Tag Archives: Iraq

Illogical Foreign Policy

Posted on by

The Kurds have been standing up to ISIS since ISIS decided to do horrible things in the Middle East. All of American aid to Iraq goes directly to the Iraqi troops who have, unfortunately, dropped their weapons and run away, giving ISIS access to some really good weapons technology. For whatever reason, the Obama Administration has consistently insisted that all weapons going to Iraq go through Baghdad to Iraqi troops and not directly to the Kurds (who obviously do not cut and run). Well, it’s even worse than that.

Yesterday the U.K. Telegraph reported that the Obama Administration is blocking the attempts of our Middle Eastern allies to send weapons directly to the Kurds.

The article reports:

Some of America’s closest allies say President Barack Obama and other Western leaders, including David Cameron, are failing to show strategic leadership over the world’s gravest security crisis for decades.

They now say they are willing to “go it alone” in supplying heavy weapons to the Kurds, even if means defying the Iraqi authorities and their American backers, who demand all weapons be channelled through Baghdad.

High level officials from Gulf and other states have told this newspaper that all attempts to persuade Mr Obama of the need to arm the Kurds directly as part of more vigorous plans to take on Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Isil) have failed. The Senate voted down one attempt by supporters of the Kurdish cause last month.

The officials say they are looking at new ways to take the fight to Isil without seeking US approval.

I have very mixed emotions about this. First of all, the Gulf states should not need American approval to fight ISIS. They should automatically just do it. However, there is another side of this story. Fighting ISIS strengthens Iran. The only difference between the goals of ISIS and the goals of Iran is who will be in charge of the Islamic Caliphate they want to set up. ISIS and Iran both have plans for a worldwide caliphate which they plan to start in the Middle East. The dispute is over who will rule it and whether it will be Sunni or Shia. Both Iran and ISIS have plans to eliminate Israel, so supporting either one puts the Jewish state at risk. Note also that ISIL stands for “Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.” The Levant includes the land of Israel as part of the Islamic state.

The article further reports:

The Peshmerga have been successfully fighting Isil, driving them back from the gates of Erbil and, with the support of Kurds from neighbouring Syria, re-establishing control over parts of Iraq’s north-west.

But they are doing so with a makeshift armoury. Millions of pounds-worth of weapons have been bought by a number of European countries to arm the Kurds, but American commanders, who are overseeing all military operations against Isil, are blocking the arms transfers.

One of the core complaints of the Kurds is that the Iraqi army has abandoned so many weapons in the face of Isil attack, the Peshmerga are fighting modern American weaponry with out-of-date Soviet equipment.

At least one Arab state is understood to be considering arming the Peshmerga directly, despite US opposition.

I think we need to get out of the way and let the Arab states arm the Peshmerga. In terms of the Middle East, lately we seem to have a gift for coming down on the wrong side of history.

Actions Have Consequences

Posted on by

The withdrawal of American troops in Iraq paved the way for the ISIS takeover. Last Tuesday BBC News posted an article about what life in Mosul, Iraq, is like under ISIS.

I strongly suggest that you follow the link above and read the entire article, but here is one example:

“One day I felt so bored at home that I asked my husband to take me out, even if I had to wear the full khimar [a long, cape-like veil that covers the hair, neck and shoulders completely, but leaves the face clear]. I had not left home since IS took over the city. As I was preparing, he told me I would be forced to put on a niqab [veil for the face]. I was shocked at this and considered staying at home for a moment, but eventually I relented.

We went to a nice restaurant by the river we used to frequent during our engagement. As soon as we sat down, my husband told me that I could finally reveal my face as there was no IS presence and the restaurant was a place for families.

“I was very happy to oblige and so I revealed my face with a large smile. Instantly, the restaurant’s owner came over begging my husband to ask me to hide it again because Islamic State fighters made surprise inspection visits and he would be flogged if they saw me like that.

The article continues:

“I was threatened and harassed [by Sunni extremists] before the capture of Mosul, but I kept on delivering babies for women from all religions and sects. I never differentiate between my patients as I believe everyone deserves equal care.

“However, I had to flee as Mosul fell. I escaped with my body unharmed, but my soul remained where I had left it: at home with my books.

“After moving to Irbil [in Iraq’s Kurdistan region] I received shocking news: Islamic State had confiscated my house and marked it with the letter ‘N’ [for Nasrani – a word used by IS to refer to Christians]. I immediately telephoned my friends in Mosul and begged them to save my books.

“But it was too late. They called back saying my library had been emptied onto the street. However, some of my neighbours were able to rescue some precious books that remain hidden.”

Another story:

Fouad: “I was arrested by IS. They came to our family home looking for my brother. When they couldn’t find him, they decided to take me to prison instead.

“Then they tortured me. The guy who did it wouldn’t stop unless he got tired. He was edgy all the time and he wouldn’t listen to what his prisoners said. He flogged me with a power cable and also tortured me psychologically.

“When my brother handed himself in, they found out that the accusations against him were false but they still kept me in prison until they judged me well enough to leave.

“They had hit me so hard with the cable that the marks are still visible on my back.”

Daily life in Mosul:

“IS takes a quarter of everyone’s salary as a contribution towards paying for rebuilding the city. People can’t say no because they would face harsh punishments. The group controls everything. Rent is paid to it and the hospitals are for its members’ exclusive use.

“The group has even replaced the imams in the mosques with pro-IS people. Many of us have stopped going to the mosques because those attending are asked to give an oath of allegiance and we hate that.

