Michael Yon is terrific. Also, it has gotten little news coverage, but there has been some significant non-military (read: political) developements in Iraq. Oil-sharing plan passsed, changes in de-bathification procedures allowing more BINO (bathisit in name only) former employees to get their jobs back (ranks of which makes up some of insurgency), Some movement on the Kirkuk question, the formation of the Anbar Salvation Front (tribes and indigenous insurgent groups) fighting AQI in Anbar and the visit by Maliki to Ramadi to meet with the leader coupled with local disdain over their representation, Mutlaq in particular, ongoing discussions between MNF and non-AQI insurgent groups, etc etc. Definite changes on the political front, coupled with palpable security improvements in Baghdad (see curfew changes, recent ABCnews report, M Yon, etc ). Of course the counter-move by the insurgents-AQI has yet to really occur, but I am optimistic about Iraq for the first time since Zarq was zapped. Lets hope we can keep the momentum going, and neutralize the emerging insurgent base in Diyala province (and not get too distracted by Iran...please)
Sounds like we've got Haji ont he run Ryan. When are you going to enlist ? You don't want to miss the action.
Jason, do you ever not use ad hominem attacks, and maybe argue a point on its merits?
hi jason,
are you blogging from afghanistan? that part of the GWOT that you pretend to support.
Remember, Jason and his Dem cohorts have outlawed the use of the term GWOT.
Isn't everybody "glad" that Jason's back?
Not to necessarily defend Jason's methods, but the difference between Afghanistan and Iraq is that Iraq was a war of CHOICE, whereas Afghanistan was a legitimate response, supported by most of our European allies, against an attack on American soil. I think Jason is merely suggesting that those who CHOOSE a war of CHOICE should be the one's to step up and fight it.
I'm not sure I follow your definition of 'War of Choice.'
For one, I fail to see how Afghanistan isn't a war of choice.' It seems to be the only non-'War of Choice' is something akin to the War of 1812- a direct military invasion.
And I didn't choose to go to war in Iraq, my government did. And if you say I had the opportunity to end it by voting for Kerry, I don't think that would be an accurate statement given his positions.
America is no safer today than the day before we went into Iraq. There was no impending danger from Saadam within the United States. We chose to go in, a choice I now think was a mistake. You chose to defend and support the war, as did many Republicans. You chose to support the man who got us into the war in the first place, who really did make the choice. If you think it was the right choice, I respect it (though I'd have to question your reasoning at this point), but it was nevertheless a war of choice.
Afghanistan was necessary in order for us to capture a man who directly attacked the United States. Averting our eyes from this to send troops to a war of choice was negligence at best. I appreciate your comments about Kerry and understand that there were probably other reasons for your Bush vote, but there have been many who have chose to go against this war from the beginning. I now think that these people are right-minded, though I still try to shy away from more radical elements of the anti-war movement.
Mike, do you think we are "safer" now than before we went into Afghanistan, considering you say it was to capture bin Laden, and we have yet to do that.
I am also wondering how you determine "safety."
I am not sure going into Iraq was a good decision, but what to do now occupies my thoughts much more. Analyzing our mistakes is important for determining what we should do now, and for deciding upon how to handle future engagements.
I still believe good can (and is) coming from our presence in Iraq, even if our military presence could be better served elsewhere. If Iraq is a success, it will change the political dynamics in the Middle East, which radically alters how we handle the rest of The Global War on Terror (nope)...the long war (nope again)...military operations against terrorism worldwide.
Finishing the job means so much for our credibility as a nation in the middle east. Keep in mind how often UBL mentioned withdraws from Lebanon (Beruit Bombing) and Somalia (Black-Hawk-Down). Perception is reality, and the perception of a tail-between-the-legs retreat w/o at least trying the surge for a year is not wise at all.
I think there are some long term benefits to removing Saddam, despite the WMD failure, but the administration sucks at explaining it. .."What I know now"...yeah I still tip to the removal side, but what really needs to be done now is a real effort to salvage the mission. Date-certain withdraw dates and regrets/tears (while very justified) really wont help the US come out a winner in this battle
Commenting by HaloScan
