What? Overreaction Did The French Have To 9/11?

Tonight on my local 10 'o clock news there was a "Terrorism Expert" who said we should not overreact to tonight's terror attack in Paris, the way we overreacted to 9/11.  He claimed that is exactly what the terrorists want us to do and it would be a mistake.  Because if we overreact, the way we did after 9/11 we will only make matters worse by alienating more Muslims and creating more terrorists.

I take it "the mistake" he was referring to was code for Operation Iraqi Freedom.  Because all right thinking people know that Operation Iraqi Freedom was a disaster and why Muslim extremists are now on the offensive in France.

But wait a second Mr. Expert, France wanted and played no part in Operation Iraqi Freedom.  How did our overreaction in Iraq lead to France being attacked so viciously?  I can see how "Operation Iraq We Gone" contributed to the mayhem we are seeing right now, but Operation Iraqi Freedom, not so much.  It seems to me when President Bush left office Iraq was stable, on the right path, and Muslim extremism was being rolled back.  Beating one's enemy on the battle field has a way of sapping them of their vigor.

Then we elected a new President who was going to correct the mistakes of our "Cowboy President."   Operation Iraqi Freedom was ended in favor of Operation Iraq We Gone.  The whole region has been going backward ever since.  Allowing our enemy space and time to regroup is an under-reaction that is only going to get more people killed.

"Overreaction"! (smh)  

Iraq War: The Inconvenient Facts

Tonight in the Democratic Party Presidential debate, they were all in agreement that the Iraq War was the worst foreign policy mistake in American History.

Really???

The facts:
In 2009, when GWB left the White House the nation of Iraq was stable, Al Qaeda in Iraq if not totally defeated was badly beaten and on their way to defeat, and the nation of Iraq was heading in the right direction.

What happened?  Obama failed to negotiate a Status Of Forces agreement allowing US troops to stay in country to insure the progress would continue in the right direction.  The US troops in country were the one honest broker that would be able to see that the Shia, Sunni, and Kurds all got along.

Obama and Clinton then neglected Iraq and dropped the ball during the Arab Spring allowing Iran to extend it's influence in Iraq leading to the neglect of the Sunni and Kurdish area's of the country, which in time led to the rise of ISIS and a new civil war in Iraq starting in 2013.

If Iraq War is the worst foreign policy mistake in American History, it's because of failure, neglect, and negligence directly attributable to the foreign policy of Obama and the Democratic Party.  

My Thoughts on the Iran Deal

Obama is taking a huge risk that his diplomacy will work out for the best in the end.  I believe taking that risk is reckless and irresponsible.  We absolutely should have put war on the table and dictated the terms to the Iranians or else.  For Gods sakes the Iranian leadership goal is to bring down Israel and the United States.  We know this because they say so frequently.

Did negotiating with North Korea keep them from cheating and getting the bomb?

There is absolutely no reason to trust we can verify anything, short of what we did in Iraq to Saddam.  The Iranians wouldn't even concede that their ambition is to get a nuclear weapons.

SMH.

My Thoughts On Planned Parenthood & Abortion

It would be a great organization if it was not in the abortion business.  It is a fact that a unique human life begins at conception.  All humans are created equal and endowed by the creator with a right to life.  To take the life of an innocent human being without just cause is murder.  I believe abortion should be allowed only in the very limited instances of saving the life of the mother, incest/rape with taking the baby to term to be viewed as the courageous and preferred option.  It is an unmitigated evil that mothers are allowed to murder their children because they use the same psychological trick as Nazi's.  Tell yourselves all you want that your child is nothing, but a bundle of cells without it's own unique humanity, but that will never be the truth.

Legalized abortion in this country has undoubtedly robbed us all.  I don't know if we will ever get to know the full extent of our loss, but it is my hope that one day we will understand what we have done and what could and would have been instead.

I support The Lions Of Rojava

The Lions of Rojava are Westerners fighting with the Kurds versus the Daesh (aka ISIS) in Iraq and Syria.
Here is a story on them.

Iraq War Reporter Dexter Filkins On the Worst Mistake Of the Iraq War

Bill Clinton, Had He Done the Right Thing Back Then...

