Freedom's Truth

Flypaper strategy is working. We know how well because of our earlier reported description of the impact of American bombing in Fallujah, taking out the violent tourists coming to Iraq for some action:

"The American command says it has carried out many bombing raids since the Marine pullback from the city in May, killing scores of militants. One such raid that was reported this week in a popular Baghdad newspaper, Al-Adala, said that 13 Yemenis had been killed in an air raid in Falluja as they prepared to carry out suicide bombing attacks in Baghdad, and that the Yemeni government was negotiating to bring the bodies home. Among militants in Falluja, there has been one point of agreement with the Americans - that many of the bombing raids have hit militant safe houses, and with pinpoint accuracy. "

And what are the terrorists doing? Evil terrorists kill 12 innocent Nepali civilians. A group calling itself "Ansar al-Sunna Army" issued a gruesome video and a statement that said: "America today has used all its force, as well as the help of others, to fight Islam under the so-called war on terror, which is nothing but a vicious crusade against Muslims," the statement said.

Now we know what war they are fighting - the war against terror is the war they oppose.

As for the AWOL Democrats, their war is on the home front: Democrats hope for bad news.

The attempt to divert Iraq's path from the democratic path has failed. The rump insurgency in Fallujah threatens the stability of Iraq, but not its future. This is a massive victory for democracy. Welcome, Iraq, to the Victory Circle!

Side note on the media 'victory for al-Sadr' meme: "War is Politics by Other Means", and our goal in Iraq is that democratic means to pursue politics are used in a free nation. As a man in charge of militia and gunmen, al-Sadr was a threat; he tried violence to make a political play. Now, he is tacking another course; as a man with a political party, he's playing the same game as a dozen others. His very conversion is a sign to others in the 'resistence' - join the democratic trend or become irrelevent and powerless. In the end, he may be not much different than the KDP, Dawa, Badr, pro-western-Democracy, etc., as they will all learn to cater to constituencies, down to the point of making the same claims. This smooths the extremists out of the process, brings the consensus builders and glad-handlers to the fore, until "There's not a dime's worth of difference" between the options for the voters: All palatable, few extraordinary, but few extreme. That's why Churchill said "democracy is the worst form of Government, except for all the rest". With his gunmen, al-Sadr could have been Iraq's next Saddam. Now, with a party that will appeal to a few and repel a great many, he will have to settle for being Iraq's Ralph Nader.

• August 28: Iman Abdul Moneam Younis,senior woman academic was shot dead by gunmen
• August 28: Car bombing in Mosul wounds 10 Iraqis, including two children and a US soldier.
• August 26: Guerrillas detonated a car bomb as a senior Iraqi Kurdish official drove past in the northern city of Mosul, wounding three people but leaving the official unscathed, police said.
• August 27: Enzo Baldoni murdered: "The group calling itself the Islamic Army in Iraq said they executed the Italian journalist Enzo Baldoni because Italy did not respond to their demand to withdraw troops from Iraq within 48 hours," Al Jazeera reported. Italian paper says this is a Zarqawi/Al Qaeda group, the same that killed Nick Berg. "the group's explicit anti-Shiite character also recalls that of radical Sunni Islamists, who are particularly responsive to the strictly Wahabite message coming from Tawhid Val Jihad."
• August 27: Terrorists attack police checkpoint; six Iraqi policemen were shot dead and 11 people wounded when gunmen travelling in two minibuses opened fire on a checkpoint in Baquba. Report notes these earlier Baquba attacks:
• Earlier this month, loyalists of Abu Mussab al-Zarqawi, claimed a suicide bombing in Baquba that killed six Iraqis, including five policemen.
• A huge suicide car bomb outside a Baquba police station on July 28 killed 70 Iraqis, mostly prospective police recruits.
• August 29: Police found slain Turkish truck driver Ramadan Erkul and an Iraqi man on a highway near Beiji in northern Iraq; the two bodies were found with their throats slit Friday night.
• August 28: Insurgents fired mortars into a crowded eastern Baghdad neighborhood, killing two boys washing cars in a street. Witnesses said at least four mortars also landed within an hour in the same area in Palestine street, a main Baghdad thoroughfare, as cars drove by. Panicked people scrambled for safety.
• August 26: "A mortar attack on the main mosque in the town of Kufa on Thursday killed at least 25 people". Iraqi Government explains police did not do this; Mahdi army did: "What happened this morning in Al-Kufah was that mortar shells were launched from the mausoleum of the [prophet's] companion Maytham al-Thammar on Al-Kufah Mosque. The Iraqi police has no mortar shells or rockets that could reach that area. We do not shoulder any responsibility for the losses that occurred in Al-Kufah."
• August 27: "In other developments, Khalil Khokhas, a member of the municipal council of Jaballa, west of Hilla, was assassinated on Thursday evening by unknown assailants, informed sources told Aljazeera on Friday."

UPDATE: CSM article mentions the impact of terrorist mortars:

At Sadr Central Hospital in Sadr City, Dr. Kamel is making the rounds on a very busy day. In the female ward alone, there are five families with more than a dozen wounded children. Most are injured by mortars and other bombs, says Dr. Kamel, whose name has been changed to protect his identity. He blames most of those injuries on the Mahdi Army.

"Ninety-nine percent of the injuries are caused by Mahdi Army fighters," he says, speaking in English to avoid being overheard by Mahdi Army officials, who now administer the hospital. "Every morning and night I see families coming in - father, mother, children, all injured by mortars. These are not simple injuries, but two or three injuries per person. It's terrible."

The government must be criticized, monitored, and watched. It should not be left to act without the people watching every step by the president, the prime minister, the ministers, and all other officials. They all must be placed under the microscope. People should not be lenient toward them or afraid of them. People should not cajole them or accept their justifications without scrutiny and accountability.

But at the same time, people must not be unfair to the government. They must not sabotage government work or obstruct its mission, let alone hold arms and carry out terrorist and subversive acts against it. If people do this, they will be conspiring against Iraq and its national interests, not simply making mistakes or expressing political views. And there is not much difference between those who effectively engage in such acts and the politicians, media men, or others who cover or promote these acts through television channels, the press, the mosques, or any other platform.

Those who promote attacks against the government and State establishments -- such as police centers or electricity, oil, or water installations -- offer a number of excuses, most importantly, they say: The government was installed by the occupation, and, consequently, to target it is to target the occupation.

This is a false excuse. But let us assume, for the sake of argument, that it is true. Do logic and the interests of the people accept such methods? Does the Palestinian resistance, for example, (and the Palestinians are living under the most vicious forms of occupation) kill the Palestinian workers who go to work in Israeli interests daily? Why do we hear protest cries when the Israelis close the crossings and prevent Palestinians from going to work in Jewish settlements, factories, and companies? Why do the same circles justify and welcome the killing of Iraqis or foreigners who work in Iraq only to secure their means of living or build their countries and societies? Does the Palestinian resistance kill the Arab members of the Israeli Knesset? Does it kill the Arab voters who cast their votes in the elections? Does it destroy vital installations in the areas that are inhabited by Arabs or non-Arabs in the 1948 territories? Did the Palestinians kill members of the Palestinian police force, who were trained and equipped by the American intelligence? Did they assassinate members of Yasir Arafat's government or the Palestinian Authority for signing peace agreements with Israel under American supervision and sponsorship? Were there calls for civil war? Didn't the opponents of that policy stress the importance of national unity and acknowledge that different resistance methods can be used to end the occupation? Doesn't all this proceed from the need to maintain the unity of the people and their basic interests, including the material, educational, and legal interests, which must not be endangered?

Aren't the Golan Heights occupied territories? Why the basic elements of life there are not being destroyed? Why is the fraternal Syrian government eager to engage in negotiations and diplomacy to end the occupation, avoiding the provocations of war and the attempts to drag it into a fight? If this policy is correct there, why should it not be a correct policy here in Iraq?

Saying that this government was installed by the occupation is affront not only to the government but also to the entire Iraqi people and their contemporary history. In the 20's, the national Iraqi government was proclaimed through decisions made by the representatives of the Iraqi people and the British occupation. Iraq was placed under mandate through resolutions from the League of Nations. The mandate did not end and Iraq did not join the League of Nations except under the 1932 treaty, and that laid the foundations of the full independence. Despite this, the Iraqis are proud of their contemporary State. They did not contest its legitimacy or raise weapons in its face. But this did not prevent them from struggling to consolidate the sovereignty and free the Iraqi will politically, economically, and culturally.

Why was this possible at that time but it is not possible now? Was the government that cooperated with the British to establish the contemporary national rule more representative than the current government? Didn't Lakhdar Brahimi, as representative of the United Nations, personally announce the names of the members of the new government based on the Security Council resolutions, which were accepted by all countries, including the Arab and Islamic countries?

We believe that the interim Iraqi government enjoys much greater domestic and foreign legitimacy than the legitimacy that some of the countries and establishments that incite against this government enjoy. As for foreign legitimacy, there are many cases where the international organization supervised arrangements to end the occupation. As for domestic legitimacy, it is stronger in Iraq than in any other country in the region, considering the forces that are represented in the government, their history, and their ideological makeup. If the adversaries say that the Iraqi government is not elected, our answer to them is: Who elected them and authorized them to carry out the acts they are carrying out? If they say that the interim government does not represent the entire Iraqi people -- which is true -- do they represent more Iraqi people than the government does? Can they speak on behalf of the Iraqi people? If the government is not elected, the others are also not elected, and they are not more representative than the government. So why are these falsehoods and meaningless talk?

What is more important about the interim government -- apart from its international legitimacy and the number and weight of the political forces represented in it, which no other bloc or organization enjoys -- is that it is a "de facto" government. This issue is not related to the occupation. It is basically related to the history of the struggle against despotism and dictatorship and the weight of the forces that are participating in the political process in Iraq's pluralistic reality. This is an extremely important issue that is often ignored. For, without it, we must abolish the legitimacy of three-quarters of the countries of the world, including most of the countries neighboring Iraq. In addition, we must abolish the legitimacy of most of our political history. None of the governments that ruled Iraq over half of the past century was elected, unless the 100 percent elections [reference to Saddam winning 100 percent of the vote] are considered legitimate. The absence of elections might raise questions about the representation or constitutionality of governments, but it does not raise questions about their legality or eligibility to rule. Indeed, sometimes it is the only way that might establish for electoral and constitutional legitimacy.

