We Are Losing.

I hate to admit this, but I find it to be an impossible fact to ignore.

We are losing the war.

No, I am not referring to the wars being fought in Iraq or Afghanistan. I’m not even referring to the War on Terror. No, we are losing a much larger war, a war where the stakes, literally, could not get any higher.

We are losing the existential war against radical Islam.

The fact that we are losing this war is extremely troubling to me; however, when you understand why we are losing, it makes the situation exponentially worse.

We are losing this war not because we are militarily outmatched; in fact, we have absolutely no rivals in regards to military might. We are not losing due to the fact that we are intellectually inferior, lacking in numbers or economically inadequate.

None of those factors are why we are losing this war. The reason we are losing is because we lack the will to win.

I believe this lack of will emanates from the Obama administration’s cowardice, naïveté and criminal misunderstanding of what is at stake in this war.

Want some examples? All you have to do is pick up a newspaper or watch the news to see what I’m talking about.

Example One: The Iranian Nuclear Crisis.

Iran is clearly developing nuclear weapons. They know it, we know it, the Israelis know it and the U.N. knows it.

What are we doing to stop them?

Toothless sanctions, meaningless deadlines set, lopsided deals proposed.

In short, nothing.

While we do nothing, Iran is busy at work. They recently conducted war games to practice for a possible invasion that threatens their nuclear facilities. There are also plans to greatly increase their capacity to enrich uranium. They are also restarting a secret uranium enrichment site that has been inoperative for years.

In Washington, hands are being wrung.

Example Two: The Khalid Shaikh Mohammed Trial in New York.

While KSM has steadfastly refused to show any remorse for masterminding the 9/11 plot that directly killed 3,000 American citizens and launched the multi-front War on Terror, we are bending over backwards to ensure this terrorist gets a fair trial… in a U.S. civilian court no less.

Never mind the fact that he does not meet the criteria for an enemy combatant as outlined in the Geneva Convention, never mind that if released, he would go right back to plotting the deaths of untold numbers of Americans and never mind the fact that this trial will make him a martyr and source of inspiration for would-be Islamo-fascists, the real issue is the intelligence boon this trial presents to Al-Qaeda, The Taliban, Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad.

First, like in any civilian case, the government will have to disclose huge amounts of evidence; evidence gained through highly sensitive intelligence procedures. This not only harms our future ability to gather intelligence, but it also places our intelligence operatives in harm’s way.

Secondly, the question of whether we can convict KSM is a legitimate one in my mind. He certainly wasn’t Mirandized when he was captured, so how much information can they use and how much will be thrown out?

On top of that, he now plans to plead not guilty to all charges (along with his four cohorts also being tried with him), after offering to plead guilty in front of a military tribunal only ten months ago.

Example Three: The War in Afghanistan.

Yes, President Obama has committed to sending more troops, but he failed to meet the requested amount given to him by his handpicked general. More importantly, his speech clearly communicated that he is more interested in pulling U.S. troops out of Afghanistan rather than winning the war. His arbitrary timeline to pull troops out more than illustrates that point. As troubling, the vagueness of his “plan” puts the entire mission in Afghanistan in serious jeopardy.

Example Four: The Fort Hood Massacre.

Major Nidal Malik Hasan’s horrific action was not the deed of a deranged man. He was calculating, composed and brutally efficient. He didn’t just wake up one day and decide that he had had enough with military life. Quite the contrary, he was fed up with what he perceived as sins against Islam, committed by the U.S. military and he planned to exact revenge for his religion.

In the hours and days that followed this travesty, I found it utterly appalling that so many members of the administration went out of their way to state that this was not an instance of Islamic terrorism. The sanctimonious platitudes offered up about Islam and the ignoring of the obvious was disgusting.