...how would history be different now?

What got me thinking about this question again and ole' Slick Willy was the way former Texas Ranger Ron Washington handled his infidelity the past couple of weeks.  And also how my Governor Mark Dayton reacted to the Adrian Peterson situation with these remarks:

"It is an awful situation. Yes, Mr. Peterson is entitled to due process and should be 'innocent until proven guilty.' However, he is a public figure, and his actions, as described, are a public embarrassment to the Vikings organization and the State of Minnesota,"

Back in 1998, I was adamant that the only proper thing for Bill Clinton to do in light of the whole Monica Lewinsky scandal was for him to resign his office in disgrace.  That was clearly the right thing for him to do.  Yet for reasons that may forever be beyond me Bill wouldn't do it and the Democrats wouldn't make him do it.  It's not like the Democrats wouldn't still hold the Presidency and I believe it's the only reason why GWB even had a shot at beating Al Gore in 2000.

Would 9/11 have happened? I think probably so and the War in Afghanistan would have gone pretty much as it has.

Would the Iraq War have happened?  I think the chances are better than 50/50 that it would have.  A little later than 2003 probably, but I believe Al Gore wanted Saddam gone.

Would Gore have gotten a 2nd term? I'm 98% positive he would have.

Would the financial collapse of 2008 happened?  Pretty much 100% sure nothing would have happened to stop that.  But I believe the nation would have been in better financial shape thanks to no Bush tax cuts for the top 2%.  Yes, I believe the Bush tax cuts were clearly a mistake.

Who wins the 2008 election?  In light of that, a Republican obviously.  I don't even know if we would know Barak Obama's name right now had Bill Clinton resigned.

Would we have gotten Osama at the exact same time we eventually did?  Pretty much.

Who wins in 2012? No idea, but what I'm sure of is we would be in a lot better shape in the "Long War" than we are now.

Why didn't that SOB Bill resign?

"If it's important enough to fight;..."

...It's important enough to win."
Rep. Jack Kingston

I am in total agreement with this statement.  I don't believe President Obama subscribes to it in wars our soldiers are fighting over sea's.  But I believe he subscribes to it 100% at it would pertain to winning against his political opponents here at home.

Obama's Iraq Policy

Disaster by Peter Beinert of The Atlantic

Candidate Obama On Iraq, "I Will Do Stupid Shit!"

Op-ed from the New York Times
In this campaign, there are honest differences over Iraq, and we should discuss them with the thoroughness they deserve. Unlike Senator McCain, I would make it absolutely clear that we seek no presence in Iraq similar to our permanent bases in South Korea, and would redeploy our troops out of Iraq and focus on the broader security challenges that we face. But for far too long, those responsible for the greatest strategic blunder in the recent history of American foreign policy have ignored useful debate in favor of making false charges about flip-flops and surrender.

I thought Barak's foreign policy motto was "Don't Do Stupid Shit". Can we all be honest and admit that Barak's policy in Iraq was some pretty stupid shit. This Nation would have been served far better had we done what McCain said we should do in Iraq back in 2008.

My Congressman Rick Nolan

In his most recent add Rick Nolan starts off by talking about how "so called nation building" is a waste of money.  I guess this is what polls well with all the folks up here in the sticks.  If he had his way we would pull our troops out of Afghanistan as we did in Iraq and were forced to do with all our people from Obama's War in Libya. Were you even aware that there are no American's left in Libya in any capacity.  Yep, not doing any nation building in Libya and giving up on it nearly cold turkey in Iraq has worked out swell.  In Afghanistan I'm sure things will turn out swell as well.  Just remember Syria had Chemical weapons, Pakistan has the ultimate Islamist prize, Nuclear Weapon's.  

He is also all for shrinking our military.  Yep sticking our head in the sand, while the world spins out of control is just the kind of leadership we need more of in Washington. smh

Well Written, I Couldn't Agree More

The danger to America is not Barack Obama, but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America. Blaming the prince of fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools, such as those who made him their President.

This was from the comment section of the Washington Post in an article about figuring out Obama's worldview.