The Governing Council promised to end the occupation, and it did so two years ahead of the time mentioned in main plan, which spoke about an end to the occupation in 2006. Security Council Resolution 1546 stated that the presence of the multinational forces is contingent upon the approval of the Iraqi government. This is an important quality development, leaving Iraqi interests and the circumstances decide if there is need for these forces. The success in holding the recent national conference and selecting the interim National Assembly was also an important step showing constant expansion of the government's political base and a clear determination to hold the elections early next year and move to the constitutional and legitimate state and consolidate full sovereignty.

We hope the government will realize these duties and will not be driven behind individual or personal positions. We hope it will not turn into another axis. On the other side we hope the injustice, aggression, and disdain for the blood and interests of the Iraqi people will stop. The government is a legal and practical entity even with its many mistakes. Any other talk is meant for deception.

"The government will not permit private armed groups to operate outside Najaf regardless of whether they are Al-Qaeda groups, Zarqawi groups, bin Laden or the so-called Mehdi Army," Allawi said.

Washington says Jordanian-born militant Abu Mussab al-Zarqawi is the chief operative in Iraq for Osama bin Laden (news - web sites)'s Al-Qaeda terror network.

Allawi issued his threats after State Minister Kassem Daoud admitted Sadr's fighters had not surrendered all their weapons, defying one of three conditions laid down by the government for halting its US-backed assault on the militia. Many fighters have hidden their Kalashnikov rifles at home and stashed mortars and rocket-propelled grenade launchers in safe houses.

"One of their first discoveries was 20 decomposing corpses stored in a Mahdi office, which they claimed were executed captives. The Mahdi Army said they were its own casualties and dead civilians, but at least one had what appeared to be a noose around its neck, and police discovered a dungeon under the building. Scared civilians speak of a 'reign of terror'."

Still, Marine commanders at Camp Falluja, a sprawling base less than five miles east of the city, have been telling reporters for weeks that the city has become little more than a terrorist camp, providing a haven for Iraqi militants and for scores of non-Iraqi Arabs, many of them with ties to Al Qaeda, who have homed in on Falluja as the ideal base to conduct a holy war against the United States. ... Some of those officers have also acknowledged that Iraqi "scouts" working for the Americans, some disguised as militants, others working for the national guard and police, have been a source of intelligence on militant activities in Falluja, and on the location of bombing targets. The American command says it has carried out many bombing raids since the Marine pullback from the city in May, killing scores of militants. One such raid that was reported this week in a popular Baghdad newspaper, Al-Adala, said that 13 Yemenis had been killed in an air raid in Falluja as they prepared to carry out suicide bombing attacks in Baghdad, and that the Yemeni government was negotiating to bring the bodies home.

Among militants in Falluja, there has been one point of agreement with the Americans - that many of the bombing raids have hit militant safe houses, and with pinpoint accuracy. A clue as to how this has been possible is given in the tapes of the beheadings of Mr. Mar'awi, the national guard commander, and of the Egyptian, a man in his mid-30's who identifies himself on the tape as Muhammad Fawazi. Both men confess to having planted electronic homing "chips" for the Americans. As they speak, the tapes show a man wearing a red-checkered kaffiyeh headdress holding a rectangular device, colored green and encased in clear plastic, about the size of a matchbox.

Iraqi police spread out across Najaf's devastated Old City on Saturday, patrolling in vehicles and on foot and taking over checkpoints that until recently were manned by followers of rebel Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr. U.S. forces pulled back from the neighborhood, the site of much of the fighting.

"It's a joyful thing, the armed men have left Najaf and (neighboring) Kufa," interim Prime Minister Ayad Allawi told al-Iraqiyah television Saturday.

Around the Imam Ali Shrine — which al-Sadr fighters surrendered Friday after weeks of using it as a stronghold — street cleaners in orange uniforms swept up debris, trash and rubble, loading it onto trucks. Shards of glass littered the streets, and burnt cars could be seen on the roads, cratered by bomb blasts. Some buildings were blackened by blasts. Others had big holes in them.

A delegation of five government ministers visited al-Sistani to thank him for his peace efforts. They also visited the shrine.

"The shrine inside is cleaned up," Minister of State Qassim Dawoud said. "We hope to open the mosque to the public within 10 days."

Corpses found in al-Sadr court, showing evidence that policemen and cilivians were murdered on al-Sadr's order in his 'courts'.

In the Iraqi media, the blame is on al-Sadr; in the Arab media, the blame is on America. In American media, the lack of perfection in the world is seen as cause for interminable handwringing. It truly is disturbing when SCIRI, the Shiite Islamic Iraqi political movement, makes more sense than the average Liberal editorial writer:

An editorial in the daily Al-Adalah, issued by the Justice House of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq, granted that the people have the right to "monitor and criticize" the performance of the government, but "sabotaging government work or obstructing its mission" is not "expressing political views," rather it is "conspiring against Iraq and its national interests." The editorial also asserted: "There is not much difference between those who [commit terrorist acts] and the politicians, media figures, or others who cover or promote [them] through television channels, the press, the mosques, or any other platform"

In a way, the most important development has been that al-Sistani - a 73-year-old grand ayatollah, the most revered Shia figure in Iraq - has agreed to work with the interim government of Prime Minister Iyad Allawi. It gives the government an absolutely essential dose of legitimacy with the majority Shia Muslim community.

Militants fired eight mortars at U.S. troops, but all of them missed and instead hit an electricity substation, cutting power to five or six blocks of Sadr City, U.S. Capt. Brian O'Malley of the 1st Brigade Combat Team, said. U.S. forces suffered no casualties.

Insurgents also fired a round of mortars into a crowded eastern Baghdad neighborhood, killing two boys washing cars in a street, said Interior Ministry spokesman Col. Adnan Abdul-Rahman. At least four mortar rounds landed within an hour in the same area, sending panicked pedestrians scrambling for safety, witnesses said.

The dead teenagers were taken to a nearby morgue, where tearful relatives pounded their chests in grief and others hugged and kissed the boy's bodies. At least six other people were injured, said Bashir Mohammed of Baghdad's al-Kindi hospital.

""MR. CAVETT: We're back, and two of the charges against John Kerry at the moment, that I remember, are why didn't he leave when war crimes were being committed in front of him – MR. O'NEILL:Mr. Cavett –
Mr.CAVETT: I'm going to finish this sentence. – and your attitude changed because of your political ambitions. Those are two things that were mentioned.

MR. KERRY: Well, I hardly think the second really merits that much discussion – I'm not sure – that much discussion or consideration. The fact of the matter is that the members of Coastal Division 11 and Coastal Division 13 when I was in Vietnam were fighting the policy very, very hard, to the point that many of the members were refusing to carry out orders on some of their missions; to the point where the crews started to in fact mutiny, say, "I would not go back on the rivers again;" the point where my commanding officer was relieved of duty because he pressed our objections to what we were doing with the captain in command of the entire operation.

MR. CAVETT: The man above you was relieved of duty?

MR. KERRY: That is correct. The man above me was finally relieved of duty. "

They were being hit hard in the Old City war zone. They were deserting.

So what does an Arab army do when faced with force that's beating the tar out of them? No, not the old Hudna trick, they FLEE. We learned on August 25:

"Mahdi army fighters loyal to the Shia cleric Muqtada Al-Sadr had largely abandoned Al-Al-Najaf's Imam Ali shrine yesterday ... the majority of the militiamen slipped out of the complex after a secret order by Mr Al-Sadr five days ago. One says: "We are cleverer than the Americans think. Anybody who stays behind is likely to be killed." He added: "We need these people."

Mr Al-Sadr's aides insisted the cleric was still in Al-Najaf, but many of his fighters appeared to be regrouping in the neighbouring town of Al-Kufah, having been told that the battle for the shrine has effectively been lost.

Al-Shira publishes report: a Peshmerga commando unit has been prepared to break into the Al-Sahn al-Haydari al-Sharif, Imam Ali's holy shrine in Al-Najaf, enclosing Imam Ali's mausoleum. A well-informed Iraqi source said that the same unit attacked Al-Sahlah Mosque and killed the people taking shelter in the mosque three months ago.

Al-Mu'tamar publishes on page 6 a 1,300-word article by Adil Habah saying: "We are at a dangerous junction; either we build a state of violence and militias" or choose to establish a "modern democratic state in Iraq." The current preparation to complete the constitutional process is not a political maneuver by an Iraqi or a foreign party; it represents the determination of most Iraqis and is approved by the international community represented by the UN; thus, there is no reason why certain parties should boycott the democratic process unless "they want to prevent the building of the state of law, equality, and democracy." The article urges the Iraqi people not to be deceived by false banners calling for the "resistance" to get the occupiers out of the country and destructive ethnic and sectarian or religious calls based on bloodshed and destruction.

There is also the threat of the external sides that are beating the drums of war and trying by all means to feed the fire of confrontation ...

An Iraq living in anarchy and instability is one of these aims. They dream about transforming Iraq into a quagmire for US politics and do not care who pays the price. Another aim is to exclude the Iraqi oil from the world market so they can gain from the hiking oil prices. Still another aim is to destroy the democratic experiment in Iraq and use all the tools at their disposal to foil it so that its light will not spread to others. Therefore, they have nothing for us except the rhetoric of incitement, pushing for internal conflict, and burning everything in the name of fighting the occupation. They are playing a cat-and-mouse game with the United States on our soil.

Hassan al-Rashid was elected new governor of Basra ... the dissenting voice at the council electing the governor was the representative of Moqtada al-Sadr. The new governor is 40 years old, member of Badr organization, and ... a virulent opponent to the Baathist regime of Saddam Hussein.

The five-point plan called for Najaf and Kufa to be declared weapons-free cities, for all foreign forces to withdraw from Najaf, for police to be in charge of security, for the government to compensate those harmed by the fighting and for a census to be taken to prepare for elections expected in the country by January.