“Meanwhile, my brother was given 20 lashes just because he didn’t shut his shop during prayer time – as if you can just impose religion by force!”

I don’t have an answer–I don’t want American troops there–this is a civil war and we need to stay out of it. However, the rise of ISIS is the result of letting Prime Minister Maliki purge the Iraqi government and army of Sunni Muslims. When President Obama allowed him to do this, we paved the way for what is happening now. The possible answer is to arm the Kurds directly–not go through Baghdad. Meanwhile, the people of Iraq suffer.

It’s Not The Fault Of The American Military

Posted on by

Fox News posted an article today quoting President Obama’s statement that “When a finalized plan is presented to me by the Pentagon, then I will share it with the American people. We don’t yet have a complete strategy.” The statement was made in reference to training Iraqis to fight the Islamic State.

It’s very hard for me not to go totally ballistic on this. Has President Obama forgotten that he ignored the requests of the military to leave American troops there to prevent the takeover of Iraq by Iran (which is essentially what has happened–if we fight against ISIS, we are fighting with Iran)? The American military leaders saw this coming–President Obama chose to ignore their advice. I have no doubt they are continuing to advise the President. I also have no doubt that he is continuing to ignore that advice.

As someone with a family member in the military, I don’t want to see any of our military put in harm’s way unless the rules of engagement are in our favor and unless there is a planned strategy. President Obama’s policies have offered neither.

Military leaders are all about plans for all contingencies and possibilities. President Obama is relying on the ignorance of the American people to avoid taking responsibility for the mess he has made of the Middle East.

Is There A Realist In The House?

Posted on by

While I sit here in North Carolina enjoying the beautiful weather, the Middle East is falling apart. There are three articles in today’s Wall Street Journal that cause me to wonder about the future of the Middle East and the future of America.

The first article, entitled, “Sunni Tribes in Iraq Divided Over Battle Against Islamic State” deals with the problem of tribalism in Iraq. Many Iraqis oppose ISIS. They understand that ISIS is not who they want running their country. They are willing to fight ISIS–right up to the point where as Sunnis they are asked to fight with Shiites. Some Sunnis support the Islamic State being created by ISIS. Many do not. It is very difficult to fight an ISIS takeover of Iraq when all Iraqis do not oppose such a takeover.

The second article, entitled, “Islamic State Gains New Leverage in Syria” deals with the ISIS capture of Palmyra in Syria. Palmyra, home to many archaeological treasures, is now in the hands of a group that has destroyed many archaeological treasures in the past.

The article reports:

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, an opposition group that monitors the conflict via a network of activists inside the country, said that following Palmyra’s fall on Thursday that Islamic State now controls half of the country, including most of its oil fields. The crude provides a steady stream of revenue.

The third article (actually an editorial), entitled “I Don’t Think We’re Losing” deals with President Obama’s recent statement after the fall of Ramadi in Iraq. What does losing look like according to the President?

The article reports:

It’s also worth mulling over Mr. Obama’s claim that he always “anticipated” this would be “a multiyear campaign.” This is the same President who criticized George W. Bush for conducting endless war in Iraq and Afghanistan and vowing to end it in both places. The Iraqi city of Mosul fell last June, Mr. Obama laid out his anti-ISIS strategy in September, and eight months later he promises years of more American commitment to Iraq.

At least Mr. Bush, for all his mistakes after the fall of Saddam Hussein, ordered a change of strategy that left Iraq stable by the time Mr. Obama took office. On present trend Mr. Obama’s Cool Hand Luke generalship will leave his successor an Iraq in turmoil and a mini-caliphate entrenched across hundreds of miles. If this isn’t “losing,” how does the President define victory?

I don’t have the answer to the problems in the Middle East (and the rise of ISIS). However, I do know that there are some very good leaders in our military who do have answers. I question whether or not they are currently being listened to. I do not support ground troops, but also do not support standing idly by as innocent civilians are being killed or forced to flee with only the clothes on their backs. We said ‘never again’ after the holocaust killed millions of Jews. This is our ‘never again.’ ISIS is killing both Jews (if there are any remaining in the Middle East outside of Israel) and Christians. I believe God will hold us accountable for our inaction.

Even When The Obama Administration Helps, It Doesn’t Help Much

Posted on by

On Wednesday, Paul Mirengoff at Power Line posted an article about the battle for Ramadi, Iraq. For whatever reason, American has chosen to provide only minimal air support to help defend the city.

The article reports:

U.S. air strikes had been instrumental in helping to keep ISIS at bay. Without such support, the defenders of Ramadi have said they cannot hold out.

Unfortunately, during the recent rounds of fighting, U.S. air support reportedly was minimal. Local officials say they were told that U.S. aircraft are occupied on other fronts. It’s difficult to imagine what front is more critical right now than Ramadi, the site of some of the most intense fighting by U.S. troops during our war against al Qaeda in Iraq.

U.S. Central Command confirms the paucity of U.S. bombing. A spokeman said that the U.S. made two attacks on ISIS in the Ramadi area during the period from Friday through Monday. On Tuesday, it carried out one additional strike.

We have noted before that the U.S. bombing campaign against ISIS fails remotely to approach the intensity of our efforts during the early days of the Afghanistan war or during the Kosovo campaign. Even so, our failure to average even one raid per day while ISIS came close to overrunning the defenders of Ramadi is shocking.

