21 Comments

1. jerry:

Roger:

There is one possibility that the lefties won’t entertain. Rather then a Wag the Dog scenario what we may be seeing is just the opposite. Bush has decided that he must deal with Fallujah before Wednesday as a hedge against a political defeat at home. If Kerry wins then the coalition of the willing [democratic governments] will be replace by the coalition of the corrupt and thugs. You can bet that if Kerry wins then by the end of the week everybody is going to announce a pullout from Iraq. I believe Bush knows that if Iraqi democracy has any chance after a Kerry victory Fallujah must be eliminated as a home for Baathist holdouts and Al Qaeda terrorists.

The entire world knows which side Kerry is on because all the world’s thugs see him as a ally.

Oct 27, 2004 - 4:50 pm 2. Katherine:

jerry,

I was wondering about something like that for some time now.

Should Bush lose, can we expect strikes against Syria or Iran before January 20th?

Oct 27, 2004 - 4:54 pm 3. Peter G.:

The Battle of Fallujah should have been concluded last April, but I applaud and admire the military personnel now involved in that fight. I don’t believe for a moment that the attack has anything to do with politics; on the contrary, I believe the attack is taking place in spite of politics. Does the fate of Fallujah matter to swing voters in Wisconsin? But I could definitely see this working against Bush if there are significant casualties. So, I applaud and admire the president also for allowing this attack to go forward, if that is in fact what’s happening.

Oct 27, 2004 - 4:56 pm 4. jerry:

Katherine:

My guess is no, at least not from the Untied States. However, if Kerry goes through with his appeasement of Iran, I would expect a strike an Israeli strike against the Iranian nuclear program in shortly after Kerry takes office. That will be Sharon’s welcome present to the virulently anti-Israel [if not anti-Semitic] Richard Holbrooke.

Here from “Best of the Web/Boston Globe” is Richard Holbrooke in action…

“I’m not here to criticize President Bush,” Holbrooke, a former United Nations ambassador, told hundreds of members of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC, a major pro-Israel lobbying group, gathered for their annual summit. “His support for Israel is, in my mind, unquestionable.”

The crowd–to Holbrooke’s chagrin–offered rousing applause. “That was not,” he said wryly, “supposed to be an applause line.”

A little bit of reveal preference here. He thinks Bush’s support for Israel is a bad thing.

I guess he expect to force Israel to accept some enforced Ramboulllet-like deal on Israel. Somebody should tell him that the Israelis have nuclear weapons and may be in a better position to fight back then the Serbs. [Just engaging in some blog oriented hyperbole here.]

Oct 27, 2004 - 5:04 pm 5. Silicon valley Jim:

The likes of Terry McAuliffe, John Kerry, and Teddy Kennedy (when he’s sober enough to construct complete sentences) will always question the timing of any action by the President. There will always be an election, convention, congressional vote, etc., close in time. Best to ignore considerations like that and do what’s right.

Oct 27, 2004 - 5:11 pm 6. Terrye:

This has been coming for some time. They have been conducting aerial assaults in preparation of this advaNCE and I think the decision to wait until now was based on the desire to gain intelligence as to who was where as well as allow the Iraqi people the oppurtunity to see what their future will be if we fail.

If the Dems chose to make this a wag the dog story they can try, but I think the commanders on the ground in Iraq have more pressing concerns right now than the political bs being thrown around by operatives.

Oct 27, 2004 - 5:33 pm 7. Sandy P:

I have no idea how to wargame this.

He dies, what does this do for election/Fallujah/explosives coverage?

Plus for W????

Oct 27, 2004 - 5:34 pm 8. Katherine:

jerry,

This makes a lot of sense. I have been speculating that all the restrain on Sharonís part will go out of the window should Kerry get in. Sharon has an incentive to cooperate with Bush, but what is there for Israel with Holbrook running the ME affairs? They may as well decide to take their own fate into their own hands and damn the consequences. It would be entirely understandable. And I am not sure that the Islamist would actually like the outcome.