Ironic is it not - 3 weeks of pounding Mahdi Army while respecting the "holy shrine", and the day of a peace 'deal', the Mahdi Army fires mortars into the Kufa mosque. We were told by Reuters that this outrages millions of Shia followers. Let's see if they respond ... Actually, let's not - we know who uses mortars and who does not: "A U.S. military official said it was possible guerrillas firing at nearby Iraqi National Guard positions overshot their target and hit the mosque." And we know who is to blame for that, as the people at the scene would know: " Those at the scene blamed the U.S.-allied Iraqi military or Americans for the blasts — charges both denied." Oh. It's not hard to be a terrorist when the victims of your killing blame someone else. UPDATE - Allahpundit ain't too happy Mookie isn't showing up to claim 72 virgins right about now. I don't blame him, but think of the bigger picture: The bigger picture of this '2 steps forward, 1 step back' kind of deal is that the key Government/coalition demand was pacifying Najaf; it was never to get al-Sadr arrested. The goal of disarming the Mahdi Army is not met, but will be advanced by this deal that requires the Najaf fighters to leave their weapons behind. And the TIME guys said: "the government will quietly breathe a sigh of relief if Sadr emerges from the standoff unscathed," in other words, we saved ourselves a world of blowback by not turning Mookie al-Sadr into a martyr.

Allawi, the national conference, others have said that if al-Sadr wants to be political, do so peacefully; they left the door open. The threat was violence and his gangs, and what we saw was a face-saving way for al-Sadr to retreat. The solution was to turn these extremists from the equivalent of Bin Laden into the equivalent of Ross Perot or Ralph Nader.

Unhappy that al-Sadr was able to save face? Consider: "I think that Al-Sistani is the KEY to Iraq.If this deal makes him look good and gets the fat-boy out of Najaf permanently,I think that is a good thing." Exactly. The hero of this event is NOT al-Sadr, who wreaked havoc in Najaf and showed his army are thugs and criminals. It's Sistani, who comes back and can make war turn into peace. Double win for Iraqi govt: First, Sistani underlines going ahead with elections; Second, done in a way that leaves the anti-al-Sadr Najaf police chief the only one with guns in Najaf. It's what we wanted from day one.

Worried that we didnt killed a few more dozen criminals or dissolve it completely? somehow the thugs were deserting anyway; and dissolving Mahdi Army, away from Mosques, is a much easier task than the standoff. The Govt can continue to press the case to Mahdi army: Dissolve yourself or we will do it for you. We can abide by the agreement while hammering him elesewhere.

Bottom line: If the deal holds, it is a big step forward.

We have Belmont Club noticing a TIME magazine "Atmospherics" piece - a journalist goes into the heart of darkness and finds friends on the other side, among Mahdi Army militia. Belmont's point of course is that the journalist writes as if "we" are the other side; his only fear seems to be of coalition fire taking him down. We wonder why. For me, his cheer was gloomy and his gloom was cheery, when he said:

Blood covered the marble floor and streaked the walls of the makeshift hospital. We saw fighters run down Rasul street to attack U.S. positions. Minutes later, injured men were wheeled through the gates of the shrine on blood-soaked carts. Casualties were brought in every few minutes. ... We witnessed twenty of these funerals over the course of three days. It was a relentless and terrible sequence, the explosions and incoming rounds, the men rushed to the hospital through the gates of the shrine, the dead carried in a final circuit around the tomb on the shoulders of their friends.

But others have simply quit the fight - like Kerry in 1971, they've had it. In Breslin's indefensible column, Vietnam is alive and well. The Bush cheap shots are repellent: "George Bush, who does not like people who go to war, probably will say that they are not dead. ... The dead were brave men. The president is craven.

Never mind that Bush went to Baghdad last Thanksgiving, has comforted grieving families, and has been the commander-in-chief of the war on terror since September 11th, 2001. Bush didn't ask for 9/11, but he did respond to it, appropriately - Bush declared war on global terrorism, and he's fought it (World War IV) since then. Bush has made courageous and difficult decisions that make a travesty of the "craven" smear, and constant harping and criticism only confirms Bush's courage, because he is now punished for taking risks that others would duck.

If you told me that in 3 years we would have toppled 2 regimes, Iraq and Afghanistan, and took out 2/3rds of the Al Qaeda leadership, I'd have been surprised. If you asked the total death toll in our effort to overthrow 2 regimes and stabilize countries with close to 50 million people, I would have been hard pressed to come up with an answer below 5 digits.

And consider this from Bob Herbert in the New York Times:

How long is it going to take for us to recognize that the war we so foolishly started in Iraq is a fiasco — tragic, deeply dehumanizing and ultimately unwinnable? How much time and how much money and how many wasted lives is it going to take? ...

One of the many reasons Vietnam spiraled out of control was the fact that America's top political leaders never clearly defined the mission there, and were never straight with the public about what they were doing.

The sad truth about Iraq is that one year after President Bush gaudily proclaimed victory with his "Top Gun" moment aboard the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln, we don't know what we're doing in Iraq. We don't know where we're heading. We don't know how many troops it will take to get us there. And we don't know how to get out.

Next up in the Iraq plan are January 2005 elections. Impossible? A pipe dream? Surely if Afghanistan can hold elections, and it looks like they will, Iraq can and will, despite terrorist threats in some areas. We do know how many troops we need: The force level we have, and more and more Iraqi troops. the Iraqi Army's 27 new battalions by the end of the year will help.

Back in August 2003 Herbert insisted only the UN could save things. What we have learned from the UN in Kosovo, and from Iraq since then, is that it would have been a sure prescription for failure. Why? Because the terrorists were not afraid to bomb UN HQ, what would stop them from killing blue helmet soldiers? And then what? Would the UN have the strength to kill terrorists and have a "UN occupation" based war? If so, what is the complain against the US?

The main quiver in the defeatist quagmire arsenal is the bare fact that violence inflicted by terrorists is still far too common in Iraq: Terrorists are still bombing, assassinating, kidnapping, ambushing, and mortaring. They are killing Iraqi civilians, and coalition soldiers. This is not peace, this is asymmetric warfare at its most brutal.

But neither is it a quagmire, nor interminable, nor meaningless, nor hopeless. And certainly a war to depose a genocidal supporter of terrorists is not "Indefensible". Just because the war isn't over in microwave time, that doesn't mean it's lost. In Najaf and elsewhere, we are hitting hard against terrorists who engage in violence, while minimizing the civilian impact in as precise a way as possible. The enemy has morphed bringing to Al Qaeda style terror units to bear with baathist Fedayeen, yet we morphed our capabilities to fight them. Now Iraqis are on the front lines in many fights.

The attacks and smears against Bush on Iraq are an exagerration of war's common difficulties, spun to make any effort to fight evil seem a toxic enterprise: Making errors into "lies"; the necessary uncertainties of war into "no plan"; the existence of enemies into "quagmire"; the crimes of the few into "opening torture chambers under new management" and "war crimes on a wide basis".

The Vietnam template's main danger to our future is that it is a failure template, a template for American descine. For America, it was an abberation; As Bill Murray said in "Stripes" We're 10 and 1. For the Kerry Democrats, it the Idee fixe of their global worldview, a just and fitting demise of military over-reach. The Kerry Democrats' anti-Iraq war script is to tell us that only Vietnam "war hero" John Kerry can save us from our next Vietnam (with a secret plan - bugging out.)

The retort to this has come from none other than John O'Neill, prophetically stating in 1971:

"Mr. Kerry is the type of person who lives and survives only on war-weariness and fears of the American people,"

"How can you tell an Iraqi people that desires democracy and oppose terrorism that America's effort to build democracy and defeat terrorism in Iraq is a mistake?"

The Iraqi national conference with 1300 participants from all over Iraq was portrayed as one overshadowed by the standoff in Najaf, but the truth is the opposite. The working through of issues in the democratic process showed progress and promise for Iraq's nascent democracy that will last long after the Mahdi army is removed from Najaf.

The conference showed that Iraqis have a near-universal desire for better security and a great majority demand an end to illegal militia's like al-Sadr's Mahdi army. The national conference, expressed in the statement of Hussein al-Sadr, made clear: "There is a vast scope for all Iraqis, irrespective of their religions, sects, and nationalities, to openly engage in politics, as a political organization, political party, formation, society, or league. They are free to call them what they may. But, the existence of armed militia is a red line under the law and in civilized countries"

Thus the civil and democratic 'center' in Iraq confidently demanded that all players in Iraq participate within democratic and peaceful means or not at all. It's the non-negotiable demand of democratic citizens. Those who think free speech, civil governance, and democracy is impossible in Iraq, think again: It's already happening.

To those who think his call for peace may be complicating, consider this news from today: Terrorist insurgents killed Iraqi civilians: " three mortar rounds, apparently targeting a police checkpoint, hit a civilian area in Kufa, killing two civilians, including an 8-year-old boy," There is no complication here - this is madness. Moreover, Sistani's peace initiative is no different from the call of most civilized Iraqis, such as what the Iraqi national conference proposed:

Late Wednesday, al-Sistani proposed a new peace initiative, calling for Najaf and Kufa to be declared weapons-free cities, for all foreign forces to withdraw from Najaf and leave security to the police and for the Iraqi government to compensate those harmed by the fighting here, according the al-Sistani aide Hamed al-Khafaf.

Coalition and Iraqi forces are now close to extinguishing the Mahdi Army near the shrine (now within 250 yards). The 'promised' final assault last night didn't happen; Iraqi Government ministers are beginning to lose more in credibility than they gain in psychological torment of al-Sadr with the threats. But the crack-up of the Mahdi Army is happening, surely:

Iraqi police sealed off Najaf's Old City, preventing cars from entering, and the police chief, Maj. Gen. Ghalib al-Jazaari, said al-Sadr's Mahdi Army militia was on its last legs. "The Mahdi Army is finished," he said. "Its hours are numbered." {Ed note: This must give him great pleasure to see. To do it for his kidnapped father, or the men under him who were cruelly tormented and killed by Mahdi Army thugs. This is Payback.]

Witnesses in the Old City said the militants were still fighting in the streets, though the relentless American attacks appeared to be taking their toll.

"It's not like before. The area we control has significantly shrunk," Sheikh Ahmed al-Shaibani told an AFP correspondent inside the mosque.