I fear that the Obama Administration, when looked at in historical perspective, will be seen as generally being on the wrong side of history. Somehow America under President Obama has forsaken the defending of freedom and either directly supported the forces of tyranny or simply stood back as they advanced. This is not who we are.

What Coalition?

Posted on by

The Hill is reporting today that Turkey has stated that it will not allow the United States to use its military bases in Turkey as operational bases against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

The article reports:

National security adviser Susan Rice said Sunday on NBC that Turkey agreed to let the U.S. use its bases and territory, including the Incirlik air base in southern Turkey, to train moderate Syrian rebels.

“That’s the new commitment, and one that we very much welcome,” she said.

However, on Monday, Turkish officials denied reaching such a deal, according to local media reports that said both sides were continuing to discuss the use of the military bases and Turkey’s airspace.

Turkey does not want the United States doing anything that will strengthen Syrian dictator Bashar Assad. Turkey also does not want anything to happen in the area that will strengthen the Kurds.

The awkward situation regarding Turkey, a supposed United States ally, illustrates the complexity of meddling in the Middle East. Every country where America has toppled a tyrannical dictator has disintegrated into chaos. Our ‘good deeds’ have resulted in people dying and an increase in Christian persecution. Oddly enough, I am not including the ousting of Saddam Hussein in this statement. The problem with Saddam Hussein is that had he been left in place, the United Nations would have been totally destroyed. As much as I would not object to the end of the United Nations, it is the world umpire we are currently dealing with and Saddam Hussein was thumbing his nose at the United Nations on a regular basis. Saddam Hussein had violated every condition of the peace treaty signed after the first Gulf War and he needed to be reminded that his behavior was unacceptable.

It is time to put an adviser in the White House that has some understanding of the Middle East. Right now we seem to be lacking that expertise.

 

A Solution To The Middle East Problem From Someone Who Would Know

Posted on by
Lieutenant General William “Jerry” Boykin posted the following on his Facebook page:

 

I have hesitated to write this posting because I have been trying to find an alternative to what I will propose here.

The situation with ISIS is very serious now as I am sure that everyone is aware. The Obama administration is totally inept and not serious about reducing the threat to America and American interests. These airstrikes are not effective because they have not been well directed at real targets in most cases and they have not been in large numbers.

So what do we need to do now? I hate to recommend this but I have considered the alternatives and I find none acceptable.

We need to do 5 things right now:

1. Put forth a significant intel effort against ISIS. This includes flying drones throughout the ISIS area of operations as well as a big Human Intel and Signals Intel effort. The idea is to find ISIS targets and kill them including the leaders and the command and control nodes.

2. Put as many Special Operations teams on the ground as the US Special Operations Command calls for. They should operate with the Kurdish Peshmerga and any Sunni tribal entities who can reasonably be assessed as true anti-ISIS entities. They should be equipped with SOFLAMS (Laser Designators) for controlling air strikes.

3. Deploy ground forces of at least one full US Army Armor or Mechanized division with supporting assets to go into the urban areas and to ferret out ISIS an kill them with anti-tank systems and attack helicopters. Yep, I know this is controversial and I don’t like it either but we have to destroy ISIS and reduce them as a threat. The US division must go in order to convince and persuade other nations to do the same. Even the NATO nations have to see that they either stop these pigs in Iraq and Syria or they will fight them on their home turf in Europe. The same applies to America. Now we cannot deny that they are coming across the US southern border since members of congress are now acknowledging the same thing.

4. Arm the Kurds directly and not through the Iraqi government. Anything going through the Iraq government never gets to the Kurds. Fly plane loads of arms and equipment into the city of Irbil and off load it there where the Kurds will get it themselves.

5. Cancel all foreign aid and foreign military sales of US arms and equipment to any nation that will not fight with us. Start with Turkey. Turkey is not a reliable ally and Erdogan is an Islamist himself. He has no intention of ever doing anything to stop ISIS. He wants Bashar al-Asaad’s head and has no interest in destroying ISIS because they are his strongest allies in the fight against al-Asaad. NO MORE US $ for nations that will not stand with us in the fight against ISIS.

The Problem With Attempting To Rewrite Recent History

Posted on by

The problem with attempting to rewrite recent history is that there are too many people around who remember what actually happened and that some of them write books. Such is the case with the political spin President Obama has used to explain why there were no troops left behind in Iraq.

Paul Mirengoff at Power Line posted an article yesterday about Leon Panetta‘s new book “Worthy Fights,” excerpted in Time Magazine.

The article reports:

In Panetta’s forthcoming memoir “Worthy Fights,” which Time Magazine has excerpted, Panetta argues that Iraqi leaders privately wanted U.S. forces to stay behind after the formal 2011 withdrawal; that the U.S. had “leverage” to strike a deal; and that the Defense and State departments attempted to do so. However, says Panetta, “the President’s team at the White House pushed back” and thus no deal was reached.

This statement agrees with statements made by Ryan Crocker, ambassador to Iraq during the period in question.

National security should not be governed by politics. Unfortunately, under President Obama, every decision is governed by politics. We need to elect leaders who will put the good of America ahead of their own desire for personal gains.

After A While You Wonder If They Mean Anything They Say

Posted on by

When American forces left Iraq, many military people warned that not leaving significant forces behind would be a mistake. The Obama Administration and many political leaders seemed to overlook the fact that we currently have forces in Germany, Japan, and South Korea, despite that fact that those wars have been over for a long time. Despite the warnings from military leaders, President Obama celebrated the fact that our troops were coming home from Iraq, and many Democrats celebrated with him. So what are these people saying now?

