Doctrine. Fight when needed, add troops and first responders, improve intelligence, and try to get others to take our place in the war.

    Funny, I’m not getting warm fuzzies about our security future.

  • Iraq Calls for Muslim Force; Terrorists Quake

    Iraqi Prime Minister Ayad Allawi is urging other Arab nations to send troops to combat the terrorists disrupting the progress in the beleaguered nation.

    Allawi made the appeal a day after Saudi officials disclosed that they had initiated an effort to encourage the creation of a Muslim security force to help bring stability to Iraq.

    “The leaders of this region must unify and must stand as one group against those gangs, against those terrorists and those criminals who are threatening and causing a great deal of harm to the Arab World and the Islamic world,” Allawi said.

    The terrorists responded quickly by playing the Jew card and posting internet threats against such a force

    “Our swords will be drawn in the face of anyone who cooperates with the Jews and the Christians,” the group said in its statement. “We will strike with an iron fist all the traitors from the Arab governments who cooperate with the Zionists secretly or openly.”

    The statement was issued in the name of the Jamaat al-Tawhid al-Islamiya — Omar el-Mukhtar Brigade, a little known group whose main title means the Group of Islamic Monotheism. Omar el-Mukhtar is the name of a Libyan nationalist who fought against the Italian occupation who was hanged by the colonial authorities in 1931….

    The Internet statement was addressed to the Saudi and Pakistani governments. It said the two states “intend to send Islamic troops to Iraq.”

    “We will not keep silent in case any Islamic or Arabic country, especially Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Egypt, send troops to Iraq. We also call on Muslim soldiers, in case they are sent to Iraq, not to respond, not to throw themselves in the path of death.”

    These tough guys are getting to be quite the good at the criminal side of the business via their kidnapping. They can prolong the suffering of their fellow Arabs, standing against the tide of progress and the hands of time.

    However, practically asking Muslim troops to please not make the trip shows their weakness: they can’t fight. They can’t make a stand against the well-trained soldiers of the coalition without getting shredded, and they can’t make a stand against Muslim forces without threatening any support they have in the populaces of Arab nations.

    They can only manage atrocities against civilians and assaults on the infrastructure. Oh yeah, they can post threats on the internet.

  • Y’all al-Queda?

    We’ll have to see what comes from this story of a possible terrorist infiltration caught here in Texas.

    Federal authorities are investigating whether a South African woman they say tried to board a flight near the U.S.-Mexico border with a mutilated passport has ties to al-Qaida or other terrorist groups.

    Farida Goolam Mohamed Ahmed, 48, was arrested July 19 at the McAllen airport and charged four days later with illegal entry into the United States, falsifying information and falsifying a passport. She was denied bond on Tuesday by a federal magistrate.

    A senior federal law enforcement official, speaking on condition of anonymity, told The Associated Press on Tuesday that investigators were trying to determine whether the woman had ties to terrorist groups. So far nothing has been substantiated, the source said.

    Simply put, our borders are not secure, and the Rio Grande is amazingly porous. Even if this is not a terrorist connection, I put big Gunner money that it shows weaknesses in our security that can be, and probably have been, exploited. The days are numbered — are we counting down to another 9/11 or a campaign of small-scale suffer-the-children-of-Israel-type campaign? The Iraqi and Afghani efforts must continue and be supported. Even somewhat stable-democracies in those countries will be enough of a threat to the Islamist movement to drive the bastards towards desperation.

    When desperate, what will the Islamist terrorists do? Attack here and falter at home? Attack at home and continue the current course? Turn to the Tet strategy of gambling it all by hitting hard everywhere and counting on the American mainstream media to assist in the cause?

    The Cronkite types better not help them in this one. I want to have children and grandchildren, and I want all of them to enjoy the freedoms I enjoy.

  • Kerry’s Stance(s) on Iraq

    Tipping the CVC to Every Thing I Know Is Wrong for finding the RNC’s new video on the timeline of Kerry’s positions on the Iraq campaign.

