29 Comments

1. Benj:

All True.

And I’m guessing too that you’d allow that “any fair-mnided person” - such as yourself? - would allow that Ken’s plan to bring the Surge “to the USA” marks him as a hopeless kook.

Sep 16, 2008 - 3:16 pm 2. Panday:

“If things continue to go well, the situation in the Gulf will have changed from one in which Iraq had to be contained to one in which it will become a major element in the containment of Iran.”

That’s a bit optimistic, considering the ties between Iraqi shiites and Iran. Political whims like that can undo the most carefully planned alliances and strategies.

Sep 16, 2008 - 3:37 pm 3. NahnCee:

I hope there’s a major mark-up in whatever we charge the Iraqi’s for these planes.

Sep 16, 2008 - 3:52 pm 4. luagha:

Serves the Iranians right for not giving back the planes that Saddam gave to them at the start of Gulf War I. Now they just have to buy better ones.

Sep 16, 2008 - 4:03 pm 5. ridgerunner:

Ayers and Dohrn’s plan to bomb their way to power marked them as hopeless kooks, and then they became trusted colleagues of a presidential nominee. So Ken could have a future, huh.

Sep 16, 2008 - 4:18 pm 6. RWE:

“Neither the aircraft numbers nor the new Iraqi army are large enough to constitute a threat to other countries in the Gulf…”

Don’t be too sure. Remember the famous statement by Moshe Dyan, “The best well to excel at war is to make sure you are fighting Arabs.” The new Iraqi military may be Arab but they won’t fight like it.

“If things continue to go well, the situation in the Gulf will have changed from one in which Iraq had to be contained….”

Changed to one in which Iraq has to be contained by everyone else, including the U.S. as in “Okay, so we know that suicide bombing was done by Iran but you can’t just go bombing the crap out of them for that. I mean, who do you think you are, the Israelis? What? What do you mean they are in on it with you? And they upgraded your aircraft for you without our approval? The two of you can’t get away with that!”

Both us and Iraq’s neighbors may be about to find out what “sovereign nation” really means.

Sep 16, 2008 - 4:18 pm 7. sirius_sir:

Both us and Iraq’s neighbors may be about to find out what “sovereign nation” really means.

Given the scenario you paint, I for one have no objection.

Perhaps the Pakistanis might also learn that sovereignty cannot be ceded to terrorist infiltrators and then claimed as a cudgel to threaten other states not so willing to forfeit their own sovereignty.

Sep 16, 2008 - 4:47 pm 8. cjm:

i can’t help feeling that the iraqis will be less than grateful for all we have done for them. at least the current government seems keen to revert to the mean. sigh.

Sep 16, 2008 - 5:22 pm 9. wretchard:

Iran may be more threatened by a Shi’ite semi-democracy to its West then a Sunni-dominated totalitarianism under Saddam. That presents a rival model of legitimacy to the theocracy in Teheran. The key challenge is to keep Iraq a relatively liberal, democratic place. If that is achieved and the nation-state itself is strengthened, I think all kinds of geopolitical benefits will flow out of it.

Sep 16, 2008 - 5:24 pm 10. trangbang68:

O/T Read excerpts of Colonel Hal Moore and Joe Galloway’s new book “We are Soldiers Still” in which they return to the Ia Drang Valley battlefield where LZ X-ray was located in the 1965 battle they previously wrote about. It seems a very moving read, but nowhere moreso than in the account of Brit Rick Rescorla who served as a lieutenant under Moore in the Ia Drang and 36 years later, slowly dying of cancer and bemoaning his desire to die on the battlefield not in bed; charged back into the World Trade Center trying to bring people out. He found his noble death there and thank God there are still men like this in the West who know the cost of freedom.

Sep 16, 2008 - 6:07 pm 11. NahnCee:

“i can’t help feeling that the iraqis will be less than grateful for all we have done for them. at least the current government seems keen to revert to the mean. sigh.”

So who will pilot these planes? The same mighty sky warriors as who used to (try to) play tag with Americans over the no-fly zone in Iraq a mere five years ago?

Do we *have* to let them think they’re good to build up their morale?