I'm Not Happy, So I'm Back

I haven't blogged my thoughts here for the last couple of years for a couple of reasons.

1. I had a stroke in December of 2011 that has negatively effected my intellectual capabilities.  For instance  I don't have the same level of short and long term memory recall as I did before.  My deficits in intellectual capabilities makes blogging thoughtful posts much more difficult than it was before.
(Writing this one took me several hours, yes hours! And I wouldn't describe it as very thoughtful)

2. The country electing Barak Obama for a second term was totally discouraging to me.  How could people be that foolish?  Fool them once shame on him, fool them twice shame on this country.  I was left to just shake my head and pretty much checked out on the serious war on terror issues that this blog mostly focused around.

So why am I back now?  I'm pissed off with Obama's "smart diplomacy" that has blown up in our faces.  This is especially true for things are turning out in Iraq.  What a major fuck up?  Completely conceding our influence there to Iran when we pulled all our troops out was just asking for trouble.  And please don't give me that flimsy excuse that getting the hell out wasn't up to him.  He couldn't get our troops out fast enough to claim how he "responsibly ended the war."  What a crock of shit!  Now thousands and thousands of innocent Iraqi's that shouldn't have had to pay more for our invasion in 2003 than they originally already had to are getting stuck with an even higher bill.  That just plain sucks!!!

If you don't believe what I'm saying I encourage everyone to read:

Behold What Is Possible Without America by The Dignified Rant Blog
(I have pretty much always been in 100% agreement with The Dignified Rant on Iraq Policy)

What We Left Behind by Dexter Filkins The New Yorker

and last but not least my own
9/11 Has America Forgotten? written on 9/11/2010

and

Are Terrorists Wiser Than You? Written back in 2004.  We hadn't forgotten 9/11 in 2004.  Four years later  we as a nation just buried our head in the sand and gave what our soldiers fought so hard for away and for What?

About those Non-existant Iraq Weapons of Mass Destruction

Did We Lose in Iraq? No, and Here’s Why.
Michael J. Totten

This article is an essay published in the The New Republic that I think is worth a read. As that The New Republic is liberal leaning you would expect the comments on the article to be all hostile towards the thesis of the article. Amazingly not all of the comments are hostile and I think as a whole they make for an interesting read.

Most commenter's believe the war was wrong mostly because Saddam didn't have the Weapons of Mass Destruction upon which much of the justification for the war was made. Saddam didn't have the weapons, therefore there was no threat, and so the whole thing was nothing but a huge mistake.

I have one question:
How do we know Saddam didn't have the weapons?

Answer: We know he didn't have the weapons, because we went to war and so the question was once and for all definitively answered. I think it is clear in the aftermath of the war that before the war we didn't have much of a clue as to the status of Iraq Weapons of Mass Destruction and WMD programs. I think we were pretty certain Saddam was cheating, and there is no doubt at this point that he was in fact cheating on his obligations; We had no clue how much or how little.

One of the lessons of 9/11 that seems to have been forgotten at this point is that what we don't know can suddenly result in the death of a lot of people and do untold billions of dollars in damage. The burden of proof to show Saddam did not have WMD's was on Saddam and Saddam only. He most certainly did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he in fact didn't have WMD's. Saddam played games as if he was guilty of hiding things and we know he was hiding things but they just happened to be minor rather than major. In 20/20 hindsight critics claim Bush acted rashly and recklessly, but I see just the opposite. He erred on the side of caution because the risk of erring on the side of catastrophe was just to great as the lesson of 9/11 so violently showed

A Thought I Had Today.

The immoral and criminals are all for deregulation in the same manner that the immoral and criminals are all for expansive civil liberties and civil liberties protections. Being pro-deregulation or pro-civil liberties doesn't make you immoral or a criminal, but you should be realistic about who some of your idealogical bedfellows are in reality.

(I suppose on the flip side of the coin those with vested interests or some kind of God complex are pro-regulation and anti expansive civil liberties)

Where "Encircling Mendacity" Comes From

Enfleshed (the word is alive)by Mortal

It's a Deterrent!