    This new video from the RNC is a must view. It completely destroys any possibility that anyone, even the least politically engaged, who sees it can believe John Kerry did not flip-flop over the war on terror, the war in Iraq, and the question of weapons of mass destruction. It shows without a doubt, using a chronological display of videos of John Kerry himself, that he is utterly disingenuous and untrustworthy on these vital issues.

    Windows Media | Real Player

    The video is too long (about 12 minutes) to get much play on sound-byte TV, but as many people as possible should see it. If you are a blogger please link to it, if you are not send it to a friend. We can’t allow a man who is this casual about these issues to become President.

    “They call him Flipper, Flipper….

  • Kerry Wants to Extend the 9/11 Commission

    Back in the early 90’s, I lived in Washington, D.C. for a little over a year, including interning for a fall on Capitol Hill. One thing I learned while there was that there is nothing so permanent as a temporary government agency. This was brought back to mind when I read this:

    Kerry said the (9/11) commission should issue progress reports every six months, beginning in December. Among the questions they should address, Kerry said, are whether we are doing enough to strengthen homeland security, reorganize intelligence agencies, build global alliances and make America as safe as it can be.

    In Boston, Kerry foreign policy adviser Jamie Ruben told reporters that keeping the commission intact would be an effective way to “bird-dog the bureaucracy” on implementing the panel’s recommendations.

    So, Kerry wants to bureaucratize the 9/11 Commission and have its bureaucrats oversee the rest of the government’s bureaucrats. Does Kerry anticipate changes in the panel or any checks on the commission, or is he wanting a Supreme Court of Security whose edicts must be enforced?

    Ah, but who will guard the guards?

  • Terrorists Threatening Coalition Countries Left and Right

    Islamic terrorists have released threats against Australia and Italy, as well as Poland and Bulgaria. These follow earlier threats against Japan.

    A top security official at NATO says the decision by the Philippines to withdraw its small contingent to gain the release last week of a Philippine truck driver kidnapped by militants probably sparked the most recent threats.

    Terrorists, give ’em and inch and they’ll carbomb a mile. Oh, and I just wanted to send another thanks to President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, Philippine president and Manila folder.

  • Committee on the Present Danger Being Reformed

    A Cold War relic is being reincarnated for the War on Terror.

    Citing what they call the need for a more aggressive war of information against, and education about, Islamic extremism, two U.S. lawmakers appeared Tuesday at a news conference formally announcing the latest reincarnation of a group that had its beginnings during the Cold War.

    In 1950, in the earliest years of the “Cold War” with the former Soviet Union, the Committee on the Present Danger was formed to serve as a way of building support among Americans for a strong national defense and opposition to Moscow’s expansionist aims.

    Described in history texts as a conservative, although bi-partisan group, the committee counted among its members numerous people who went on to work in several presidential administrations. It also included, at one point in 1979, a politically ambitious Ronald Reagan who would go on to win the presidency.

    In the 1960s, the group became less visible with the growth of public opposition to the war in Vietnam, only to re-emerge in the mid-1970’s amid a debate about the direction of U.S. security policies regarding the Soviet Union, and the efficiency of the intelligence community.

    Now, the group has appeared again, this time with the objective of educating Americans and the world about what its members call the threat from radical Islamist, as opposed to Islamic, terrorism.

    Chaired by former CIA director James Woolsey and fronted by Sens. Joe Lieberman and John Kyl, the Committee on the Present Danger, quite simply, gets it:

    The 9/11 attack had a similarly stimulating effect on the terrorist network that perpetrated it, and on legions of Muslim youths across the globe from among whom that network draws its recruits. Nothing succeeds like success, it is said, and Al Qaeda’s “success” in hitting America on 9/11 was a far greater rallying event than all of Bin Laden’s screeds and Al Jazeera’s agitprop, combined. As it moved from suicide bombers in Tel Aviv to weaponized commercial aircraft in New York and Washington, there was no escaping the reality that the Islamist jihad took a quantum leap on 9/11. And with it leapt the danger confronting the free world from the “insane courage” (a term Bin Laden favors) of radicalized, Islamo-fascist killers.