Sep 16, 2008 - 6:12 pm 12. Tcobb:

Jets have parts. The parts wear out when they are flown. Many of those parts wear out fairly quickly. You can’t buy those parts in your neighborhood hardware store. That is Iran’s problem–their air force is a joke because most of the planes they have can’t fly. Having functional fighter jets that you can gets parts for is a big plus; it means that if there is a conflict between Iraq and Iran the Iraqi’s will have dominance in the sky, and that is not something Iran wants to happen.

Sep 16, 2008 - 6:48 pm 13. Benj:

Wretch is right re keeping Iraq a “relatively liberal” place. O was wrong re the Surge but my sense is that his own political instincts might be on more on time now than Mac’s (due, in part to the latter’s Viet Nam era mind-set). Doubt Mac is as attuned as he needs to be to internal Iraqi politics. (Which is why his - and Bush’s - position on the timeline came to be undermined by Maliki.) The Kurds will be crucial if Iraq is going to move in the right, liberal direction. Talabani met with Bush today - and that reminds me - that it wouldn’t be strange if this (self-defined) Social Democrat and Secularist (see PUK website) feels closer to O than to pubs. (Talabani’s son was at the Dem Party Convention reaching out to O’s foreign policy team.) Read somewhere that the Kurds other heavy, Barzani, leans toward Mac - wants U.S. troops in-country protecting Kurdistan for as long as possible? - but Barzani is less invested in the Nation of Iraq than Talabani…Cunning of history? O might just be the, ah, One that’s needed in the upcoming years…

RWE - Ayers and Dohrn were Kooks. Back in the day, they might even have been as stone crazy as Ken. Certainly more dangerous. For what it’s worth, though, Ayers, has moved on a bit. Allowed he’s embarrassed about his past. That embarrassment hasn’t yet turned to full-bore shame. And my guess is that it never will. Still, he’s more than a few moral steps ahead of Ken (or that freaky photographer). See passages below from the Wiki entry on Ayers…

“Ayers has repeatedly avowed that when he said he had “no regrets” and that “we didn’t do enough” he was speaking only in reference to his efforts to stop the United States from waging the Vietnam War, efforts which he has described as “. . . inadequate [as] the war dragged on for a decade.”[19] Ayers has maintained that the two statements were not intended to imply a wish they had set more bombs.[19][20] The interviewer also quoted some of Ayers’ own criticism of Weatherman in the foreword to the memoir, whereby Ayers reacts to having watched Emile de Antonio’s 1976 documentary film about Weatherman, Underground: “[Ayers] was ‘embarrassed by the arrogance, the solipsism, the absolute certainty that we and we alone knew the way. The rigidity and the narcissism.’ “[12]

…In a letter to the editor in the Chicago Tribune, Ayers wrote, “I condemn all forms of terrorism — individual, group and official”. He also condemned the September 11 terrorist attacks in that letter. “Today we are witnessing crimes against humanity on our own shores on an unthinkable scale…”

Sep 16, 2008 - 7:32 pm 14. Nomenklatura:

Wretchard said: The key challenge is to keep Iraq a relatively liberal, democratic place. If that is achieved and the nation-state itself is strengthened, I think all kinds of geopolitical benefits will flow out of it.

Conversely, should Iraq slide back into chaos after all the effort, money and lives which have been spent on it, it will be far easier to make the case for a much rougher response next time we are attacked from that part of the world. The world’s fractious Islamic tribesmen don’t realize it, but they are teeing themselves up.

Sep 16, 2008 - 7:36 pm 15. coyotl:

Wretchard writes:

“The key challenge is to keep Iraq a relatively liberal, democratic place. ”

My God, Wretchard! Are you really kidding yourself? Have you not read of the Shiite-led governments raids of voting centers and intimidation? Especially against the Sunni Awakening? Is this “liberal”?

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2008-08-14-Iraq-voters_N.htm?loc=interstitialskip

Or how the Iraqi government is arresting hundreds of the Awakening council members?

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/22/world/middleeast/22sunni.html

Or perhaps you can tell your readers how many days Maliki spent in June of this year in Iran, consulting with his old friend, the Ayatollah Khamenei?

How long can you maintain your fantasies that an unabashedly pro-Iranian, pro-Hezbollah, Shiite Islamist Iraqi government is a trusted US ally? Or that gift-wrapping the country and turning it over to such jihadist thugs is a victory?