Sadr's most influential aide, Sheikh Ali Smeisim, was arrested along with at least three other lieutenants who were believed to have been found with a centuries-old tablet engraved with verses from the Koran and a stash of dollars.

MSNBC has a march 2004 story on the Najaf clerics that states:

Sistani, 73, certainly has a vision of what an Islamic government should be, but he is not inspired by Ruhollah Khomeini—the ayatollah who articulated the idea that clerics should rule (wilayat al-faqih) and implemented it in Iran. Sistani's emphasis is not on clerical rule, but rather on ensuring government accountability and protecting religion. Hence his call for direct elections to a national assembly—an institution that would check the actions of the government and the process of legislation in Iraq.

Sistani's clout—the fact that his insistence on elections has fundamentally reshaped Washington's plans for handing over power to a sovereign Iraqi government—is by now well known. Less noted is the fact that he has not called for a council of guardians like the one in Iran to scrutinize the bills that would be introduced in the assembly. If he sticks to that position, Sistani will in effect be recognizing the complex social and ethnic reality of Iraq with its substantial Sunni and Kurdish minorities, and tacitly acknowledging that there should be limits on clerical participation in state affairs."

Note to those who demand Bush 'fix' Iraq by doing this or that: When Bush said Sovereign Government, he meant it!

Editor,

Major Butler's startling and eloquent letter from Najaf was a refreshing missive from the heart to the homeland.

He is right that: "Success depends not only on battlefield superiority, but also on the trust and confidence of the American people."

But don't we need trust from Iraqis? On web forums and in Iraqi media, many Iraqis express trust and hope in the coalition military, interim Government, and Iraqi security forces.

As Iraqi Hoshyar Zakhoi-Duhok put it on BBC Arabic forum (on July 28th): "The American soldier is trying to protect me from the terrorists and the American president saved me from Saddam's regime. If this is an occupation then I show my deepest respect to it and if such suicide attacks are called resistance then let the resistance go to hell."

Our success will be assured when most Americans and Iraqis together share this level of confidence in our mission. The only thing that can defeat us is defeatism itself.

The article is really about explaining The Bush Doctrine, and the keystone of the article and the doctrine is Bush's September 20, 2001 speech. In it, President Bush first named the enemy:

Americans are asking, why do they hate us? They hate what we see right here in this chamber -- a democratically elected government. Their leaders are self-appointed. They hate our freedoms -- our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our freedom to vote and assemble and disagree with each other. ... These terrorists kill not merely to end lives, but to disrupt and end a way of life. ... We have seen their kind before. They are the heirs of all the murderous ideologies of the 20th century. By sacrificing human life to serve their radical visions -- by abandoning every value except the will to power -- they follow in the path of fascism, and Nazism, and totalitarianism. And they will follow that path all the way, to where it ends: in history's unmarked grave of discarded lies.

Our war on terror begins with al Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated ...

Americans are asking: How will we fight and win this war? We will direct every resource at our command -- every means of diplomacy, every tool of intelligence, every instrument of law enforcement, every financial influence, and every necessary weapon of war -- to the disruption and to the defeat of the global terror network.

This war will not be like the war against Iraq a decade ago, with a decisive liberation of territory and a swift conclusion. It will not look like the air war above Kosovo two years ago, where no ground troops were used and not a single American was lost in combat.

Our response involves far more than instant retaliation and isolated strikes. Americans should not expect one battle, but a lengthy campaign, unlike any other we have ever seen. It may include dramatic strikes, visible on TV, and covert operations, secret even in success. We will starve terrorists of funding, turn them one against another, drive them from place to place, until there is no refuge or no rest. And we will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism.

Podhoretz's compares the Bush doctrine with Cold War doctrine and World War IV with Cold War. He is trying to be the Kennan where Bush is the Truman - the man who faced up to the new threat with a new doctrine. It must be said then, that this election season is incredibly important, since history reverberated with the crucial decisions made in that early period of testing. Our current period of testing is critical in determining whether the War on Terror can be won in years or decades, whether 9/11 was the last attack on our nation or just the last one in the era of complacency. This election in my mind will not be a judgement of the Iraq war so much as a decision of whether we even care to win it, and by implication win the war on terror itself. By 2008, Iran will be either a nuclear armed enemy, or a lesser threat. Afghanistan and Iraq will be either new democracies on the mend, or the latest failed states ready to rejuvenate terrorism. Saudi Arabia will be a renewed ally or a recalcitrant Wahhabist despotism. All of them will be either with us or against us.

I am optimistic. If America has its senses intact, Bush will win and the war on terror - World War IV - will be won as well. The fact that in every critical stage in the war on terror, Bush has made the correct decisions, even though second-guessed and vilified for them (and yes, deposing Saddam and liberating Iraq was the correct decision then and the correct decision now). But it is early stages yet, and while much of Al Qaeda is gone, many small groups remains; while 2 hostile regimes were overthrown, 2 other hostile regimes (Iran and RPNK) may soon possess nuclear weapons, while other problem regimes (Syria) remain.

There is much fighting left. As Podhoretz puts it: "we are only in the very early stages of what promises to be a very long war, and Iraq is only the second front to have been opened in that war."

UPDATE: Bill Roggio of the fourth rail discusses the "World War IV" name.

Leaving aside the fact that the WMD threat was real both in Iraq and elsewhere, and leave aside the 9/11 Commission Report that vindicates Bush's integrity, a real problem with it is that the Democrats said the same thing. Les Jones has a compilation of Democrats talking about WMDs, that was verified by Snopes. Some of the quotes:

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seing and developing weapons of mass destruction." Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.

"There is no doubt that . Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status." Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, Dec, 5, 2001.

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years . We also should remember we have alway s underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002,

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do." Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction. "[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ..." Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.

There are lies, there are damned lies, and then there is partisan blindness that confabulates reality. "Kerry Lied While Good Men Died" say the Vietnam Veterans Against John Kerry for his 1971 testimony smearing the military, turning the tables on the anti-war activists.

The curent smears against Bush have a similar ring to Kerry's 1971 statement of exagerration and falsehood: Making errors into "lies"; the uncertainties of war into "no plan"; the difficulty of the task into "quagmire"; the crimes of the few into "opening torture chambers under new management" and "war crimes on a wide basis". All these allegations against Bush are false - dare I say LIES. Before the war, the Democrats saw Saddam as a 'serious threat' needing deep thought. Bush saw the same threat and knew what he had to do. Now, the Democrats have come home - they found their Vietnam. I fear, if they are in power, it will be our next Vietnam too.

• Al Anbar Province 19 35.8%
• Baghdad 10 18.9%
• Najaf 7 13.2%
• Samarra 4 7.5%
• An Najaf Province 3 5.7%
• Qaim 2 3.8%
• Ramadi [Al Anbar Prov.] 1 1.9%
• FOB Duke [near Najaf] 1 1.9%
• other 6 11%

The pre-emptive doctrine of the current administration will continue to be debated long after I'm gone, but one fact stands for itself: America has not been hit with another catastrophic attack since 9/11. I firmly believe that our actions in Afghanistan and Iraq are major reasons that we've had it so good at home. Building a "fortress America" is not only impractical, it's impossible. Prudent homeland security measures are vital, to be sure, but attacking the source of the threat remains essential.

Now we are on the verge of victory or defeat in Iraq. Success depends not only on battlefield superiority, but also on the trust and confidence of the American people. I've read some articles recently that call for cutting back our military presence in Iraq and moving our troops to the peripheries of most cities. Such advice is well-intentioned but wrong - it would soon lead to a total withdrawal. Our goal needs to be a safe Iraq, free of militias and terrorists; if we simply pull back and run, then the region will pose an even greater threat than it did before the invasion. I also fear if we do not win this battle here and now, my 7-year-old son might find himself here in 10 or 11 years, fighting the same enemies and their sons.

When critics of the war say their advocacy is on behalf of those of us risking our lives here, it's a type of false patriotism. I believe that when Americans say they "support our troops," it should include supporting our mission, not just sending us care packages. They don't have to believe in the cause as I do; but they should not denigrate it. That only aids the enemy in defeating us strategically.

insurgency weakening:"the consensus among U.S. military personnel is that the insurgency is weakening. The latter is due in large measure to an increase in solid intelligence, a more formidable Iraqi national military force, and positive developing relationships between U.S. forces and Iraqi civilians."

Locals supporting coalition, officer's comments: "Despite the obvious level of destruction they were inflicting, I watched Iraqis cheer every time the aircraft fired." ... "The farmers are some of the most supportive of our patrols," said Sellars. "In these areas you can see women who respond to waves, babies and small children being held up to see the Americans." ...

First Lt. John B. Johnston experienced similar interaction with Iraqi civilians.... he recalled a recent patrol in which his platoon was followed by droves of children. "There were about a hundred of them," he said. "They were chanting 'USA' and shouting great things about President Bush. These kids are the future of Iraq, and they clearly want us there."

Marine 1st Lt. Stephen F. Shaw: "The receptiveness toward us is good and improving. The people are quite friendly."

Suits added, "This is not a Shia uprising. It's just the people we are fighting happen to be Shia. But 99 percent of this country think this guy needs to get out of the holiest place in Shia Islam and fight his war somewhere else." According to Suits, the vast majority of the Arabic-language news outlets in Iraq, "except Al Jazeera," are making the point that al Sadr is hiding behind the American respect for Shia Islam. Iraqis, now granted never-before-realized freedoms, are refusing to buy into the propaganda of the past.

UPDATE Aug 22: Gunfire erupts. U.S. tanks were positioned within 800 meters of the shrine, and Mahdi army are now in a pocket about 1 km square near the shrine.

"Sadr's Mehdi Army fighters launched several attacks on US tanks, parked around 300 metres (yards) away from the Imam Ali shrine, an AFP correspondent said. Guns and mortar bombs were heard being fired from inside the mosque compound. American troops backing Iraqi forces in Najaf had scaled back their deployment Saturday, but an AFP correspondent said Sunday's clashes were more intense than the sporadic firing the previous day. ... the US army confirmed military operations were continuing at the request of the Iraqi government."

In other news, 5 US soldiers lost their lifes in separate incidents in the last 2 days. Al-Anbar is the main trouble-spot:

One soldier was killed when a roadside bomb exploded in the main northern city of Mosul. Three US marines were killed in separate attacks in the volatile western province of Al-Anbar on Saturday. Another marine also died in a road accident in Al-Anbar when his Humvee ploughed into a US tank, flipped and crashed.

UPDATE 2 - Aug 22, evening:

U.S. warplanes and helicopters attacked positions in the Old City for the second night with bombs and gunfire, witnesses said. Militant leaders said the Imam Ali Shrine compound's outer walls were damaged in the attacks. The U.S. military, which has been careful to avoid damaging the compound, said it fired on sites south of the shrine.

Sunday's clashes in Najaf appeared more intense than in recent days as U.S. forces sealed off the Old City. But Iraqi government officials counseled patience, saying they intended to resolve the crisis without raiding the shrine, one of Shia Islam's holiest sites.

"The government will leave no stone unturned to reach a peaceful settlement," Iraqi National Security adviser Mouaffaq al-Rubaie told The Associated Press. "It has no intention or interest in killing more people or having even the most trivial damage to the shrine. We have a vested interest in a peaceful settlement."

Battlefied Map is here

UPDATE 3: Hammorabi's update and story - "MS escaped from the Shrine and he is in the old city in Al-Khonedi School which contains cellars and many rooms."

Iraq at a glance's AYS has eyewitnesses and relatives from Najaf commenting:

‘they aren’t from AlNajaf, they came from other governorates and especially from those low and mean suburbs well-known in their crimes, this militia is full of crap, we are so afraid of them, some of the residents were forced to join the militia otherwise they would be killed..we got out of our homes because of those thugs why don’t those reporters show the poor residents and let them say all of what’s going on there?’

Also reports: " According to AlIraqiya channel: "Unknown armed men in AlNajaf kidnapped Grand Ayatollah Mahdi AlKhurasani Grand Ayatollah Ridah AlMar’ashi Grand Ayatollah Mahdi AlHakeem After they’ve been assaulted and beaten…" If this is true, then the situation in AlNajaf is getting so dangerous day by day, who dares to do that to those so respectable men in AlNajaf?"

UPDATE 4: Statement by Alaa on the desecration of the shrine and old city at the hands of Mahdi Army: "Just today, a most venerable religious scholar “Sayed Mahdi Al Hakim” who had been a guest in Saddam Prisons for almost 12 years, has been beaten badly and led to un unknown location by a gang belonging to these occupiers of the shrine."

They say the Americans are desecrating the holly place. No and a thousand times no. The Americans are helping the people of Najaf, they are now truly defending the shrine and attacking a murderous gang, attacking the desecrators and coming to the rescue of the holy shrine.

UPDATE 5 - Aug 23 morning:We are wearing the Mahdi Army down as Insurgents Drift Away:

... their numbers and weaponry were considerably depleted from two weeks or even a few days ago. The fighters may have been killed, wounded or redeployed to other troublespots, ... No Mahdi supporter would would accept such observations — even to discuss them would leave journalists open to accusations of peddling American propaganda, or physical attack — but many Najaf residents, who were for the most part delighted to see some signs of life returning to parts of the city yesterday, confirmed that they have seen the Mahdi fighters slipping away.

“About 600 have left, mostly yesterday and the day before. Not all together, but in groups,” Abu Allawi, who lives near the southern front line, said.

“Many of them have deserted, I saw a whole bunch of them walking away this morning,” Abu Ali, a father who was departing the debris-strewn streets, said. ...

Mahdi fighters who vowed to remain — and there are still hundreds — sought consolation yesterday in excited talk of divine intervention to protect them from the withering air and land assault that has rained bricks, debris and shrapnel upon them.

Despite their bravado, the number of unarmed pro-al-Sadr “human shields” inside the shrine itself is also significantly lower than it was. ...

In these bombed-out streets, the detritus of war gives clues to a change in US military tactics. Whereas shrapnel previously comprised heavy machinegun rounds or helicopter missile tailfins, now it is casings from handheld weapons and yellow smoke canisters, indicating that American ground troops are moving through and clearing streets one by one.

Certainly they are confident that they have removed Mahdi fighters from all but a few blocks nearest the old city. “Everything south of here is clear,” one tobacco-chewing Humvee top gunner grinned, his vehicle bearing the warning — in Arabic — “Stay 25 metres away”.

Some helpful advice:

• The price of oil is now 40% higher than a few months ago. With disruptions in Iraq, terrorism fears, and jitters in the market, oil may stay up at that price, damaging our economy. This price is due to fear not real supply/demand. Fortunately, you have a tool at your disposal that was designed for just this sort of event: The Strategic Petroleum Reserve. There is 700 million barrels in it, enough to pump an additional 1 million barrels a day for 2 full years. Now is not the time to continue 'business as usual'. You should release oil from the Stretegic Petroleum Reserve. Here's how to do it in a way to tamp down prices: Announce that until oil prices are below $30 no more oil will be bought to add to the SPR; further announce that up 1 million barrels a day would be sold, as long as the price is $35 or higher. As a consequence, you would soon find the price automatically retreat to under $35 a barrel. Why? Because the price now is based on fear not on supply and demand. It takes leadership to erase that fear and uncertainty - your leadership. Go short on oil or at least stop buying and wait for short term market to match long-term one
• Help the Iraqi government to take decisive action to resolve Najaf and the whole situation with the Mahdi Army. The Iraqi Governments resolve is strong, but the execution of the demands has not happened.
• It may be time for another major address to the American people to give an update the situation in Iraq and Afghanistan. Perhaps a good time would be on September 11th, or after the vote in Afghanistan. Your last address, in May, explained the needed transition in Iraq. Now, with the interim Government, the next steps are needed to be explained. Polling is showing America divided on support for the war; this is not an expression of lack of resolve, but a wearying sense that things are not going as well as they should. Maybe not, but there is a compelling story of the ongoing successful transition to democracy in both Afghanistan and Iraq that can and should be explained to Americans. August has been a difficult month, and should the casualty count add up past 1,000 soon the media will surely jump up and yell 'quagmire'. Even though we lost more Marines in 72 hours taking a coral reef called Tawara in World War II than we lost in 15 months in Iraq, the ongoing violence is troubling, indeed despairing to those who might not see our overall plans and progress towards a free, independent and democratic Iraq. America needs to be told, where we are, where we are going, and what it may take to get there. It wouldn't hurt to point out that the political transition you outlined last november has so far proceeded as planned.

The local police in Mosul have foiled an attempt to blow up the headquarters of the Kurdistan Democratic Party [KDP] in the city. The police seized a booby-trapped car, driven by a person holding the Saudi nationality, which targeted the KDP headquarters. This operation is the first of its kind in the city in terms of the huge amount of weapons and ammunition the car was carrying.

Inside the shrine itself, there were no weapons to be seen, but there were hundreds of Mahdi Army supporters, some of them familiar faces from a demonstration one week ago in Baghdad. [Ed note: Busing in supporters? Learning tricks from the Democrat activists? ]

They were voluntary human shields, the youngest perhaps 8 years old, the oldest 70. [Ed note: Strange terminology 'voluntary human shields' for extra emphasis? This is as opposed to the non-volutary 'human shields' that the terrorists use every day by invading homes, hiding behind children, etc.]

We were led around to the north side of the shrine and into an air-conditioned office, where Sadr's spokesmen, Sheikh Ali Smeisim, gave a press conference. Smeisim's statement was a complete reversal of what we had been told. He said that Sadr had accepted all of the conditions of the National Conference delegation, although he was unable to meet the delegation in person, because of concerns for his safety. "Now the ball is in their court," Smeisim said. "We are waiting for the National Conference to send another delegation to us, and then everything will be solved peacefully." [Ed note: This was a DAY after they rudely made the first delegation sit for three hours and then be told al-Sadr wouldnt meet them.]

Moments later, another senior Sadr aide, Ahmed al Sheibani told reporters that the Mahdi Army rejected the government's new list of demands announced Thursday. "It is very clear we reject them." [Ed note: Thanks for clearing that up. Yes. No. Yes. No.]

Some alleged that the Americans had used chemical weapons on them and promised to bring the evidence. They showed us shell fragments but those could be from any shell casing, conventional or otherwise. [Ed note: Did they have a sale on gullibility in Najaf recently? If the Americans had any intention at all to expand the casualty list, these people wouldn't be around to collect 'shell fragments'.]

One Sadr supporter chastised our interpreter, Alah, for failing to hide her hair under her scarf. [Ed note: A very important thing these men are fighting for! They are blowing up oil facilities, killing policemen, shooting at coalition troops - all for the right to b***ch-slap Islamic women around and make 'em wear burkas.]

We made our way to the shrine's combat hospital, where fighters are brought for treatment. They begged us to take away a man with severe head wounds, who appeared to be dying. We promised to send an ambulance, but say we cannot take the man out ourselves. That would compromise our neutrality. The hospital staff are disappointed. Our interpreter Alah breaks down in tears. [Ed note: Perhaps rightfully so. what 'neutrality?' you are telling the story that Sadr wants told. If you took him out, neither side would shoot you. Coalition doctors themselves would work on him, even if an enemy combatant.]

A tall man in a white dishdasha grabs me by the shoulders. "We hated Saddam, why? Because Saddam Hussein didn't give freedom," says the man, who gives his name only as Mohammad. [Ed note: So far so good - see, folks, even our enemies hate Saddam. so why did a baathist major train the Sadr people? Does Sadr's followers know they are being 'played' by the baathists?] "Now Allawi and the Americans are like Saddam. They describe us as uneducated, but I am an engineer, he is a doctor, he is businessman. We want peace, not war, but if they want to kill our leader, Sayid Moqtada al-Sadr, we will either die, or gain victory." [Ed: where to begin. This man may be educated, but he is infected with poison. Hussein had 30 years to repress your freedom, Sir, and Allawi has been there - how long - 6 weeks. Can you not give him a chance, and give the new Iraq a chance without violence? you join a group that killed policemen in Najaf in a mortar attack this week, and has been killing and kidnapping for months. How is that 'wanting peace'? Allawi has called on al-Sadr to reject violence and disarm; Sistani has called on Sadr to disarm. If you want freedom, why not heed the calls and join the civil society? It's frustrating to see such irrational hate, whose only result is more pain and misery.]

This is a man who believes that he will survive, I think to myself. Otherwise, he would have nothing to hide, not even his name. [Ed note: This is signalling perhaps he is bluffing?]

I couldn't help but thinking back to what an American officer had said about the shrine. Would this engineer be alive tomorrow? Or that 8-year-old girl holding her father's hand? Or that 60-year-old woman walking aross the marble floor? [Ed note: The Coalition military has made pretty clear they would do no such thing, and the interim Iraqi government has made clear only Iraqis would storm the shrine. As it is, Sadr just plays things out and strings everyone alone. I hope his people are getting hungrier and losing ammo and sleep in the process, because we need to wear them down to make them leave.]

One man stopped me. "You newspapers no good," he said. "Yesterday we bombed eight Humvees and killed 11 soldiers, but there was nothing announced on TV." Through my interpreter I vow to report what I had seen.[Ed note: A man after my own heart! That danged biased media!]

But moments after we arrive back at the hotel, Prime Minister Allawi issues a "final call" for rebel cleric Moqtada al-Sadr to disarm his fighters and leave the mosque, and "engage in political work and consider the interests of the homeland," Allawi told a news conference. [Ed note: Giving al-Sadr that 8th or 9th chance to do so.]

By sundown, the fight for the shrine could begin in earnest. For all of us, the journalists and the fighters of both sides, we may have seen a turning point. [Ed note: I would have hoped, but it looks much like it did a week ago; he is in the shrine and old city, and we are facing off the militia in the old city but avoiding the shrine.]

Many peace activists probably had no real idea of the depth and seriousness of the crimes against humanity committed by the Baath regime. ... On March 17, 1988, some twenty chemical and cluster bombs targeted the town of Halabja (population 70,000), killing 5,000 persons. The attacks also included conventional assaults and the kidnapping and murder of thousands of men. ...

The Baath regime has killed hundreds of thousands. The anti-war movement must find some practical way of addressing the genocides like those of Saddam and the use of weapons of mass destruction if it is to attain credibility.

"Now, 12 years later, Mr. Shaati cannot remember if the women and children beside him screamed as the bullets hit, or whether the men in the hole moaned as they died. He only recalls a moment of hollow silence when the soldiers stopped shooting. Then came the throaty rumble of a backhoe and the thud of wet earth dropping on bodies. He survived but saw hundreds of other innocents buried in another of Saddam Hussein's anonymous mass graves." -- The New York Times, June 2, 2003

When I think of Danny Pearl, executed WSJ journalist, or the scary account by John Burns of his kidnapping, or the death during war of the great journalist Michael Kelly I am reminded that these men and women too are heroes for freedom in their own way (although with Al-Jazeera, etc., they sometimes look to be pawns for Jihad instead). They are our eyes and ears in a confusing part of the world for us.

What can Kerry do? PANIC and become book banners, or sign the Form 180? or ...

... hire Baghdad Bob to explain Kerry's position (WARNING: Very funny. Put down the coffee.)

UPDATE: Smearing soldiers is what the Swift vets' new ad is responding to. I saw it. Very effective.

From BBCArabic.com: I am an Iraqi Shia citizen and I totally reject what Moqtada is doing. He undermined the reputation of the Sadr Family and of Shias all over Iraq. Bloodshed and destruction are not acts of jihad and do not represent Islam by any means. He is manifesting his anger after failing to securing a position in the new Iraqi government. No decent honest Muslim would exploit the holy shrines like he did to achieve material gains. Sarah Al Zubaidi, Geneva

From BBCArabic.com The city of Najaf doesn't need to be defended as much as it needs to be rebuilt and to enjoy safety. Moqtada's army deprived it from any perspective of safety or development. The city under Moqtada is pretty much the same as it was under Saddam Hussein. - Ahmad, Najaf, Iraq

From BBCArabic.com The Baathists and the so called Mehdi Army should leave Najaf. Moqtada should beware of this clique or he will be held responsible for all the blood that will be shed in his name. Since he is adamant in continuing fighting, he should immediately leave the city centre and go away from the holy shrines. Raad Al Jassas, Najaf, Iraq

From BBCArabic.com In my opinion, Moqtada has greatly contributed in the weakening of the Shias and has desecrated the holy shrines that he claims to defend. He claims to be a devout Shia while turning the Holy Mausoleum of Imam Ali into a weapon cache and a potential battleground. He placed pieces of artillery and machineguns on top of its minarets and when Americans returned his fire, he claimed that infidel Americans were destroying the shrines. Moqtada, you are very much aware of the holiness of these sites and should spare them any harm. If you want martyrdom, get out there and leave them as places of prayer like they have always been. Americans didn't come near them for a whole year until your army occupied it. Haydar Al Karabala'i, Karbala, Iraq

From BBCArabic.com: I agree with anyone who supports taking very harsh measures against Moqtada and his henchmen. Since the liberation of Iraq, the Coalition forces didn't come near the shrines because they know very well that these are holy sites. They are doing so today because they have been asked by the legitimate government of Iraq to oust the army of bandits that have overtaken the Shrines. The Coalition forces have thus no intentions of harming the Sacred Haydari Shrines. God bless the new Iraqi government. Layth al Rumayhi, Najaf, Iraq

From BBCArabic.com: Dr Allawi's government has overblown the status of Moqtada. He was manipulated by people from outside Iraq and undercover Baathists. I am part of an eminent body of clerics from Najaf, and we sincerely wish to see him and his militia leave, as much as we wished Saddam and his regime to fall. The internet became the only means of expression here. Anyone who criticises Moqtada in public risk arbitrary execution. Even journalists cannot convey the real image because they also fear for their lives. - Zwein, Najaf, Iraq

From BBCArabic.com: What Moqtada is doing is really brave. All the people of Najaf are united behind him. What has been said about the Medi Army is pure propaganda. The Americans have brainwashed the minds of the gullible people of Najaf. I ask the real patriots of our great nation to stand by Moqtada. Salah Zayer, Najaf, Iraq

From the rest of the world, some other good points:

If Sadr thinks that he is popular, then let him opt for democracy and renounce violence. Simple arithmetic. Lawal J, Lagos

These bandits, led by the power hungry Moqtada al Sadr, have two options. Either put down their arms and join the process of forming a new government in Iraq, or die. I personally think, the more of them are "martyred" the better. We have suffered by the hands of similar animals for 25 years here in Iran. What is their agenda? They have none - and when it comes to governing and administering, they resort to some outdated and mad rules and laws. - Mohammmad Ali, Iran

The militia of Mr. Sadr see themselves as defenders of the holy shrine, but in reality, it is defending them! -Thomas Thompson, Springfield, Ohio, USA

Joint operation: "Iraqi National Guard soldiers detained five individuals after gunmen attacked Multi-National Forces Aug. 19 in Al Uraba neighborhood of Mosul. Iraqi national guardsmen, along with U.S. Soldiers conducted a hasty cordon and search operation in the area the small arms fire originated from and detained five individuals for questioning. There were no injuries during the incident."

Iraqi police solo operation: "Mosul police stopped a terrorist plot Aug. 19 after they located a roadside bomb in the Mosul's Ninevah Gubat Area. Police officers secured the scene until an Iraqi explosive ordnance disposal team arrived and reduced the device. No officers were injured during the operation."

Caption: Iraqi boys carry mock rocket propelled grenade launchers while worshippers perform Friday prayers in eastern Baghdad's Shi'ite suburb of al-Sadr city, August 20, 2004.

The first is that the non-negotiable demand of democracy still stands. The militia must dissolve, the violent uprising must end, or it will weaken and kill Iraq's democracy. From Iraq the Model, we have words of wisdom from Sistani, who joined other civilized Iraqis to call on armed thugs to stop desecrating the shrine and leave Najaf:

Al-Sistani called the militias to leave Najaf immediately and hand over the city to the Iraqi government Al-Sistani called the militias to leave Najaf immediately and hand over the city to the Iraqi government describing the presence of militias as illegitimate and that the presence these militias inside the shrine is desecrating its holiness. Sistani had also stressed on the necessity to hold the elections according to the declared schedule saying that the results of the elections will decide who has the right to lead Iraq. Sistani added “the coalition forces came and helped Iraqis to get rid of a brutal tyrant that murdered Iraqis and destroyed Iraq’s economy and they didn’t come to kill Muslims or attack Islam”

"The Baath Party so permeated Iraqi institutions - the security forces of course, but also the ministries that controlled eletrical, power, oil production, public health, education, telecommunications-that with the collapse of the regime, the country's organizational skeleton was broken. Ten of thousands of policemen had disappeared fearful of citizens vengeance. And rather than surrendering as cohesive troops - which would have allowed us to put them to work in reconstruction - they simply melted away."

"This does not mean that the violence will end when the last Baathist diehard or foreign jihadist is captured or killed. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis-members of Saddam's military, as well as lower level and mid-level Baathist bureaucrats-are out of work."

The Iraqi National Guard battalion commander that was killed was Lt Col Sulaiman Hamad Ftikan. We knew him as Sulaiman. He was the closest thing to a true patriot and leader we have found who is actually from the local Falluja area. He was kidnapped and murdered because he had finally gotten his battalion to stand up to the criminals and insurgents who have had their run of the city all these months.

Of course his murder was not merciful. He was tortured and beaten to death. He was so disfigured by the torture that his friends could not bear to look at his body - this from a people who have seen their share of death and torture. There are still at least two soldiers missing that were kidnapped with Sulaiman and more good men are taken every day.

The city has continued to be an epicenter of terror and instability. With everything that I know, I cannot fathom a resolution of this problem that does not include us being allowed to take the city down once and for all. Time and space does not allow me to recount the horrible tales of torture and murder that have taken place inside this town. Too many good men have been taken into the town and beaten savagely because they are trying to be honest policemen or soldiers. It seems that the favorite torture techniques include hanging people upside down and pulverizing feet and toes. However, we have had bodies show up with various unimaginable wounds including some that have had their faces melted off by welding torches. The enemy is savage and will never come around to cooperate with the coalition or the new Iraqi government.

Sulaiman's death in large part ended the Regiment's restraint around the city. The Marines have invested so much time, energy and passion into training the two battalions of Iraqi National guards that were headquartered in and around the town. The enemy surrounded the two battalion headquarters and threatened to destroy them in total. They lured Sulaiman out with promises that they just wanted to talk and that if he exited, he could spare his men. Long story short, immediately after the commanders left their headquarters with the insurgents, the enemy poured into the buildings and beat the soldiers. After a beating, they chased the soldiers out of the headquarters and proceeded to steal all the weapons and ammunition that we had provided and loot all of the garrison property (trucks, TVs, air conditioners, etc...) that we had purchased to stand up the force.

Two days ago, as the Marines were fighting on the outskirts of the city, one of the battalion commanders' security detail was parked behind him as he was observing one his positions. Two young LCpls looked up on the highway behind them and saw a high jacking in progress. There were masked men with AK 47's stopping tractor trailers loaded with Toyota Landcruisers. The two Marines immediately began engaging the masked men. A Marine on rear security near the battalion commander heard the gunfire and turned and engaged the masked men himself. The trucks took off. The masked men made a break for the city but were chased down by the Marines and captured. However, the car carrier escaped and was speeding toward the city with a couple of taxis used by the highjackers.

A Sgt saw the trucks and sped his HMMV section (2 vehicles) toward the trucks across the open desert. He split his section and rifled past the enemy vehicles with is own HMMV. He gave a hasty order to the Marines in his vehicle and then swerved in front of the tractor trailer cutting it off. The Marines bailed out of the HMMV and caught 4 enemy exiting the truck with AK 47s. The Sgt and his team cut them down at a distance of 20 feet with their M16s. Several more insurgents tried to run from the rear. The Marines in the last vehicle cut them down in an engagement that took place at a distance of 30 feet. The two taxis took off and tried to make it to the city. They were engaged with a TOW missile and a medium machine gun. The insurgents inside the city and in a position behind the Marines immediately opened up with a heavy volume of fire. The Sgt tasked a young Marine who had never driven a semi truck before to get into the cab and drive out of the kill zone. He did. The Sgt brought all of his Marines and the high jacked truck out leaving nothing but dead insurgents in his wake.

UPDATE: Hugh Hewitt links to the same "Green Side" article and opines: "a new TRB column out this week branding the Marines' springtime disengagement from the fierce fighting in Fallujah as a strategic error ... The choice made in the spring to defer the battle for Fallujah, in order to assure the transition to an interim government that could then order the reduction of Fallujah in the interest of the Iraqi people, cannot be evaluated now anymore than the decision not to strike the "underbelly" of Europe in 1944, as Churchill urged, could be evaluated until after D-Day and the march to Berlin has been accomplished."

My opinion is similar but different: It is too early to judge the real long-term impact of certain events, but we can say it was *NOT* a strategic error to at least try and accomodative approach. Why? Because we had reason to think - in fact we know - that much of the energy of the 'resistance' is simply due to anti-American/anti-foreigner/anti-outsider hostility, combined with the anger of dispossessed former elites; we had reason to think giving them some space and their own stake in events would create a positive cycle of self-responsibility; we had reason to think the interim Government might introduce a new dynamic, thus making our own risks in the town unnecessary. It didnt happen. The people we fought decided to make Fallujah a hell-hole and a haven for terrorists. So we do know enough now to call it - a calculated risk that failed to work.

The military knew it was a risk going in - on May 6th, they were upbeat but wary

Myers: "Are we sure it's going to work? No, we're not sure it's going to work, but it looks like the best chance we've had."

Kimmitt: "We don't think that that risk is so high that we can throw the baby out with the bath water and just completely discard this option. If life did not have risks..." he said, trailing off.

Indeed, had the National Security Council listened to Bremer's advice, Coalition forces would have arrested Sadr long before he could organize his well-planned, well-coordinated April uprising. ... Whereas President Bush repeatedly promised that the U.S. sought democracy in Iraq, the British government, U.S. State Department, and the National Security Council project the opposite to an Iraqi audience.

During April's siege, diplomats could debate the merits of a deal. Now they cannot. Between April 6 and April 30, the period of siege, there were five bombings. Since the creation of the Fallujah brigade, there have been more than 30 bombings. Self-righteous human-rights activists who condemned the siege of Fallujah have Iraqi blood on their hands today, and yet remain silent. Rumors are rife through Baghdad that there will be dozens of car bombs on June 30 and July 1 as insurgents seek to challenge the new government and rattle American confidence.

As this blog noted a week or so back, the military knows that the Fallujah Brigade is an experiment that failed - so much so, they are dissolving it. Fallujah didn't police itself as was promised, so the US military is now in the mode of air-bombing terrorist targets in the city. There is a way out of the 'box', to go back and finish what was not finished in the April-May failed 'uprisings' on the two fronts where we previously won 'truces' that were less helpful than we once might have hoped: First Najaf, then Fallujah.

"I believe that the talk about negotiations is exaggerated. There is a situation and a framework on the way to deal with what is happening in Al-Najaf. Al-Najaf is an important holy city for all Muslims and the Iraqis in particular. The government cares for the lives of citizens, the city, and Al-Sahn al-Haydari [Imam Ali's holy shrine in Al-Najaf, enclosing Imam Ali's mausoleum]. Out of this concern, the government cannot accept the presence of armed groups. Fortification within Al-Sahn al-Haydari is unacceptable. Therefore, the government positively responded to the calls made by the Iraqi National Conference, currently under way, to enforce the law, dissolve the militias, disarm the city, and immediately evacuate Al-Sahn al-Haydari. We emphasize to Al-Sayyid Muqtada al-Sadr and his followers that there is a large margin for political work in Iraq for them and other political currents. There is a transitional phase in Iraq and this country needs to hold elections late this year or early next year. Those who abide by the law and the rules of the political game will have the right to full participation in the political process. They should depend on the ballot boxes instead of violence or armed groups that are hostile to the citizens and law."

... "With regard to Al-Sayyid Muqtada al-Sadr, the prime minister stressed that the government does not intend to arrest or liquidate him. If he chooses to evacuate Al-Sahn al-Haydari, he will be safe and the government will not take any measures that might lead to his arrest or liquidation. Let us concentrate on the national interests of this country."

"The new Iraq views force as the last resort. We sincerely hope that the initiative undertaken by the Iraqi National Conference will succeed and this problem or crisis will end peacefully. The general welfare of the country, the citizen, and holy Al-Najaf cannot tolerate any delay or procrastination in resolving this problem. There is still a chance and we hope it will be used for the good of Al-Najaf and Iraq as a whole. God willing, this initiative will bear fruit and lead to a satisfactory result in the national interest of Iraq."

"What does the American installed Iraqi PM Allawi's"

Allawi was picked by the Iraqi Governing Council, not by the US. Indeed the IGC made choices that were not the picks of the US, but we went along.

" killing of 6 handcuffed prisoners by shooting them in the head"

A false story and lie rejected by all concerned. Despicable how liars will show contempt for good people like that.

"The American people were told ... that last years’ invasion would bring democracy and liberation to Iraq."

And so it has and so it will: Liberating Iraq from saddam closed his torture chambers and opened his mass graves. Now Iraq has had a national conference to set up National Assembly elections, new Constitution and admistrative law, which will be made permanent next year. civil society is developing well. Saddam's police state had been replaced with 200 papers in baghdad, satellite dishes, cell phones and even talk radio. free speech lives in Iraq.

OTOH, salafist former-saddam-sponsored clerics urge violence and hate of the 'occupation'. they sow extremism and violence. That result is terrorism: Policemen, schoolgirls, council members, Iraqis have been victims of car bombings and indicriminate mortar attacks. most Iraqis categorically condemn the violence.

The new Iraqi National Conference rejected as a "red line" the lawless independent militias. Iraq shall have law and order determined by the Government, of by and for the people through peaceful democratic means. The delegation from the conference went to tell al-Sadr that: grow up, get rid of the armed militia, and join the political process in a peaceful way if he has something to say.

"the Bush administration, as part of a criminal imperialist strategy to dominate the resources of the Middle East,"

Wrong. Iraq now controls its oil and its future, but we DID manage to end the $10 billion in corruption at the UN through the oil-for-bribes program. Bush admin's deposing the man who once offered bin laden safe haven, who funded ansar al-islam and gave money to suicide bombers and the GIA, is a step in the right direction. " has imposed an unelected, pro-US cabal"

The Iraqi Government has wider representation and there is more democracy in Iraq *today* - with elected councils for cities, towns, etc. - than in *most* Arab nations: Syria, Iran, Libya, Saudi Arabia etc.

" that is under siege from the Iraqi people."

2000 terrrorists helping Zarqawi, the 20,000 at in baathists and in the Mahdi army, are not "the Iraqi people" but a small subset of them - thugs, criminals, terrorists and foreigners.

" Lacking any legitimacy or popular support,"

Poll in June: 85% of Iraqis polled supported the new interim Government and giving them a chance. " the regime of Allawi is dependent upon repression"

Wrong! if that were the case, thousands of Sadrists would have been dead already. The Govt is patiently giving the militant thugs *every chance* to lay down arms. they are enforcing law and trying to restore order. The Iraqi Government has every right to defend their country from threats to law and order.

"to terrorize the population into submitting"

the ones terrorizing the population are the militants and the terrorists that engage in indicriminate violence.

" to indefinite US control over the country."

Wrong. Not indefinite. In fact, the Interior Minister expresses hope that in 12 months Iraq can handle its own security needs. The US will be there as long as it takes for the new Iraq to stand on its own feet. No more, no less. The future of Iraq is in the hands of Iraqis.

In Iraq, the U.S. had an unambiguous objective: to install a friendly government and transfer most administrative responsibility to it as rapidly as possible. After that, we would maintain whatever forces were necessary to frustrate any attempts to restore the Ba’athist regime or install an Islamofascist successor. So far that is what we have accomplished. That the enemies of the new polity haven’t simply folded up and vanished is unfortunate but is not failure. ...