Politico posted an article today with the headline, “Liberal doves run as war hawks.”

The article cites a few examples:

Democrat Kay Hagan didn’t mince words about the Iraq War during her 2008 Senate campaign against Republican Elizabeth Dole.

“We need to get out of Iraq in a responsible way,” Hagan declared in May of that year. “We need to elect leaders who don’t invade countries without planning and stay there without an end.”

Hagan is striking a different chord these days. Locked in a tough reelection battle, the first-term senator boasts that she’s more strongly supportive of airstrikes against Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant militants than her Republican challenger, Thom Tillis, and says she’s been pressing the Obama administration to arm Syrian rebels since early last year.

…Take Bruce Braley, the Democratic Senate candidate in Iowa. He picked up a Republican-held House seat largely on the strength of his opposition to the war in Iraq. He backed cutting off funding for military operations and spoke out against the surge.

When his opponent warned at a 2006 debate of chaos if the U.S. cut and ran, Braley responded: “Chaos already is ensuing in Iraq.”

Just last August, Braley demanded Obama get congressional authorization before taking any military action in Syria.

Now Braley is running against military veteran Joni Ernst in one of the most contested Senate races in the country.

“ISIS is a threat that must be stopped,” Braley said during a debate Sunday. “Anytime American citizens are attacked by a terrorist group, they need to be brought to justice or to the grave.”

Follow the link to the article to read more wiggly-worm statements.

Admittedly, the situation in Iraq and the Middle East is fluid, but it is very obvious that many of the positions taken regarding the war in Iraq and the withdrawal of troops have been purely political. In this country there are men and women who love America more than they love political power. We need to start electing them.

 

I Guess Everyone Has An Achilles Heel

Posted on by

Yesterday the New York Post posted an article about the ISIS fighters. They do have a weakness–they are afraid that if they are killed by a woman, they will not go to heaven. This is amazing to me. Despite what President Obama says, ISIS is an Islamic organization–they believe in Sharia Law–that is the reason they have no problem with killing infidels. However, it is interesting to me that a religion that treats women as badly as Islam does has spawned men who are afraid that if they are killed by a woman, they will not go to heaven.

The article in the New York Post reports:

A 27-year-old female Kurdish fighter named Tekoshin fighting in northern Iraq recently gloated to AFP: “I think [ISIS] were more afraid of us than of the men.” The Kalashnikov-toting fighter added: “They believe they’ll go to hell if they die at a woman’s hands.”

Some women who have fled the brutal oppression of ISIS have been organized into special Women’s Protection Units in Syria to do battle.

Hend Hasen Ahmed, a 26-year-old female fighter in Syria’s Kurdish region, told Britain’s Telegraph during the ISIS siege of Mt. Sinjar: “We are being trained to use snipers, Kalashnikovs, rocket-propelled grenades and hand grenades … For myself and for my people, I will go to [Mount] Sinjar to either die or live there freely.”

Radical imams have invoked interpretations of Koran passages to recruit jihadists, promising them a trip to paradise and 72 brown-eyed virgins if they die in battle or in what’s considered a martyrdom operation.

Seeing a woman staring at them down the barrel of a machine gun apparently isn’t what they had in mind.

I have very mixed emotions about sending women into combat–I think it goes against the natural feminine instinct, but it does make sense to me to see women standing to defend their country–it reminds me of a mother bear protecting her cubs–not something you want to mess with. With superman it was kryptonite; with ISIS it is women fighting to defend their country. We need to find a way to use this to our advantage.

Politics Is More Important Than Action

Posted on by

We have been hearing for a while now that ISIS is a serious threat. President Obama has made a few speeches emphasizing the importance of recognizing and dealing with the threat. I suspect most Americans who are actually paying attention also believe that ISIS is a threat. So what does the Senate do?

Yesterday The Hill reported that Senate Democrats have decided to debate and vote on a broad resolution authorizing military strikes against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) after the election.

The article reports:

“We’re going to take up the construction of a new authorization for the use of military force. It’s long overdue,” said Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.).

The authorization would focus narrowly on ISIS, likely bar the deployment of ground troops and set a one-year time limit on military action.

The plan to vote on a resolution specifically authorizing strikes against the extremist Sunni group could help reassure liberal Democrats nervous about supporting a measure that authorizes President Obama to train and equip moderate rebels in Syria.

Durbin announced the roadmap at a Democratic leadership press conference shortly before the chamber was scheduled to vote on a government funding measure that included the so-called Title 10 authority to train the rebels.

Durbin said he is pushing the measure with Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) and Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.).

“This is one of the most important votes we can cast,” he said.

Durbin said the Senate would take up the measure when the pending authorization for training Syrian rebels expires on Dec. 11.

I guess the Senate Democrats believe that ISIS is a problem that can wait until after the election. That belief goes on my rather long list of reasons the Democrats in the Senate need to be voted out of office. If the threat of ISIS is as important as the President says it is, the Senate needs to figure out what it wants to do to counter the threat as soon as possible.

The Basics Of ISIS

Posted on by

One of the things Vince Lombardi was remembered for is a speech he gave to the Green Bay Packers after they lost to a team that they should have easily beaten. The morning after the loss, he called a practice. As his team (normally a championship team) sat there, he picked up a football and said,“Okay, we go back to the basics this morning. . . . Gentlemen, this is a football.” Sometimes it is a really good idea to get back to basics.

Breitbart.com posted an article today listing seven facts about ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria) that every American should know.

Here is the list:

1. ISIS Began in the 1990s

2.  ISIS is Led by a Man Released from a U.S. Detention Camp in 2009

3.  ISIS is the Richest Terror Organization in the World

4.  The Number of ISIS Fighters Has Tripled to 31,500

5. ISIS has an Estimated 2,000 Westerners in its Ranks

6.  ISIS Now Controls 35,000 Square Miles in Iraq and Syria

7.  In Addition to Beheadings, ISIS Has Carried Out Mass Executions and Rapes

Please follow the link above to the article at Breitbart.com to read the details. ISIS is a serious threat to Western Civilization. It would be to our advantage to recognize that fact.

Misinformed Or Lying?

Posted on by

In his speech last night, President Obama said, “Now let’s make two things clear: ISIL is not Islamic. No religion condones the killing of innocents, and the vast majority of ISIL’s victims have been Muslim. And ISIL is certainly not a state. It was formerly Al Qaeda’s affiliate in Iraq and has taken advantage of sectarian strife and Syria’s civil war to gain territory on both sides of the Iraq-Syrian border. It is recognized by no government nor by the people it subjugates. ISIL is a terrorist organization, pure and simple. And it has no vision other than the slaughter of all who stand in its way.”

I beg to differ. The Koran states in Q9:5:

“So when the sacred months have passed, then fight and slay the pagans wherever you find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem of war; but if they repent and establish regular prayers, and practice regular charity, then leave their way free to them; for surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.”

‘Pagans’ are to convert of die. The Christians have fled in every town ISIS has taken–they have been told to convert of be killed. The killing of infidels is commanded in Islam. We need leaders who understand that. Obviously, President Obama does not, or he is lying.

Evidence Of The Decline Of America

Posted on by

On Monday, the Washington Post reported that Egypt and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) carried out a series of airstrikes in Tripoli, Libya. Neither country informed the United States before taking action.

The article reports:

The airstrikes appear tied to fear over the growing muscle of Islamist militias. The region’s monarchies and secular dictatorships are increasingly alarmed about Islamist gains from Libya to Syria and Iraq. And the airstrikes may signal a new willingness by some Arab states to take on a more direct military role in the region’s conflicts.

Various groups in Libya have been battling for control of the main Tripoli airport, and the strikes may have been a failed attempt to keep the strategic facility from falling to extremists.

Our intervention in Libya was a mistake. The only true justification for America’s getting involved was to protect the oil fields that supply Europe with oil. There is also some questions as to whether of not Gaddafi was planning to begin to trade oil in currency other than American dollars. If he had done that, it would have crashed the American economy. Gaddafi had turned over his weapons of mass destruction after the United States had invaded Iraq. He was a horrible dictator, but there was no assurance that he would be replaced with anything less horrible. The Obama Administration’s decision to bomb Libya as part of the ‘Arab Spring’ only strengthened the grip of the multiple terrorist groups in Libya and surrounding areas.

President Obama’s foreign policy in the Middle East has been a disaster. It will take years to restore the faith in the United States that our allies once had and to undo the damage President Obama has done by supporting the enemies of democracy.

A Subtlety That I Didn’t Understand

Posted on by

Allen West posted an article on his blog today explaining the difference between ISIS and ISIL. The Obama Administration and some news sources have begun to use the word ISIL instead of ISIS to describe the terrorists making their way across Iraq. I really wasn’t paying much attention to the change, but Colonel West explains the difference.

The article explains:

This week I listened to two Obama administration spokesmen, Josh “Not So” Earnest from the White House, and Rear Admiral Kirby from the Pentagon in relation to the Islamic terrorist army freely operating in Iraq and Syria. These two individuals and many other voices out of the Obama administration refer to them as ISIL (Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant). The group has professed the establishment of an Islamic caliphate and refers to itself as IS (Islamic State). The manner in which we should all be referring to this savage and barbaric group is ISIS (Islamic State in Iraq and Syria).

 …First, if you choose to refer to this group as ISIL, you have basically rewritten the map of the Middle East and fallen into the trap of not recognizing the existence of Israel and also Lebanon. If you use ISIL you are then validating the Islamic totalitarian and jihadist claim that the modern day Jewish State of Israel is an occupation state and does not exist.

The Obama Administration has used some strange words in the past when referring to events in the Middle East. At a Ramadan dinner at the White House, Obama counter-terrorism advisor John Brennan referred to Jerusalem as Al Quds–a name that has a significant meaning to Muslim extremists. The name of the city is Jerusalem. It is the capital of Israel. The Arabs do not have the right to rename it. This is also the administration that referred to the shooting at Fort Hood as ‘workplace violence.’

The article reminds us:

Lastly, we need to address this group as ISIS because it is seeking to establish an Islamic state within the borders of two recognized nation-states; Iraq and Syria. ISIS can attempt to break down any borders and not recognize them, but we must. We cannot allow this group to reestablish some 7th century regional caliphate and therefore must fight to reestablish sovereignty.

Now, I would much rather use this crisis as a means to establish something long since needed — a separate country called Kurdistan — but my focus would be on destroying ISIS. There is an opportunity here to truly promote a country where there can be respect and coexistence of Muslims, Christians, and other religious minorities. A place that would thoroughly reject the idea of Islamic jihadism and would continue to be a reliable ally of the United States.