Oct 27, 2004 - 5:54 pm 9. Loki the Dog:

Perhaps the final battle for Fallujah is the end game that has to happen now for a variety of reasons. On one side, we have the insurgents, who are eager to make news by committing as many atrocities as possible leading up to the election. If they can make headlines, then they must think they can weaken the American resolve–and, obviously there will be those in this country eager to aid them in that task.

In turn, the increased insurgency does two things. One, it may further expose the insurgents–so that we have more intelligence on which to act. Second, it forces the issue one more time–we have waited far too long to take care of Fallujah, and must do it now. In other words, if they want to escalate the violence bring the battle to them.

No matter what the reason, I hope that the reports are true. We have waited far too long.

Oct 27, 2004 - 5:55 pm 10. Stephen_M:

Go Devil Dogs!Be safe.Semper Fi.

Oct 27, 2004 - 6:14 pm 11. Terrye:

We have to go after these people.

They have taken people from Nepal, Italy, Japan, America, Britain, South Korea, Turkey, the Philipines, Bulgaria and God knows how many other countries and have decapitated them like the barabarians they are.

They have made targets of civilians, often children and have brought terror to people that have done them no harm.

If Iraq is to have a future these people need to be destroyed. This should not be a left/right debate.

Whoever wins this election will have to deal with this.

I just wish I had faith that Kerry felt that way. I don’t.

Oct 27, 2004 - 6:25 pm 12. legion:

I would prefer building a tall wall around Fallujah, and shooting anyone trying to go in or come out. Keep the Fallujans isolated, under siege, continuing to bomb terrorist meetings. And in the rest of Iraq, hold elections and continue to rebuild. But that’s just how I feel about it.

Fallujah could only be pacified when the Iranian authority was strong enough to clean out the mosques, and keep the peace, post-cleanup.

American troops could not safely patrol Fallujah after the foreign terrorists were cleaned out, because the regular citizens of Fallujah hate all outsiders, especially infidels. Allawi has to make a deal with Fallujah’s tribal leaders, after the foreign arab terrorists are dealt with.

The Sunnis have had things all their way for a very long time. They think they have nothing to lose by behaving like medieval savages. Perhaps Allawi can convince them differently.

Oct 27, 2004 - 6:32 pm 13. David Thomson:

ìAnd if we are in the midst of this battle a week from Tuesday, it is hard to see how Bush will lose.î

I agree completely. President Bush should ìwag this dogî until its hair starts to fall off. It should boost our Commander-in-Chiefís poll numbers by another few points—and thatís all he needs to guarantee victory on November 2nd. Is this a cynical act? Not in the least. This battle has to be fought eventually, why not here and now?

Oct 27, 2004 - 7:21 pm 14. jj:

Roger,

I’m afraid that many people just don’t care about democracy in Iraq. The place just doesn’t seem real to people who are struggling to make ends meet over here. Many people don’t understand the connection between airplanes flown by Saudi citizens into New York buildings on the one hand and kamikaze religious nuts in Iraq. 200 billion can pay for a lot of hospitals and job training and jobs for that matter. GWB is not FDR. Many people, not just leftists, distrust Rumsfeld and Cheney, while Colin Powell, who is still respected and has the power of oration, does not seem to be campaigning for anyone.

I, myself, believe strongly that we must prevail in Iraq, but I can’t make up my mind who to vote for. I’m sure there are a lot of people who feel like I do. To a pro-war liberal, Bush is like a porcupine. There are just so many negatives there, he’s pretty hard to swallow.

Oct 27, 2004 - 7:57 pm 15. jerry:

legion:

We should actually do to Fallujah, and any other recalcitrant Sunni strongholds what Sherman did to Georgia. We aren’t there to win hearts and minds but to beat them into submission.

