Your author paused before commenting on the bipartisan eight month long Iraq report, which could be best described as ‘we don’t have the answers’ or at worse ‘let’s get out of Dodge’. With that pause events here and abroad have surfaced that provides more evidence to the ridiculousness of this document. Remember reader supposedly these were smart people who took nearly a third of a year to throw something together. Your author needs to sum up a few items and bring them back to this document before opining on it any further.
Back in July 2006 the big media machine was quick to criticize Israel as they engage in fierce combat against Hezbollah. Your author has found several descriptions of this Syrian and Iranian back group besides the common reference of being a political party. One suggested a guerilla group while another described it as being a terrorist organization. Whatever the case Israel’s critics were quick to cite that Hezbollah had set up hospitals and daycares for the Lebanese in exchange for using their country as a strategically placed location. Now no one said such but Lebanon received something in return for the cooperation. In the end Iran and Syria wasted funds in fighting the Israel Army and Lebanon was left with an estimated $15 billion in damages.
Well matters have changed a great deal and yet the media is not so quick to point this out to the reader. Currently demonstrations unlike ever seen in recent history are now becoming commonplace and some extremists are seeing signs of the famous Lebanese Civil War of the 1970s-1990s.
On November 21 Lebanese Interior Minister Pierre Gemayel was assassinated by suspected pro-Syrian (Hezbollah) gunmen. The 34 year old Cabinet member, whose family had a history of being murdered by opposing forces, was unapologetically anti-Syrian. Prior to his murder the former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri was assassinated, which caused several members of Prime Minister Emile Lahoud’s Cabinet to resign. Lebanese political law that calls for representation from Shias (Shiite), Sunnis and Christians states that if one third of the Prime Minister’s Cabinet is unavailable then an election must be held. Lahoud is pro-Syrian and by default pro-Hezbollah. Meanwhile efforts by Hezbollah have been successful in blocking an investigation into the assassination of Rafik. Massive protests, where hundreds of thousands have sat down in Beirut, pitting anti-government and pro-government sides against each other began.
Meanwhile the UN’’s head chief, General Kofi Annan, is leaving office following an unremarkable but highly public tenure. General Annan, as your author previously commented on, has been high on statements and intentions but light on achievement. On December 11th Annan gave his final speech at the President Harry S. Truman Library in Independence, MO. As most know it was Truman who assisted with the architecture of the United Nations. Your author refuses to believe that President Truman would be satisfied with the modern day UN. Annan was quick to denounce the Bush Administration with what he described as unilateral policy and reminded the audience that the great states’ responsibility was to serve and not dominate the world’s people. He then, in a strange twist of changing directions, implored the United States to maintain its policy on human rights including the struggle against terrorism. These are mixed words with bold overtones from someone that has yet the grasp the seriousness of Muslim extremists. He also fails to recognize the countries, along with the US, that make up the Allied Forces as it relates to Iraq and any perceived unilateral policies.
Let us count the failures and scandals that have graced the UN and Annan during his time. The tsunami of 2004 that left over 200,000 dead in Southeast Asia was a symbol of outpour of the world with billions in relief. However The Financial Times was on the receiving end of many evasive answers when 30% of these funds were found to be unaccountable. Then there was the Iraq Oil For Food Scandal that exonerated Annan but cast doubts on his management team. Of course there was the Rudd Lubber sex scandal of 2004, which barely made it to the plateau of the big media machine. Rwanda and the continuing slaughter in Darfur. Let us not forget that the UN was rebuffed by Saddam Hussein when weapons inspectors were denied entry into Iraq. And as Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called for the extermination of Israel, Annan and the UN proved unable to address the matter. The world still waits for their response.
Now let’s get back to the US-ever wondered what happened to former Klan leader and Louisiana pseudo politician David Duke? The flip flopper, who jumped between Democrat and Republican, Duke served as a representative of Metairie, a New Orleans suburb, in 1989, thus proving that only in Louisiana a former Klansman can get elected to public office. This was followed by numerous failed campaigns for various positions and finally being forced to retire from politicking when he pled guilty to tax evasion and mail fraud, which climaxed with a 15 month prison sentence and $10,000 fine. The charges stemmed from defrauding donors, which doesn’t bother your author when he thinks that folks were giving their money to a former Grand Wizard. The donations were flushed back into the local New Orleans economy as Duke proceeded to frequent local casinos.