It is a shame that the Obama Administration does not include people with the understanding of the Middle East that Allen West represents. A more qualified group of presidential advisers might have avoided the disaster that President Obama’s foreign policy has become.

While The Press Was Covering Ferguson…

Posted on by

Yesterday, Hot Air reported on four murders that the press seems to have overlooked. Ali Muhammad Brown was suspected of killing three Seattle men. He is now accused of shooting 19-year-old Brendan Tevlin eight times at a West Orange traffic light in New Jersey in June.

The article reports:

He sought revenge against America for what he said was the wanton killing of civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan. Tevlin was allegedly Brown’s fourth victim.

Brown’s victims, with the exception of Tevlin, had a similar background: they were young, gay men.

…Brown may eventually face federal and/or state-level terrorism charges, but few press accounts of his attacks – most of them in local outlets — state clearly that Islamic jihadist ideology inspired him. “All these lives are taken every single day by America, by this government. So a life for a life,” court documents allege Brown said of United States actions in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Some outlets are not mincing words about the nature of Brown’s crimes. A July report via a Seattle-based Fox affiliate described Brown as a “radical jihadist” who targeted homosexual men, but few have followed suit.

Brown was an Islamist who targeted homosexual men. Under Sharia Law, homosexuals are subject to the death penalty. He was simply acting within the bounds of his religion. Somehow the press does not seem to be concerned with this man who killed four men in America in the name of jihad. The jihadis are already among us. Unfortunately, the press is not keeping us informed.

.

 

Why Guantanamo Needs To Stay Open And Adding Prisoners

Posted on by

In June, the U.K. Mail posted an article identifying the leader of ISIS as someone America once had in custody in Iraq. If you choose to follow the link, be aware that there are some graphic pictures posted there.

The article reports:

The United States once had Islamic State of Iraq and al-Shams (ISIS) leader Abu Bakr al Baghdadi in custody at a detention facility in Iraq, but president Barack Obama let him go, it was revealed on Friday.

Al Baghdadi was among the prisoners released in 2009 from the U.S.’s now-closed Camp Bucca near Umm Qasr in Iraq.

Had Al Baghdadi been shipped to Guantanamo when he was captured in 2005 (under President Bush) and kept there, the situation in Iraq, Syria, and the rest of the area might be a little different.

The article reports:

The story of how Baghadadi ended up in U.S. custody in the first place and later came to be the leader of a violent terrorist group is the stuff of legend.

It is said by some that al Baghadadi was in the wrong place at the wrong time when he was picked up by the U.S. military, a farmer who got caught up in a massive sweep. It was at Camp Bucca that he was radicalized and became a follower of Osama Bin Laden.

Another version of the story is that al Baghadadi, who also goes by the alias of Abu Duaa, was an Islamic fundamentalist before the U.S. invaded Iraq and he became a leader in al Qaeda‘s network before he was arrested and detained by American forces in 2005.

‘Abu Duaa was connected to the intimidation, torture and murder of local civilians in Qaim,’ according to a 2005 U.S. intelligence report.

‘He would kidnap individuals or entire families, accuse them, pronounce sentence and then publicly execute them.’

Releasing this man from prison was not smart, he should have been executed for his crimes.

The article concludes (remember this article was posted in June):

The news that the U.S. may have played a role in the rise of the new Osama bin Laden comes just a week after President Obama released five Taliban commanders in exchange for a U.S. soldier being held hostage by the terrorist network.

Lawmakers immediately questioned the logic of the president’s decision, saying that the move could end up backfiring on the U.S. if the five fighters return to the battlefield in Afghanistan once their mandatory one-year stay in Qatar comes to a close.

They are especially concerned given the president’s announcement just days before their release that he plans to withdraw the majority of America’s troops in Afghanistan by the end of this year.

Already one, of the Taliban 5 have vowed to return to Afghanistan to fight American soldiers there once he is able.

‘I wouldn’t be doing it if I thought that it was contrary to American national security,’ the president said at the time.

Stay tuned.

A Tribute To James Foley

Posted on by

National Review posted an article on line today about the death of James Foley. James Foley was beheaded by ISIS. The video was posted online with a threat to America regarding the other Americans the terrorist organization is holding. James Foley showed himself to be a man of courage as he faced death from these barbarians.

The article reports:

The video, entitled “A Message to America,” begins with President Obama’s announcement of military operations against ISIS. It then transitions to a sandy hilltop, where James Foley kneels before a man in black coveralls and a full black mask. Foley is wearing an orange jumpsuit and begins to read a forced message: He is made to tell us that “he died” the day that America intervened against the Islamic State. He’s made to blame his brother, a U.S. Air Force serviceman, and President Obama for his looming death. He’s made to state that he wishes he had “more time” and “the hope of freedom” (the Islamic State revels in teasing its prisoners with lost hope) to see his family again. Foley is made to say that he wishes he “wasn’t an American.”

Then, waving a knife, in a British accent dripping with hatred, the ISIS fanatic speaks.

He complains about American interference in Iraq. He claims that the Islamic State represents all Muslims and thus possesses inherent moral sovereignty.

He then beheads Mr. Foley.

This is what we are up against. We ignore it at our own peril. If you don’t believe that America is in any danger, google “The Holy Land Foundation Trial” and look at the exhibits. Included in the exhibits is the Muslim Brotherhood‘s plan to take over America.