Oct 27, 2004 - 8:00 pm 16. RogerA:

It really is time to reduce Fallujah and drain the swamp. I suspect the Iraqis know that as well. There are nothing but plus sides: Wretchard wrote a precient blog a while back that said basically: who would we piss off? the shiites and the kurds both wish the sunnis a happy stay with their 72 virgins (or sultanas). Only the chattering classes who really dont give a damn what happens in Iraq except as it affects their political survival really care. Give the city 48 hours to evacuate women and children and then level it. Trust me: you will NEVER have a problem with the tribalists again–they really understand the use of force and the importance of not only defeating–but humiliating your opponent.

Oct 27, 2004 - 8:05 pm 17. RogerA:

Jeez, Jerry–I like how you think. Westerners really do NOT understand a shame culture. Compassion is understood as weakness. Crush them and grind their noses in it–they will fear us, and ultimately respect us. Not a western concept, but those who havent been kaffirs in the land of the faithful dont understand that.

Oct 27, 2004 - 8:08 pm 18. docweasel:

What’s extree funny is that what, a week ago the Dem ocrat spin doctors were spinning that the Bush Admin was supposely _delaying_ any major action in Iraq to keep casualties down before the election. Now they bitch that Bush is _expediting_ major action before the election? Which is it?

Oct 27, 2004 - 11:44 pm 19. docweasel:

re: my above post:

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1011-02.htm

Oct 27, 2004 - 11:47 pm 20. PeterUK:

Fallujah,Perhaps time to read the history of the destruction of Carthage by Scipio Africanus.Some interesting parallels,

“When Scipio Aemilianus obtained the command he at once perceived that it would be impossible to subdue the city as long as smuggling traders could run into the port with provisions”.

“For the first time in the siege the blockade was complete: the city was enclosed in a stone and iron cage. The Carthaginians in their fury brought forth the prisoners whom they had taken in their sallies, and hurled them headlong from the walls.”

http://www.barca.fsnet.co.uk/carthage-destruction.htm

What goes around comes around.

Oct 28, 2004 - 12:34 pm 21. Katherine:

Jj,

You label yourself as a pro-war liberal, but you cannot bring yourself to vote for Bush, for whatever reason. Bush is no angel, and we all can agree that his anti-terrorist effort at home and abroad is not perfect. Fine.

However, he is not running against a Perfect Democratic Candidate. He is running against flesh and blood candidate named John Kerry, who has 30-year record in politics, which is easily verifiable. This record shows JK consistently undermining the American military, weapons programs, intelligence and resolve in confronting the Soviet threat (yes, the Communist threat was very real, though so many already forgot about it). John Kerry voted against the Gulf War I, when everybody and his brother including Arab nations were in coalition with us ñ clearly even participation of France and Saudi Arabia did pass his Global Test. As recently as during the Democratic convention Sen. Kerry promised swift and decisive response ñ after the next terrorist attack. I donít know about you, but I prefer that we fight terrorist away from our shores. I donít know about you, but I would rather that the terrorists were confronted by armed and trained American military, not self-sacrificing unarmed militia, such as happened on the Flight 93.

Now, can you explain why do you trust Kerry to conduct the war that you claim to be for better than GWB? Do you think that the foreign affairs team that Kerry is going to put together (Berger/Holbrook et al.) is going to be better than Powell/Rice/Rumsfeld/Wolfowitz? I would like to remind you that the Holbrook and Co. also have a record, all you need to do is check how swimmingly things are going in Bosnia and how well Kim Jong-il kept his side of agreement to not develop nuclear weapons in return to American concession.

Before you answer these questions please read this take on Andrew Sullivan position, which, I suspect, may parallel your thinking (scroll down to SCREED). http://www.lileks.com/bleats/archive/04/1004/102704.html

Youíll vote whatever way you will vote. But remember, there is no buyerís regret on November 3rd or at any such time when next American city gets hit.

Oct 28, 2004 - 5:34 pm

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: