Osama's New Recruits "Cut and Run"

"The youth (Muslim fighters in Somalia) were surprised at the low morale of the American soldiers and realized more than before that the American soldier was a paper tiger and after a few blows ran in defeat. And America forgot all the hoopla and media propaganda ... about being the world leader and the leader of the New World Order, and after a few blows they forgot about this title and left, dragging their corpses and their shameful defeat."  -- Osama Bin Laden in a 1998 interview with ABC reporter John Miller. 

Wherever Osama Bin Laden now hides, he and his fellow network of terrorists must be pleased with the current divide in America over the war in Iraq and the war on terror.  Perhaps, despite huge losses of so called martyrs, they think they are about to turn the corner and become victorious by default.

The main stream media (MSM) and liberal Democrats have in effect become Osama's biggest weapon of mass destruction.  Even some Republicans have weighed in on the side of Osama.  Propaganda you see may have become Osama’s most potent weapon and he is a master of it with a little help of course.

The daily talking points about the President, the U.S. military, the lies, the torture have taken a toll on the U.S. public.  We are told we are not winning the war in Iraq or the war on terror.  That we are creating more terrorists everyday.  That we are the cause, not the solution.  We are failures plain and simple.

So how do we correct our so called mistakes?  We cut and run as Osama predicted we would.  And from looking at the polling data and listening to the calls by Democrats and some Republicans that unfortunately is the direction we as a Nation are heading.

War should not have to be sold but in this day and age it does.  And if this is the case the Administration has done a poor job in salesmanship.  Repeat and repetition are keys to long term sales success and the Democrats, the left, and the MSM have done a better job.

Americans do not think long term and our long term memory is short.  We are the “now” generation demanding quick action.  Maybe we are not designed to take on a long struggle like our ancestors did.  Thank god they were willing to engage in long struggles during the development of our country years ago.  If not we would not be here today.

Whatever the reasons for going to war in Iraq it was the right decision at the time.  Saddam Hussein’s so called containment was only an illusion.  Support for the sanctions were failing and Saddam knew this.  The UN Oil for Food Program was funding the collapse of his containment as we all know now years after he crawl out of a “spider hole” outside a small town in Iraq.

Victor Davis Hanson’s piece “Saddam in 2005! Just imagine a different Iraq…” is worthwhile reading to illustrate what could have happened if Saddam was still in power.

Furthermore does anyone think that with Iran racing toward a nuclear weapon (unchecked by the way) Saddam would have not done the same?  How long after these two countries obtain nuclear weapons would it take for Syria to join the club.  Does anyone think they would not use them against their neighbors?  And if Saddam died while still in power in Iraq would it be more stable with one of his sons in power?

The deaths of 2,000 brave young men and women in the U.S. military would be only a fraction of the pending deaths in the years to come if we have not taken action.  Would the U.S. be able to stomach 20,000 dead in a few short months?  Would our foreign policy prior to 9/11, focused on diplomacy, failure to act, Nobel Peace prizes to former Presidents and terrorist leaders have been better?  History says no.

Our foreign policy prior to 9/11 did not care when tens of thousands men, women and children were murdered by machetes in Africa. Or genocide in the Sudan, a dictator gassing his own people, a country shooting at military aircraft in a “no fly zone”, a country continually breaking U.N. resolutions, terrorist’s killing innocent civilians, a young women shot in the head for listening to music in Afghanistan, 3,000 murdered on 9/11, the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole, the first World Trade Center bombing and a declaration of war by Osama bin Laden on the U.S. in the late 90’s.

Yet those were the good ole times.

For those who think Saddam had nothing to do with terrorism or was not a threat to the U.S. let’s review:

He funded several terrorist organizations such as Abu Nidal, Ansar al-Islam, Arab Liberation Front, Hamas, Kurdistan Workers Party, Mujahedin-e-Khalq and the Palestine Liberation Front.  Estimate killed 811, wounded 2,667 (Americans killed 36 and 91 wounded).

Abu Musab al Zarqawi, after running an al-Qaeda training camp in Afghanistan, he found his way to Baathist Baghdad, where he reportedly checked into Olympic Hospital, an elite facility run by the late Uday Hussein, son of the captured tyrant. Zarqawi is believed to have received medical treatment for a leg injury sustained while dodging American GIs who toppled the Taliban. He convalesced in Baghdad for some two months. Once he was back on his foot, Zarqawi then opened an Ansar al-Islam terrorist training camp in northern Iraq. Zarqawi is thought to be behind the October 28, 2002 assassination of this man, Lawrence Foley.  (And we are told daily that al-Qaeda was not in Iraq prior to the U.S. attack)

Abdul Rahman Yasin, this Indiana-born, Iraqi-reared terrorist (Iraqi passport) remains wanted by the FBI for his role in the February 26, 1993 World Trade Center attack. President Bill Clinton's Justice Department indicted Yasin for mixing the chemicals in the bomb that exploded in the parking garage beneath the Twin Towers, killing six and injuring 1,042 people in New York.  Soon after the smoke cleared, Yasin returned to Iraq. Coalition forces have discovered documents that show he enjoyed housing and a monthly Iraqi government salary.