The Holy Land Foundation Trial was the result of a traffic stop by a Maryland Transportation Authority Police officer in August 2004. The officer observed a woman wearing traditional Islamic garb videotaping the support structures of the Chesapeake Bay Bridge. The officer stopped the vehicle and found that the driver, Ismail Elbarasse, had an outstanding material witness warrant issued in Chicago in a Hamas case. After obtaining a warrant, the FBI searched Elbarasse’s home and found a hidden sub-basement. In the basement were the archives of the Muslim Brotherhood in North America. Those archives formed the exhibits in the Holy Land Foundation Trial. Every American should read them.

And So It Begins…

Posted on by

Those of us who are old enough to remember Vietnam are getting a little nervous about what is happening in the Middle East–for various reasons. The American involvement in the war in Vietnam actually began in 1950 under President Harry Truman, who sent the Military Assistance Advisory Group (MAAG) to assist the French. President Kennedy increased our commitment, and it began. South Vietnam fell when a Democrat Congress refused to send them the aid they needed to stand. This is somewhat similar to what happened in Iraq when President Obama did not get a strong status of forces agreement to maintain stability. Now, despite claims to the contrary, we are back in Iraq.

Paul Mirengoff at Power Line posted an article today stating that we are sending 130 military advisers to northern Iraq to assess the situation there. It seems to me that we already have a pretty good idea what the situation in Iraq is. We have an extremist Islamic terrorist group killing people who will not convert to Islam. They have no problem killing women and children. I have no idea what the proper course of action is at this point. The Obama Administration has made so many bad decisions I am not sure it is capable of making a good decision. Meanwhile, the world seems to be turning away from the genocide that is happening.

The article at Power Line concludes:

President Obama claims that he’s determined not to do “stupid [stuff].” It would be nice if, in addition, he abjured “half-assed [stuff].”

Combating ISIS with a few pinprick airstrikes and a small number of advisers is half-assed. Fox News reported this morning that U.S. military commanders have compared our limited action against ISIS to “whac-a-mole.”

ISIS is powerful and is becoming more so by the week. But it is not unstoppable, as has been seen in Syria.

ISIS found the Iran-backed Syrian regime too tough a nut to crack, so it turned to the U.S.-backed (sort of) Iraqi government, correctly perceiving that it is low hanging fruit

In short ISIS’s approach is to probe for weakness. When it finds weakness, it runs rampant.

Northern Iraq is the first place where ISIS has encountered the U.S. military. It is imperative that ISIS not find weakness there.

At some point the democracies of the world are going to have to unite against ISIS and ISIS-type groups.

How Wars End

Posted on by

Yesterday Frank Gaffney posted a short article at the Center for Security Policy website entitled, “How Wars Don’t End.” In his article he reminds us that President Obama once explained to America that unilateral withdrawals from conflicts is “how wars end in the 21st Century.”

Well. so much for that.

The article states:

Recent events in Iraq show that – in our time, as throughout history – unless both sides in a war agree to stop fighting, the conflict will continue. Such fighting generally comes at the expense of the interests or security of the party that calls it quits.

The mayhem in Iraq that has flowed from President Obama’s decision to “end the war” there unilaterally has reached the point where he felt compelled yesterday to authorize renewed U.S. airstrikes.

The trouble is that his delusional approach to ending wars is of a piece with his tendency to micromanage, limit and, thereby, make ineffectual the military operations he does approve.

I hope we don’t have to put actual boots on the ground again in Iraq, but it breaks my heart to see the gains we made with the surge thrown away. I truly believe that had we left forces there, there would have been enough pressure on Prime Minister Maliki to create a more inclusive government. Now we are faced with a radical caliphate in the Middle East that will grow to include some of the countries that in the past have supported us. Being an ally of America doesn’t mean much right now, and our abandonment of the Iraqis is an illustration of that. Hopefully air power will be enough to stop the slaughter of the innocent Christians that is currently taking place.

Why There Is So Little Reporting On The Actions Of Hamas

Posted on by

A website called Legal Insurrection posted an article yesterday about the lack of reporting in the mainstream media about the activities of Hamas.

You may recall a April 11, 2003, New York Times article by Easton Jordan entitled “The News We Kept To Ourselves.” The article states:

Over the last dozen years I made 13 trips to Baghdad to lobby the government to keep CNN’s Baghdad bureau open and to arrange interviews with Iraqi leaders. Each time I visited, I became more distressed by what I saw and heard — awful things that could not be reported because doing so would have jeopardized the lives of Iraqis, particularly those on our Baghdad staff.

For example, in the mid-1990’s one of our Iraqi cameramen was abducted. For weeks he was beaten and subjected to electroshock torture in the basement of a secret police headquarters because he refused to confirm the government’s ludicrous suspicion that I was the Central Intelligence Agency’s Iraq station chief. CNN had been in Baghdad long enough to know that telling the world about the torture of one of its employees would almost certainly have gotten him killed and put his family and co-workers at grave risk.

That is the way thugs in the Middle East handle reporters. Things have not changed–that is the modus operandi used by Hamas.

The article at Legal Insurrection reports:

The Times of Israel confirmed several incidents in which journalists were questioned and threatened. These included cases involving photographers who had taken pictures of Hamas operatives in compromising circumstances — gunmen preparing to shoot rockets from within civilian structures, and/or fighting in civilian clothing — and who were then approached by Hamas men, bullied and had their equipment taken away.

The article at Legal Insurrection included tweets from reporters and stories of intimidation of reporters. The reason we are not hearing both sides of the story of the Gaza-Israeli war is that one side is a bunch of thugs who are endangering their own civilian population and doing everything they can to hide the truth.

