Living the Dream.





Saturday, May 28, 2011

re: "Obama’s Next War"

Frank Gaffney at Big Peace outlines the prospects for peace (and for war).

Money quote(s):

"(A)n extraordinary intelligence-special forces team liquidated Osama bin Laden and drones have dispatched a number of other “high value targets” in what the President calls our “war on al Qaeda.” These are morale-boosting tactical achievements, but in the great scheme of things are more like whack-a-mole than strategic victories. Much more important is the fact that Mr. Obama is in the process of losing the two wars he inherited, and making a hash-up of the one he initiated in Libya."

Nonconcur in part. Taking UBL off the board was a strategic victory just as shooting down Adm. Yamamoto was

That being said, there's a vacuum, apparently, where the grand strategy ought to be.

"Mr. Obama’s earlier insistence on withdrawing U.S. combat forces from Iraq and his abiding determination to pull out virtually all others by year’s end has, as a practical matter, made it impossible for the government in Baghdad to ask us to stay on. Even if the Iranian puppet, Muqtada al-Sadr, were not threatening if Americans are invited to stay to relaunch his Madi army’s sectarian warfare and bring down the coalition government (in which his party is a prominent part), the Iraqis can hardly be more in favor of maintaining an American presence than we are.

The predictable result in Iraq next year (if not before) will be a vacuum of power that Iran will surely fill. State Department and other Americans left behind, in the hope that the immense investment we have made in lives and treasure in Iraq’s democratic and pro-Western future will not be squandered, stand to become endangered species. The ironic symbol of our defeat may be the takeover in due course of the immense new U.S. embassy in Baghdad by Iranians – this time by invited diplomats, not the hostage-taking “students” of 1979.
"

Why is Mookie still breathing? Surely this is an oversight on someone's part.

I worry about my colleagues starting assignments in Iraq these days; I don't want to find myself glued to a television screen someday in the not-to-distant future, hoping (and dreading) to see someone I know running for the last helicopter out or being paraded around as A-Jad's latest hostage. He's done it before, after all.

" In his speech last week to what he calls “the Muslim world,” the President made it U.S. policy to support whoever manages to get elected in the various nations of North Africa and the Middle East currently undergoing political upheavals. As a practical matter, that will mean legitimating, working with and underwriting the Muslim Brotherhood, since they are far and away the most organized, disciplined and ruthless of the contenders for power in country after country. History tells us that such people – from Hitler in Weimar Germany to Hamas in the Gaza Strip – win even “free and fair” elections, which then amount to one-man, one-vote, one-time. (For more on the deadly nature and agenda of the MB or Ikhwan, see last week’s column in this space.)

President Obama’s openness (to put it mildly) to bringing the Brotherhood to power was manifested not only by his pledge to forgive $1 billion in Egyptian debt and to provide it another billion in additional foreign aid. Just as he did in his last much-ballyhooed “outreach” to Muslims in Cairo two years ago, Team Obama had one of the top Muslim Brothers – Imam Mohamed Magid, president of the Ikhwan’s largest front group in this country, the Islamic Society of North America – prominently seated in the audience at the State Department.
"

I've mentioned ISNA's Muslim Brotherhood pedigree before.

During the course of a diplomatic career, it's not that unusual to find yourself, our your side, treating with very unpleasant and sometimes quite evil folk, as you're about your country's business of state and in the pursuit of peace. That sort of thing goes with the territory, I'm afraid. Examples including treating with Yasser Arafat even though we knew he was personally responsible for the murder of (at least) one of our ambassador. (For a transcription of the document itself, see here.)

It's still troubling and bothersome. I suppose I ought to be really worried when this sort of thing doesn't bother me.

2 comments:

The Warpiper said...

Point of order- Isoruku Yamamoto was much more the strategic and tactical genius behind the Imperial Japanese naval war machine. OBL commanded much less capability, and it appears that he may well have been shunted aside by AQ before he received his cranial aeration.

Agreed on Mookie. We had so many easy opportunities to take him out in 2004 and 2005. Had we done it, he would be well forgotten by now, and the Mahdi Army would have "Tet"-ed itself out by now.

Consul-At-Arms said...

@WP: Point of information - UBL hadn't exactly hung up his strategic guns and taken up a complete life of ease and leisure just yet. There were reasons for all those couriers going back and forth.

As for Mookie, I don't know why 1st Armored Division wasn't given the green light to roll him up back in 2004 when he ambushed Lt.Col. Orlando.

See the link: http://militarytimes.com/valor/army-lt-col-kim-s-orlando/256881/