Don’t look, Wretchard! Don’t look too closely, not for the sake of your own illusions:

http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=maliki+ahmadinejad&btnG=Search+Images&gbv=2

Sep 16, 2008 - 7:41 pm 16. Lifeofthemind:

This all sounds lovely but there are serious risks involved.
From AFP

The Iraqi parliament lifted the immunity of Sunni MP Mithal Alusi on Sunday for visiting Israel last week to attend an international conference on terrorism.

Parliament voted to ban Alusi from travelling outside Iraq or attending its sessions, and to ask prosecutors to press charges against him for visiting the Jewish state.

The action against Alusi, the sole member of his own parliamentary faction, was agreed by acclamation.

The MP’s trip to Israel last week was his second since the overthrow of Saddam Hussein’s regime. He previously visited Israel in September 2004.

During his latest visit, Alusi spoke at the Herzliya Institute for Policy and Strategy near Tel Aviv where, according to Shiite MP Ali al-Adeeb, he urged support for Israel.

Not giving the URL since I don’t want to get moderated. This brave gentleman has already had his sons murdered by the thugs.

Sep 16, 2008 - 8:18 pm 17. ghoullio:

“O was wrong re the Surge but my sense is that his own political instincts might be on more on time now than Mac’s”

Not so sure about that one. Obama was plugging away during his speech today about McCain wanting to set up a commission to investigate Wall Street’s recent activity. Something about this not being 9/11? Anywho, tonight I see that Nancy Pelosi is on McCain’s side on this one…

“Pelosi orders wide Wall Street probe”

Sep 16, 2008 - 8:45 pm 18. NahnCee:

Excellent. A Wall Street probe. Follow the money.

Sep 16, 2008 - 8:51 pm 19. Bob Murphy:

Ayers and Dohrn keep coming up as friends of Obama and people keep bandying around terms like terrorist about them.
I’m a native of San Francisco and spent more than my fair share of time on the streets in the late 60s and early 70s.
The difference between the political scene in San Francisco and Berkeley was huge at the time. To the mindset of many of us in SF they were America hating commie/lefties and we merely hated Westmoreland’s lies and I hated his dull, massive, alienating tactics which got us bogged down in a 12th rate country.

The Weathermen, Symbionese Liberation Army and other like minded groups all had one thing in common.
They spent an extraordinary time talking about doing stuff and only a small amount of time actually doing it or on mission preparation. They were caught up in the wank of the day, the idea, or notion of it in their middle class projections. They had no street sense.
To those of us who are REALLY good at breaking things (Airborne, Marines etc) they were wannabes, just amateurs. Terrorists? Only in their fantasies. I knew people in both organisations. Hopeless. Funny to have a joint with them and listen to them and talk about things.
Interesting times.

Sep 16, 2008 - 11:18 pm 20. Bob Murphy:

It gives me the irrits that Ayers and Dohrn, in the end, gamed the system that they so despised, but it does not surprise me.
Wannabes and gadflies.
Damn, she had a nice set of legs. And sure used that to advantage. Had a mesmerizing effect on a lot of guys. Wonder what she runs on now.:)

Sep 16, 2008 - 11:23 pm 21. Bob Murphy:

Besides tenure.

Sep 16, 2008 - 11:24 pm 22. whiskey:

Ayers and Dorhn did kill people. Because they had wealthy, powerful, politically connected to the Chicago machine fathers, they got off. They were and are, however, terrorists.

That Benj approves of them speaks for itself.

That Obama chose to begin his political career with Ayers also speaks for itself — Obama does not love America. He hates it.

WRT Iraq, can they do anything meaningful Wretchard to Iran?

No. Iran’s nukes (I’m sure they already have them) means that regime is frozen in place, like North Korea’s. It can last a few centuries more. Iran effectively can get away with anything, and everything, with nukes. It has them, it’s enemies do not. No one can retaliate against them either. Iran could pull off another 9/11 and the US could do nothing, because of the nukes. Any more than it could retaliate against Pakistan.

Of course those nukes make them a big fat target for retaliation, eventually, when US cities die in a nuclear terrorist attack, but they don’t think so, gambling on inherent US weakness due to PC. After all, after 9/11 did not Bush visit a Mosque in what was viewed in Iran as surrender? Has not Britain surrendered to Sharia after terrorism?