After his time in politics and the penal system Duke went back to school and earned a PhD, graduating from the Ukrainian Interregional Academy of Personnel Management. Duke had previously received an honorary doctorate from the institution. Appropriately enough, Duke’s thesis was entitled “Zionism as a Form of Ethnic Supremacism”. Your author can only hope that Professor Duke attempted to seek employment in Louisiana colleges and universities only to be denied.
Since then Duke has been a bit of a globe trotter. In 2005 he showed up in Syria giving an interview with a local television station in Damascus, stating that Washington DC, New York City and London were occupied by Zionists. Back in the States Duke made claims that Jewish extremists were undermining America’s moral fabric and responsible for the world’s blood. Later he popped up in Moscow as a key speaker for the White World’s Future. This month Duke attended the Review of the Holocaust: Global Outlook held in Tehran, Iran and hosted by their President Ahmadinejad, who has previously stated he wishes to see Israel removed off the face of the earth. The group debated the reality of the Holocaust, yes argued whether the event actually occurred. While the American Left doesn’t debate the existence of the Holocaust your author has heard with an increasingly higher pitch that Israel is to blame for the problems in the Mid East. How can a small country cause all of these problems? Once again Liberals looking for a quick solution and not addressing the bigger picture, which is that Israel has built an impressive economy while their neighbors are filled with jealousy.
While it is nice to see that Professor Duke has failed to resonate with the American public, minus one state, Iran was more than happy to oblige the convicted felon. It is a pity for soon to be Speaker Nancy Pelosi that a few folks did not vote in favor of Duke as their Congressman. Given her recent track record of perceived leadership-Jack Murtha and Alcee Hastings-Duke has the pedigree and would make a fine fit.
CQ.com’s National Editor Jeff Stein paid incoming National Intelligence Committee chairman Silvestre Reyes, Democrat congressman from Texas, a recent visit. When asked about Al-Quaeda’s rank and file, Reyes stated that it was both Sunni and Shiite, probably more Shiite. The terrorist group consists of Sunni Muslims, which is an important nugget when one considers that Saddam Hussein is Sunni. Reyes was completely loss for words when asked about Hezbollah and then tried to compare Iraq to Vietnam, a longtime drumbeat for the left. For the record Republican members proved nearly as inept on history and relevant details as Congressman Reyes, proving once again politicians either will screw up military engagements or are useless when assessing them.
Finally to the Iraq report and summing all of this banter into one package. The report, officially known as the Bakker-Hamilton Commission, was much to do about nothing. On the right or supposedly representing Conservative thought were former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, Lawrence Eagleburger, Edwin Meese III and Alan K. Simpson. On the left or the Democrat side President Clinton’s crony Vern Jordan, Leon Panetta, William Perry and Charles S. Robb, former Senator from Virginia. With the exception of O’Connor, most of these figures are products of the Beltway.
So what did this fine bunch have to say? Well not much, unless you consider that the US should have a timeframe for leaving Iraq but not to leave too soon. Upon leaving Iraq, whenever that time is, the US should maintain contact with Iraq and their Prime Minister Nouri al-Malik, assuming he is in power when this event happens. Of course a 10 year old could have come up with that statement. The piece that has caused a furor is the idea that the US and our Allied Forces would engage Iran and Syria in negotiations. Reader if you agree with this one, you need to reread and reread again what I have written in this entry regarding both of these countries. Maybe we can invite Professor Duke to act as a mediator between the US and Ahmadinejad. Rank and file Democrats have been critical because the Report doesn’t provide an exact date to leave Iraq. Yes, that would be something to look forward to, just what the terrorists would like to see so they can retreat back, rest up and go back at it when the last American soldier has left the building.
To close, it should be apparent to the reader that the crisis in the Mid East is far from over and our retreat, which is what the American Left would like to see, is defeatism. Some of you may ask why does the Left wish to have the US defeated, which is the same thing if we implement a timeline strategy etched in sand. Your author doesn’t have the answer. The reader should remember that many of these defeatists on the Left derive their identity from the 1960s and the Vietnam War. Your author cannot pinpoint an exact reason behind their thinking but believes this era factors into it in some way.
It would be nice to have the War in Iraq suddenly become a popular war. If it did, it would be the first popular war our country has fought in since our creation. However the American Left has failed to realize how crucial this War will be to our very existence. They only offer a timeframe to exit Iraq and nothing more. All this ensures is that terrorists know when to strike-the next day following the exit. The American Left, as always, light on answer and dangerous with consequences. Just remember this whenever the reader is forced to listen to them.