Additionally, how was this savagery received by the President? First, he was so concerned with the wellbeing of the soldiers stationed at Fort Hood that he had to give a “shoutout” to a member of his Native American constituency (this illustrates Obama’s sickening inability to break away from his perpetual campaigning) before he mentioned the killed and wounded. To me, this is his most vile performance to date. For a Commander-in-Chief to act that way when his soldiers are dead and dying is purely despicable.

All of these cases illustrate that the Islamo-fascists will do whatever it takes to win this war and we simply will not. We need to stop being the good guy. We need to stop worrying about what the international community will think of us if we get tough with these terrorists. We need to put the lives of honest and innocent Americans first rather than seeking social justice.

If we don’t, the lives of every American, yours and mine alike, may be at risk.

That’s all for now folks. Until next time, take care and be well.

-John

Know Nothing Nancy.

“So, yes, I am saying that they are misleading, that the CIA was misleading the Congress.”

-Nancy Pelosi May 14, 2009

With this comment, Speaker Pelosi went all-in in her war of words with the CIA. For her sake, she had better be telling the truth.

Now I do not claim to know whether she is being honest or not, but my gut and the evidence that has been presented, tell me that that is not the case.

During the press conference, where she uttered the above statement, she looked like a person that was clutching at any excuse that would shroud the truth. From the finger waving, stammering, wavering voice, nervous smile, meek attempts to escape the room and theatrical hand gestures, she seemed scared, cornered and desperate.

In addition, comments made by current CIA director Leon Panetta and Representative Porter Goss and the CIA briefings regarding the Enhanced Interrogation Techniques that were recently made public certainly indicate that Pelosi was well aware of what the CIA was doing.

So for the sake of argument, let’s say she is lying, as I do think she is. Is this really the big deal that Congressional Republicans and Conservative commentators are making this out to be? After all, half-truths, fabrications and deceptions are as part of the American political system as baseball, apple pie and jazz are to the American culture.

I do think this is different though.

This is not some politician trying to spin their voting record on a politically sensitive topic. This is not an exaggerated claim by a politician that is trying to score cheap political points during an election cycle. What this is, is a member of Congress, the Speaker of the House to be specific, making fabricated statements regarding our intelligence community and how they have kept and are keeping us safe from a rogue enemy that specializes in terrorism. All of this, in a time of war.

So if this is really the case and Speaker Pelosi is lying, what should be done?

While I do not believe this is grounds for impeachment, I do think that Speaker Pelosi should be censured and have her position of Speaker of the House taken away from her if she is indeed lying.

While being censured is merely an administrative punishment, it would at least be in the Congressional records forever. I think this would act as, both, a just punishment and an effective deterrent to future elected officials that wish to lie regarding such intelligence issues.

Stripping her of her role as Speaker of the House is certainly a strict punishment, but if she is lying about the conduct of the CIA, I do not believe she should continue to serve as Speaker of the House… someone that is two heartbeats away from the presidency.

I know that this is harsh, but lying about sensitive intelligence information, denigrating the brave and effective intelligence professionals within our government, potentially alienating us from our allies and giving strategic and public relations ammo to our enemies are all incredibly egregious consequences of her reckless behavior.

Now, neither of these actions have any chance of actually happening. I realize that.

This current mini, and potentially epic-sized, scandal, does, however, present the Republican Party with the ability to show voters in 2010 yet another stark contrast between them and the Obama/Pelosi/Reid cabal that is currently running things in Washington, this time on an issue where the Democrats are clearly on the wrong side of public opinion.

That could be the worst punishment Speaker Pelosi could possibly receive.

That’s all for now folks. Until next time, take care and be well.

-John

The Battle for Pakistan.

As you all probably know, Pakistan is a mess right now and honestly, that’s putting it rather mildly.

After capitulating to the Taliban a couple of months back, Pakistan’s president, Asif Ali Zardari and the Pakistani military are finally fighting back.

This battle represents more than just a battle to control the Swat Valley of Pakistan; it represents the battle for the country itself.

This problem started back in February when Zardari acquiesced to the Taliban’s desire to control Danegeld, a city located within Swat. The Taliban assured all parties involved that this agreement would stop further violence.