Iraq’s next step is nuclear weapons (along with everyone else). Only then will they be on a level playing field with Iran. I’m sure they’ll start a program soon.

Sep 16, 2008 - 11:56 pm 23. Bob Murphy:

We will know within a few weeks of them getting nukes that they have them with that idiot Iranian president.
What point would there be for him to have them if he didn’t make immediate use of them operationally or for psychological warfare?

Sep 17, 2008 - 1:58 am 24. coyotl:

Lifeofthe Minds is on the right track, and you seem to be hiding from many of the political developments in Iraq, Wretchard. The pro-Iranian, pro-Hezbollah, Shiite Islamist government has been arresting our “allies” in the Anbar Awakening:

“Iraq Takes Aim at U.S.-Tied Sunni Groups’ Leaders
By RICHARD A. OPPEL Jr.
BAGHDAD — The Shiite-dominated government in Iraq is driving out many leaders of Sunni citizen patrols, the groups of former insurgents who joined the American payroll and have been a major pillar in the decline in violence around the nation.

In restive Diyala Province, United States and Iraqi military officials say there were orders to arrest hundreds of members of what is known as the Awakening movement as part of large security operations by the Iraqi military. At least five senior members have been arrested there in recent weeks, leaders of the groups say. ”

(Since URLs get moderated, readers can look it up themselves)

The Shiite thug-government has been raiding voting centers in advance of regional elections, all in order to intimidate the opposition:

“Iraqi elections official fears fair vote in jeopardy
Updated 8/15/2008 1:31

By Charles Levinson and Ali A. Nabhan, USA TODAY
BAGHDAD — Iraqi security forces loyal to the Shiite-led government are raiding voter registration centers and taking other steps to discourage participation in upcoming elections, says the head of Iraq’s voting regulatory agency.”

And alert Belmont readers must know that Iraqi PM Maliki spent 3 days in June conversing with his good friend, the Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei before Maliki came out for Obama’s withdrawal plan.

Why should we support, or arm such dubious allies? Why do you Wretchard, believe that the pro-Hezbollah Shiite thug-government is a “liberal” ally?

Sep 17, 2008 - 6:02 am 25. NahnCee:

“We will know within a few weeks of them getting nukes that they have them with that idiot Iranian president.
What point would there be for him to have them if he didn’t make immediate use of them operationally or for psychological warfare?”

You think the mullah’s would let him have control of the Persian version of the football? America has a system where at least two authorized people have to be present and participating to fire off a nuke. I’d be stunned and amazed if Ahmadinnerjacket could fire off whatever passes for their nuclear toy all by his little lonesome.

Sep 17, 2008 - 6:18 am 26. Benj:

Ben said: “Ayers and Dohrn were Kooks. Back in the day, they might even have been as stone crazy as Ken. Certainly more dangerous…”

Whiskey said: “Benj approves of [Ayers & Dohrn]”

Whiskey lies. (Dutch Courage?)

Sep 17, 2008 - 6:34 am 27. Nine-of-Diamonds:

@ whiskey:

Fascinating that Benj & the other apologists can’t get one major point through their thick heads: If a major nuclear conflict starts, it’s going to be the Blue States that will suffer the most. With a few exceptions like Orange County, built-up urban areas have high concentrations of Democratic voter blocs - blacks, hispanics, Jews, gays, secular professionals, government employees, union men. When that innocent-looking shipping container arrives from Iran it will be most convenient and effective to unleash it on the destination port city (NY? Philadelphia?) An attack on dispersed infrastructure targets in the “Red States” won’t produce the desired death toll. The indulgence that Blue Staters display towards those who’d destroy them would be comical if it weren’t so frightening.

Sep 17, 2008 - 12:38 pm 28. Aaron:

I hope that historian have as much clarity on this issue as you do. Strategically, the Iraq war should have major benefits to the USA throughout the Middle East for years to come. This is but one of those benefits. Bush has yet to (and may never) receive credit for a strategic choice that is just now begining to alter the Middle East in America’s strategic favor.

Sep 17, 2008 - 4:51 pm 29. Bob Murphy:

@Nahncee, you counting on the mullahs to apply checks and balances???:)

Sep 18, 2008 - 3:57 pm

Sorry, comments for this entry are closed at this time.