    I’ll most certainly be keeping an eye on the efforts of this group, and it’s comforting to know that the tradition and memory of the Cold Warriors continues. The more I read from Useful Idiots by Mona Charen, the more parallels I find between the struggle against communism and the fight against Islamofascist terrorism. This is especially true when I watch those against the struggle and listen to the recycling of talking points from decades ago.

  • Iraq’s Neighbors Agree to Improve Security

    Or, probably more likely, at least pay lip service to security.

    Iraq (news – web sites)’s neighbors agreed Wednesday to hold a high-level security meeting and share intelligence about cross-border infiltration, answering the war-ravaged nation’s plea for assistance.

    Facing almost daily car bombings and firefights, Iraq accuses foreign Muslim infiltrators of being behind some of the deadliest attacks and says neighboring countries are either facilitating or turning a blind eye to infiltration across borders.

    After a day of long-winded deliberations and minor disagreements, Arab foreign ministers welcomed the proposal of Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari to convene interior ministers and security officials to discuss how to “eliminate all terrorist and other armed groups present and emanating from Iraqi territory which constitute a danger to Iraq and neighboring states,” the final statement of the meeting said.

    The date of the meeting, to be hosted by Iran, has not yet been decided. But delegates at the sixth regional meeting of Iraq’s neighbors said the meeting will mean intelligence sharing, and possibly reinforcement of border patrols.

    Note the hint that Egypt is possibly realizing their own danger that is being fostered by the terror:

    “Just as neighboring countries affect the situation in Iraq, they are affected by it,” Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit said.

  • Al-Zarqawi Group Warns Japan to Withdraw

    Having tasted success from the Philippines’ submissiveness, the terrorists have now set their sights on Japan.

    “To the government of Japan: do what the Philippines has done. By God, nobody will protect you and we are not going to tolerate anybody,” said an online statement signed by the Khalid bin al-Waleed Brigade, the military wing of the Tawhid and Jihad group.

    “Lines of cars laden with explosives are awaiting you; we will not stop, God willing,” said the statement, carried by an Islamic forum, known as a clearinghouse for statements by extremist groups.

    “You didn’t come to support the people of Iraq but to protect the Americans. Your destiny will be the same of Americans,” the statement said.

    Japan has dispatched about 500 troops to southern Iraq for non-combat duty to rebuild local schools, provide medical supplies and supply clean water.

    Thanks, Philippines, for joining Spain in the Coalition of the Wilting. You’ve helped to make the world a more dangerous place.

  • The $6 Million Cutthroat Payoff

    Move over, Steve Austin. We apparently have a new six-million-dollar man.

    A tip of the CVC to Michelle Malkin for her post on a possible additional clause to accompany the Philippine withdrawal from Iraq for the sake of hostage Angelo de la Cruz.

    A ransom of $6 million was offered and paid out to the Iraqi rebels holding Filipino truck driver Angelo de la Cruz hostage, to ensure his release before President Arroyo’s scheduled State of the Nation Address on July 26, a high level Philippine intelligence officer told the Tribune yesterday. This offer was alleged to have been approved by the President herself, who then tapped Malaysian emissaries for the job, the intelligence officer, who asked for anonymity, said.

    Of the $6-million payoff, $5 million was shouldered by Malaysia and $1 million by the Landbank of the Philippines, the officer added.

    An Asian diplomat, also on condition on anonymity, held the view that this was a very “dangerous” move made by the Philippine government since Mrs. Arroyo has, by negotiating with terrorists on a financial recompense level, opened up the possibility of more kidnap groups in Iraq as well as in Saudi Arabia and other parts of the Middle East seeing the overseas Filipino worker as “easy prey” for them.

    De la Cruz’s whereabouts are unknown, with no words about his condition emanatin [sic] from the Arab TV al-Jazeera, although it is believed that he remains under the custody of the Iraqi rebels.

    Fine, you’ve cowered before the threats of terrorists, surrendered to their demands and slipped them some green for their trouble. You think your people are safe now? Do we even know that de la Cruz is safe? What about the next time these scumbags need a little cash? Nice precedent.

    EDIT: Mr. De la Cruz has been freed. One lucky man traded for who knows what kind of weaponry and logistics $6 million can finance.