I don't know what to make of the squeaky wheels complaining about full body scanners and invasive pat downs at airport security. Some argue that these measures are a humiliating indignity that trample on personal liberty treating the innocent as if they were guilty while doing little to enhance airline security.

I believe much of the belief that the security measures do little to enhance security is because terrorist's are not getting caught in the act. I think that point of view misses the point. The security measures are there for the most part to deter would be terrorists from even making an attempt at all. It's the hard target theory: you make the easiest way for terrorists to commit gross mass murder as difficult as possible to accomplish. When this is the case terrorists either won't even try or won't try very often. Deterrence is the main objective, not catching terrorists in the act. A lack of catching terrorists in the act is just as much a success as catching a terrorist in the act. As long as airline passengers are not getting killed we are winning.

As for the argument that these measures are a humiliating affront to personal liberty and we are treating the innocent like criminals. My simple question is, what alternative is there? There is an obvious need for for airline security to be as tight as possible because the consequences of failure are so huge. No one wants to die in a terrorist attack except the terrorist on a suicide mission. To me it makes no sense not to put the pedal to the floor on this, even though that means it makes some people uncomfortable. I personally don't find the measures being taken to be unreasonable because they accomplish the goal of making mass murder as difficult as possible.

9/11 Has America Forgotten?

I am sad to say that I think in some important respects we have. The tragedy of 9/11 happened because of a failure to recognise and effectively preemptively stop our enemies. Much has been done to see that this kind of failure could not occur again, but I fear we have lost much of our vigilance at this point. The American people are flagging in regards to Afghanistan and for the most part completely abandoned ship in regards to what should have been our commitments in Iraq.

The leaders of Iran seek nuclear weapons and openly talk of destroying our ally Israel. In Afghanistan and Iraq the Iranian rulers have plotted and conspired to kill American soldiers and stood in the way of progress and peace.

I question the resolve of the United States populace and the wisdom of our present Commander and Chief. I fear dark days ahead because we have forgotten, we have become passive and I don't think we should be at all.

"There is an appointed time for everything. And there is a time for every event under heaven...A time for war, and a time for peace."

The enemies of America are not defeated, some of them have not even been engaged and made to pay for their treachery.

What I Really Wanna Know Is...

There has been a bunch of hoopla in the air over the past few days due to a Pew Research Poll that found 18% of Americans believe President Obama is a Muslim. Some are apoplectic over this result.

I am not that interested in what "the average American" thinks on this matter. What I really wanna know is what a representative sample of American Muslims would show in answer to this question and then beyond that the results of scientific polls of Muslims from around the globe on this same question. I think those results would be highly interesting.

Afghanistan

I have been paying more attention to the war in Afghanistan lately. There has been some stupid hullabaloo made by some about how this is now "the longest war in American History." Sorry but how long has "The war on poverty" or "The war on drugs" been going on? On a more related note the Korean War was really never resolved and our troops still "occupy" Germany and Japan.

Seriously, not until 2006 did the Taliban really start making this thing into an actual war and even then what was going on was a pretty low intensity conflict. Not until the Obama escalation of 2009 did this turn into something beyond a minor conflict in my mind.

Just recently independent journalist Michael Yon wrote on Facebook:

"July 2010 likely will become the deadliest month in the entire war -- that means Iraq or Afghanistan."

Now I highly respect Michael Yon, but I'm not sure about this prediction. This just past June was the deadliest month for both NATO and the US in Afghanistan. The thing is the Taliban have a mixed record when it comes to consistently increasing casualties from month to month. The Iraq insurgency was much the same.

Michael has also recently written on Facebook:

We've been at war for over a hundred months in Afghanistan. This is the deadliest month so far. I would not be surprised to see 2011 casualties double those of 2010.

There is no room for political correctness or bullshit. This war is on a collision course for something far worse than we ever saw in Ira...q.

I think this bit of speculation is even more incredible unless he meant to say 2010 casualties will double those of 2009, which is an outcome that is likely to happen thanks to the Obama escalation.

The Taliban have taken severe poundings in the past and are I'm sure taking a severe pounding right now. How well and how long they can hold up to a severe pounding is an open question.