The Religion Of Peace In Mosul

Posted on by

In case you had any illusions about being a Christian and co-existing with Muslims, the recent events in Mosul, Iraq, should end them rather quickly. Yesterday CNN posted an article about the the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria‘s (ISIS) takeover of Mosul.

The article reports:

On Friday, the al Qaeda splinter group issued an ultimatum to Iraqi Christians living in Mosul — by Saturday at noon (5 a.m. ET), they must convert to Islam, pay a fine or face “death by the sword.”

A total of 52 Christian families left the city of Mosul early Saturday morning, with an armed group prohibiting some of them from taking anything but the clothes on their backs.

“They told us, ‘You to leave all of your money, gold, jewelry and go out with only the clothes on you,'” Wadie Salim told CNN.

Sharia Law requires that Christians either convert to Islam or pay a tax called a jizya. Paying the tax is done in such a way that the Christian shows submission to Islam. It involves a blow to the neck of the head of the family, recognizing that the tax is paid for the privilege of keeping his head.

The killing of Christians by Muslim is advocated in the Koran. The Koran states:

It is He who has sent His Messenger with the guidance and the religion of truth, that He may cause it to triumph over every religion. (Q48:28)

What ISIS is doing is according to Sharia Law. It is Islam according to the Koran. Islam and Democracy are not compatible, and Islam and Christianity cannot co-exist.

ISIS Continues Its Reign Of Terror In Iraq

Posted on by

Yesterday the U.K. Mail Online reported that the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIS) has attacked and destroyed several centuries-old graves in the northwest city of Mosul in Ninevah. Among the graves destroyed was the grave of the Old Testament prophet Jonah. Jonah was revered by both Christians and Muslims, but ISIS believes that giving special reverence to tombs and relics is against Islam.

The article also reports:

…more than 50 bodies have been discovered by Iraqi authorities in an agricultural area outside the city of Hillah, just south of Baghdad, today.

Military spokesman Brigadier General Saad Maan Ibrahim said most of the 53 bodies were found blindfolded with their hands bound and several gunshot wounds.

The grisly discovery in Hillah, a predominantly Shiite city around 60 miles south of Baghdad, has raised concerns over a possible sectarian killing amid the battle against a Sunni insurgency.

Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has accused the Kurds in northern Iraq of harboring extremists. Meanwhile, the Kurds are working hard to protect their area of Iraq from ISIS.

ISIS is acting in a way very similar to the way the Taliban acted when they took over Afghanistan.

What is happening in Iraq is partially the result of the fact that American forces were withdrawn. Had American forces remained, we would have been able to exert enough pressure on al-Maliki to prevent his purging his military from Sunnis and putting his cronies in their places. One of the reasons the Iraqi army fled was that it was not the trained Iraqi army that we had assembled–it was a bunch of political hacks put in place by al-Maliki.

I am not optimistic about what is happening in Iraq. Even with American help, the country is going to disintegrate. The civil war between the Shiites and the Sunnis will continue and various terrorist groups in the Middle East will take advantage of that fact. It would be a mistake for America to get involved in Iraq again. However, we should support the Kurds and provide relief for the refugees who have fled to the Kurdish areas.

 

 

 

 

It’s Not A Matter Of Intelligence

Posted on by

On Wednesday, the Center for Security Policy posted an article about the recent offensive in Iraq by State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) terrorists.

The article states:

Some former intelligence officers are blaming this failure on a lack of human intelligence sources in Iraq and an over-reliance on technical intelligence collection.

Congressman Mike Rogers, R-Mich., the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, disagrees. He says the Iraq crisis is a policy and not an intelligence failure.

Rogers says the signs were there about the ISIS threat and the deteriorating situation in Iraq but Obama officials ignored them. He contends that “It was very clear to me years ago that ISIS was pooling up in a dangerous way — building training camps, drawing in jihadists from around the world. We saw all of that happening.”

 What happened in Iraq was to a large extent the result of the failure of America to leave troops there after we declared the war in Iraq. The troops would not have been as much of a military force as a limiting force against the retribution of the Shiite government against the Sunnis who had previously been in power.

The author of the article, Fred Fleitz writes:

 I believe the crisis in Iraq is a major U.S. policy failure due to the Obama administration’s failure to leave a small troop presence behind after the 2011 troop withdrawal and the repeated tendency by Obama officials to discount and downplay the continuing threat from radical Islamist groups. We saw this in September 2012 when Obama officials claimed the attacks on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi was the result of an anti-Muslim video and not an attack by radical Islamists.

The intelligence oversight committees should review classified analysis on Iraq, Syria, and ISIS produced over the last year to determine whether intelligence agencies failed to provide adequate warning of the ISIS threat. I believe such an inquiry will find that U.S. intelligence analysts provided the Obama administration with excellent analysis about ISIS and the deteriorating situation in Iraq but Obama officials ignored it.

 President Obama’s Middle East policy has been a failure. It is time for him to either listen to the people giving him good advice or find people who will give him good advice.

How To Effectively Combat A Smear Campaign

Posted on by

The prisoner exchange involving Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl was controversial to say the least. When members of his platoon spoke out about the circumstances of his disappearance, some White House supporters began a whisper campaign about these men–questioning the veracity of their observations.

Rep. Tom Cotton is a veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan. His comments during a Joint Subcommittee of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs held yesterday are an example of how you correctly handle a smear campaign.

The comments are posted on YouTube (and below):