And what do you know; the Taliban reneged on the deal. Boy, I don’t know who could have seen that coming…

Oh yeah that’s right, anyone with two eyes, that’s who!!!

So now, thanks to this foolish and shameful act, Pakistan is embroiled in a desperate fight to take back control of the Swat. This fight, incidentally, is taking place a mere 60 miles from Islamabad and, more importantly, Pakistan’s arsenal of nuclear weapons, some 100 nuclear bombs and warheads. Additionally, this fighting has led to the displacement of nearly a million Pakistanis and the slaughter of many innocent lives.

While it looks like the Pakistani army will win this battle (early, but admittedly unreliable, death counts puts the loss of life at 751 for the Taliban and 29 for the Pakistani army), the war may still rage.

Unfortunately for the rest of the world, just like in Afghanistan, there are parts of Pakistan where the Taliban is very popular. This is due in large part to the anti-American attitude that is widespread throughout much of the Mid East and Asia and to the power vacuum that the Taliban filled in the inhospitable parts of Pakistan and Afghanistan that Islamabad and Kabul cannot control.

So what needs to be done?

Well, the answer to that question is uncertain, as this is such a difficult situation for all of those involved.

From President Zardari’s point of view, while he does not want to completely give in to the rouge thugs that are the Taliban, he does not want to appear to be a puppet of Washington and risk alienating him from the roughly 50% of the Pakistani population that does not care for the U.S. Conversely, he knows that he needs the U.S.’s help to defeat the Taliban.

From the U.S.’s perspective, Pakistan has to be controlled; otherwise, all of the progress in Afghanistan will continue to be whittled away. On the other hand, they are forced to deal with this clown Zardari and his complete ineptitude when dealing with the Taliban. They cannot depose him as that would send the country into further chaos. Plus, whoever would be placed into power would be viewed as a puppet of Washington and that would further foster ill will towards us in the country.

As you can see, this is a real dicey situation, but this is what I would do…

Get tough with Islamabad and Zardari. Show them that it is in their best interests to not only drive the Taliban back, but also to soundly defeat them once and for all. Convince Zardari of the reality that he cannot possibly hope to coexist with the Taliban as eventually they will either overthrow him and/or kill him.

We also have to convince Pakistan that their main threat does not come from India, but rather it comes from the Taliban. Right now, Pakistan is so paranoid that India will attack them that they have the bulk of their weaponry and all of their best soldiers on the border they share with India. We need to convince them to invest these troops and weapons in the West where the fighting with the Taliban is taking place.

I know that this is easier said than done, but we can help.

Our military can help train Pakistani soldiers in the art of fighting a counterinsurgency war, lessons that our soldiers learned fighting in the streets of Iraq.

We can also continue the drone attacks that have killed dozens of Taliban fighters.

That’s what we can do from a military perspective, but there are economic and political actions we can take to help Pakistan as well.

First, we can begin constructing trade agreements with Pakistan. This will help their poor economy and begin to improve the quality of life of all Pakistanis.

Secondly, we can continue giving them aid. Right now, we have an agreement to give Pakistan $1.5 billion per year for the next five years. Continue that policy, but place conditions on that aid, such as real progress in defeating the Taliban.

Thirdly, we can use our friendly political and economic relationship with India to lower the tensions between them and Pakistan.

This American political, military and economic investment into Pakistan will show the Taliban fighters and the Pakistani citizens that we will not accept defeat. Hopefully, this will produce a ripple effect throughout the country that will shift support from the Taliban to us, as it did in Iraq.

I know this sounds like a lot of time, money, resources and personnel, but we have no other choice. What happens in Pakistan, literally, could determine our success in Afghanistan and the overall War on Terror. We have invested too many lives, too much money and time to fail now.

I have some confidence that President Obama will do the right thing in Pakistan. He has seemed to grasp the monumental problem there better than President Bush ever did and I hope that he follows through with some of the ideas that I outlined above.

If he does not, if he fails to properly follow through in Pakistan, I am afraid that we very well may lose the War on Terror.

That’s all for now folks. Take care and be well.

-John

Quickie: Hmm… maybe President Bush was on to something.

While I certainly welcome this move by the Obama Administration, I wonder if the hysterical Left will howl about this the same way they did when President Bush was at the helm.

Waterboarding is vital to our security needs.

So it seems as though we’re back on the whole waterboarding issue once again.

After President Obama released some top-secret Bush-era memos (memos that gave the government's first full account of the CIA's use of waterboarding and other harsh interrogation methods) he has now left the door open to prosecuting the people that devised the legal justifications for allowing such activities to take place. These people would most likely be Justice Department officials, not CIA personnel.

My question is, “Why”?

Why is the President of the United States open to prosecuting people that have succeeded in keeping this country safe from another terrorist attack(s)?

Isn’t he interested in preventing attacks that could kill untold numbers of Americans?

I would imagine that he is, so why would he make it more difficult for our intelligence community to stop such events?

Oh… some of you still do not believe that waterboarding and other “harsh” methods of interrogation work?

Well you would be sadly mistaken, as you have to look no further than the CIA’s comments to CBS News regarding waterboarding for proof of its effectiveness.

According to those comments, waterboarding, in particular, helped stop a 9/11-style attack that was planned for Los Angeles. CIA officials went on to say that Khalid Sheik Mohammed, mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, planned to use East Asian operatives to crash a hijacked airliner into a building in Los Angeles in 2005.

He only gave up this information after he was waterboarded.

Additionally, President Obama’s own Director of National Intelligence, Admiral Dennis C. Blair stated, “High value information came from interrogations in which those methods were used and provided a deeper understanding of the al Qaeda organization that was attacking this country”.

But now you have many, including President Obama, claiming that we “lost our moral bearings” in these interrogations, rather than applauding our intelligence community for a job well done.

These people seem to think that our “harsh” interrogation methods that have been used (used in retaliation to a war declared on us, mind you) are somehow the moral equivalent to the deeds of the terrorists themselves.

I am sorry, but they are not and we are not sinking to the level of the terrorists by practicing such methods.

As military historian Victor Davis Hanson has said, when a country is at war (which we currently are) there is a level of barbarity that it needs to descend into in order to succeed. Our dissention into barbarity is marked by actions that can kill high numbers of people, treat prisoners cruelly and marginalize the rights of enemies. Those actions, when used to stop a greater amount of death and destruction, however, do not put us on the same moral plane as Al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad or The Taliban as they would do far worse if they possessed the resources and opportunities to do so.

Take the example given above.

Is waterboarding harsh? Unquestionably.

Is it cruel? Most definitely.

Is it torture? You could make a case for it, as Christopher Hitchens once did.

While waterboarding is all of those things… it was also very necessary in this situation, as it was responsible for saving an untold number of American lives.

The expectations and limitations that the Left wants to place on our intelligence community are completely unrealistic. They seem to have this ridiculous post-facto notion that if our intelligence officials aren’t perfect, then they’re not good. That is pretty shabby treatment for the people that keep us safe. It is also rather dangerous, as it places needless barriers in the way of these people gaining valuable information about our enemies and their intentions.

Listen, I wish we could gain information by merely sitting down and reasoning with these people, but that is impossible. These people, the terrorists we are currently at war with, are not a rational group of people, therefore, they do not respond to rational forms of interrogation. They are willing to die for a cause that has been started and led by a number of murderous madmen. What would lead anyone to believe that these terrorists would respond to standard interrogational techniques?

That leads me to another question, what is going to happen when we do have a prisoner that has vital information and simply won’t talk?

That’s a question that President Obama needs to figure out as, literally, thousands of American lives could be riding on his answer.

That’s all for now folks. Until next time, take care and be well.

-John