Abu Abbas masterminded the 1985 hijacking of the ocean liner Achille Lauro during which American retiree Leon Klinghoffer was murdered. U.S. troops captured Abbas in Baghdad.

Abu Nidal’s terrorist gang killed 407 people, including 10 Americans, and wounded 788 more. He lived in Baghdad between 1999 and his mysterious shooting death in August 2002. 

September 11 hijackers Nawaz al-Hamzi and Khalid al-Midhar were on American Airlines Flight 77 when it slammed into the Pentagon and killed 216 people. The two terrorists reportedly met Iraqi VIP airport greeter Ahmad Hikmat Shakir in Kuala Lampur, Malaysia, on January 5, 2000, whereupon he escorted them to a 9/11 planning meeting.

Hussein paid bonuses of up to $25,000 to the families of Palestinian homicide bombers.

The Czech government stands by its claim that September 11 leader Mohamed Atta met in Prague in April 2001 with Ahmed Khalil Ibrahim al Ani, an Iraqi diplomat/intelligence agent.  (Unfortunately we may never know the actual involvement or help these high-jackers ever received by any country, including Iraq.  They took that information to their death)

This was a Saddam Hussein contained as we are told and was not a threat to the U.S.  Meanwhile Joe Wilson (a diplomat and not a weapons expert) sipped tea in Niger to get the so called truth about uranium sought by Iraq.

So we as a Nation have forgotten why we are at war.  Osama has a new group of recruits in the Nation’s capitol and we are losing, as we are told daily, the war in Iraq and the war on terror.

There’s only one word to sum this up.  “NUTS”

(Gen. Anthony Clement McAuliffe is best remembered for uttering a single word -- no mean feat, considering that even the shortest Bible verse has two. Commanding the U.S. Army’s beleaguered and surrounded 101st Airborne Division during World War II’s Battle of the Bulge, McAuliffe received a German surrender ultimatum. "Nuts!" he replied, and became a lasting symbol of American courage and determination under fire.)

From "Iraq the Model"

(This is a thought by an Iraqi blogger, "Iraq the Model" that is worth reading.  He is also linked in our blog roll on the right hand column.  Really worth reading on a regular basis)

I know some who would agree with Murtha, but who?

It’s becoming obvious now that most of the regional powers including Arab countries as well as many former Ba’ath leaders began to realize that defeating America and pro-democracy Iraqis is not a reasonable objective anymore and that’s why they are making steps to join and/or support the political process. This came in the form of lowering the ceiling of their demands from an immediate withdrawal of coalition forces to setting a timetable for the process and this is what we’re hearing from the hardcore Sunni parties and people who speak for the Iraqi militant groups and in the Arab League’s attempts to host a reconciliation meeting.

The previous two and a half years lacked such moves and their appearance at this stage indicates that these opposition parties and Arab policy makers are getting tired of armed confrontation with the Iraqi and US forces since this confrontation hasn’t done them any good.

Maybe the most significant recent statement in this regard is the one made by Egypt’s foreign minister when he said that US forces presence in Iraq is necessary to “stabilize the country” and warned that a civil war could erupt if these troops leave now.

Such a statement lead us to the conclusion that countries like Egypt are no longer placing their money on the armed insurgency. And I really think they were forced to make this change in attitude because Iraq now is less than a month away from electing its first permanent (4 year term) government and the situation is no longer representing a temporary or transitional phenomenon but rather a solid transformation that began to take shape.

However, there are still some elements that have different goals of course but they all think that they can reach these goals through pushing America to leave Iraq; I’m talking about elements like Asad, al-Qaeda and Murtha.
In spite of the differences, neither is following logic and we do need to work on changing their minds (each in a different suitable way).

I can’t imagine why Mr. Murtha said something like “is evident that continued military action in Iraq is not in the best interests of the United States of America, the Iraqi people or the Persian Gulf region”.

It is really strange when a US representative says something like this few weeks after the elected Iraqi government demanded from the UN to extend the mission of coalition forces for another year; apparently my government (and I) do not think that US military presence is harmful for us and the Arab League also thinks that an immediate withdrawal would be disastrous for Iraq and the region.

And correct me if I’m wrong but I think I heard a few days ago that the US senate rejected a law that demanded setting a timetable for troops withdrawal (58 vs. 40, right?) let alone an immediate one.

However, I agree with Mr. Murtha that some people in Iraq would benefit from an immediate withdrawal but that would be al-Qaeda and there are also countries in the region that would benefit from that too but these would be Syria and Iran!