The critics are right to say that President Bush did not, on April 9, 2003, have what they call a “plan” for Iraq. He only knew what he wanted to accomplish and had assembled adequate resources to accomplish it. The details were left to improvisation. That was the only rational way to proceed. Iraqis had lived for 45 years under one form or another of military dictatorship and since 1979 under the pathological tyranny of Saddam Hussein. Every natural leader of a successor government was either tainted by association with Saddam or out of touch owing to long years in exile. It was impossible to separate a priori covert patriots from opportunists and scoundrels. Hence, the occupation authorities had to pick their way carefully and could not avoid misjudging some of those with whom they dealt.

Young and old clerics in black and white turbans, groomed men in suits and carefully pressed shirts, tribal Sheikhs traditionally dressed, women shrouded in black abayas, others in the latest hairdressing style and glamorous fashion trends and some in headscarfs of every imaginable colour. Doctors, dentists, lawyers, judges, engineers, professors, teachers, generals, businessmen, artists, actors, activists, priests, imams, even sportsmen and a musician.

After Bush made the proposal to cut troop levels in central Europe and Korea - "a seven- to 10-year plan to withdraw up to 70,000 U.S. troops from Cold War bases in Europe and Asia" - Kerry came to the same forum (VFW) August 18 to blast it. Kerry's flip-flops on the Iraq war have been followed by worrying comments that indicated a wavering commitment to winning in Iraq. Just last week, President Bush critiqued Kerry's hasty promise to cut troops in Iraq, and rightly so, because it put our troop reductions as a higher goal than victory. Now we have the opposite sides - Kerry promising troop cuts in Iraq, while critiquing changes Bush proposes when it comes to Germany and Korea. Kerry - weirdly - complains the fairly specific Bush plan is not specific enough, but doesnt have a plan in response. The upshot is this: Bush is realigning our forces for the war on terror and for a 21st century challenges posture. Kerry has a status quo mentality on Cold War deployments and is unwilling to keep a commitment for victory in the war on terror.

Kerry's position would be bad enough in that context of keeping our troops where they arent needed, but it's worse! Kerry has been saying just the opposite only a few weeks before. Kerry's done a full olympic medal-winning flip-flop, solely for the sake of politicizing what should be a no-brainer non-political

The Kerry flip-flop record

Kerry Is Against Troop Realignment

Today John Kerry Criticized The President For Realigning Our Troops. "Finally, I want to say something about the plan that the President announced on Monday to withdraw 70,000 troops from Asia and Europe. Nobody wants to bring troops home more than those of us who have fought in foreign wars. But it needs to be done at the right time and in a sensible way. This is not that time or that way. Let's be clear. The President's vaguely stated plan does not strengthen our hand in the war on terror. It in no way relieves the strain on our overextended military personnel. It doesn't even begin until 2006, and it takes ten years to achieve." (Sen. John Kerry, Remarks At The Veterans Of Foreign Wars Convention, Cincinnati, OH, 8/18/04)

In August 2004, Kerry Said: "I Think We Can Significantly Change The Deployment Of Troops, Not Just There But Elsewhere In The World. In The Korean Peninsula Perhaps, In Europe Perhaps." STEPHANOPOULOS: "Can you promise that American troops will be home by the end of your first term?" SENATOR JOHN F. KERRY: "I will have significant, enormous reduction in the level of troops. We will probably have a continued presence of some kind, certainly in the region. If the diplomacy that I believe can be put in place can work, I think we can significantly change the deployment of troops, not just there but elsewhere in the world. In the Korean peninsula perhaps, in Europe perhaps. There are great possibilities open to us. But this administration has had very little imagination, enormous sort of ideological fixation and, frankly, took its eye off the war against al Qaeda and the war on terror shifting it to Iraq at enormous cost to the American people and to the legitimacy of the war on terror." (John Kerry, ABC's "This Week," 8/1/04)

Q: "You talk about the overextension of the troops. Do you think this course is ultimately going to lead to the reinstitution of the draft?" SEN. KERRY: "I hope not. I would be against that in the current form. I don't think we need it now, particularly if we did the proper diplomacy. The overall effort of a president right now ought to be really to try to find ways to reduce the overexposure, in a sense, of America's commitments. A proper approach to the Korean peninsula, for instance, should include the deployment of troops, the unresolved issues of the 1950s and ultimately, hopefully, could result in the reduction of American presence, ultimately. Those are the kinds of things that we ought to be trying to achieve in our foreign policy." (John Kerry, News Conference, 4/14/04)

SEN. JOHN KERRY: "The troops of the United States of America are overextended. Their deployments are too long. The families are hurting at home because they lose money from the private sector when they're called up, and they get paid less in the military, and nobody makes it up to them. The fact is if we are going to maintain this level of commitment on a global basis - for the moment we have to, because of what's happened - we need an additional two divisions. One is a combat division, and one is a support division. And that's the responsible thing to do. I've also said, responsibly, that's temporary, because I intend to be a president who goes back to the United Nations, rejoins the community of nations, brings other boots on the ground to help us in the world, and reduces the overall need for deployment of American forces in the globe - and I mean North Korea, Germany and the rest of the world where we can begin to set up a new architecture of participation of other countries." (ABC News/The [Manchester] Union Leader Democrat Presidential Candidates Debate, Manchester, NH, 1/22/04)

In November 1990, Kerry Complained: "We're Currently Paying For 300,000 Troops To Be In Germany To Save The Germans From The Soviet Troops That They're Paying To Leave Then To Stay. It Doesn't Make Sense And I Think We Could Help Massachusetts By Using That Money Here." EDYE TARBOX: "Thank you. Mr. Kerry, Massachusetts gets about the sixth biggest chunk of defense spending. Given the pressure nationwide to take a peace dividend and cut defense spending, how do you propose to keep defense jobs in our state?" SEN. JOHN KERRY: "Well I intend to try to keep defense jobs in the state the very way I have been doing it. During the course of the last few weeks I have been working diligently on behalf of those defense programs which we ought to have. Those that makes sense for a strong defense for this country and that are realistic in terms of the new threat, as defined by the changes in Europe, and the Soviet Union and the rest of the world. ... I think we ought to stay on the cutting edge, and I think we ought to be doing an enormous amount more to guarantee research and development. We've seen a horrible shift in the last few years away from civilian R & D into military R & D and R & D that doesn't make sense. But we should not be building a B-2 bomber for 858 million dollars for one bomber. We should not be building more MX missiles to deal with the Soviet Union, and we ought to be making savings in our troops in Europe. We're currently paying for 300,000 troops to be in Germany to save the Germans from the Soviet troops that they're paying to leave then to stay. It doesn't make sense and I think we could help Massachusetts by using that money here." (Democrat Senatorial Candidates Debate, Boston, MA, 11/3/90)

Then this happens: As Iraqis pick Interim assembly, the heat was turned up on al-Sadr by Iraqi defense minister:

Defence Minister Hazem al-Shaalan earlier told Sadr's Mehdi Army to surrender within hours or face a decisive battle in the central holy city of Najaf, where fierce fighting raged Wednesday morning.

Then this happens: Al-Sadr accepts peace plan: "Radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr accepted a peace plan Wednesday that would disarm his militia and remove them from their hideout in a revered shrine,..."

New York Times Rebel Cleric Accepts Truce Terms, Iraqi Conference Is Told

Mr Shamari, who said he was contacted by one of Mr. Sadr's representatives and told that the cleric had a message for the conference, said that Mr. Sadr "accepts the three items that were in the letter of your conference to stop the bloodshed of Iraq, and to build a new Iraq which needs the effort of everyone, its sons and its daughters."

Al-Sadr aide Ahmed al-Shaibany said U.S. forces must first stop attacking. "They cannot ask us to disarm while ... they're using warplanes to fight us. There should be a cease-fire first and then they ask us to disarm," he said.

The pan-Arab nationalists are angry at Bush because, toppling Saddam Hussein's Baathist regime in Baghdad, he destroyed the illusion of a "strongman" leading Arabs to unity and socialism. "It may take a generation before anyone talks of Arab unity without being laughed out of the room," says columnist Ahmad Rabii. "Those who dreamed of an Arab superpower will never forgive Bush." The pan-Islamists also dislike Bush, but for different reasons.

They see his talk of democracy as an attempt at preventing them from establishing their "ideal Islamic" system based on the Shariah rather than elections. Bush's "Broader Middle East and North Africa Initiative" is seen by Islamists as "a plot to impose a Western model."

... One theme of these sermons is that Bush's call for free elections and reform in the Muslim world amounts to "an act of cultural aggression." "Our Prophet did not run for office in any election," the sermon says. "He did not win any political debate. [Instead] he won the war against the infidel."

A deep-seated fear of elections is one key feature of the Islamist political psyche. The Koran includes a chapter entitled "Parties" (Ahzab), to warn against splitting the Umma (the community of the faithful) into rival political groups vying for power. "Kerry's recent statement that he would abandon Bush's democracy campaign in the Muslim world will please many Islamists," says the novelist Rubee Madhoun.

A statement released by an Al-Qa'ida group, posted on the Islamic website, "Mimber Ahl-i-Sunnat Wal-Jamaa" [name as transliterated], on Thursday [12 August] says their leader Usama Bin Ladin, or his deputy Ayman al-Zawahiri, will soon make an announcement on the expiry of a deadline given to Europe to be followed by massive attacks on the United States, Europe, and other allied countries. The statement said all Al-Qa'ida "cells" [preceding word within quotation marks in English] are fully prepared and as soon as Sheikh Usama gives an order, they will attack targeted places and personalities.

Back to the terror masters in Iraq, we learn from Alphabet that: In response to pleas from victims, UN shows concern for al-Sadr the criminal. Wonder how Rwandan, Bosnian, or Darfur genocides happen under the nose of the UN?

Everyone with an open mind would benefit from this book. I give is 5 stars because, frankly, nobody else out there is touching this issue with the detail he is. This book presents specific facts, gleaned from intelligence sourcs, interviews and other sources. It is careful in caveating when the facts are not fully solid, yet the evidence is compelling to those with an open mind. It is abundantly clear, if you look at all the evidence, that Saddam Hussein, one of the biggest sponsors of terrorism in the last few decades, had links and a relationship with Al Qaeda.

In an interview stephen Hayes said: "The book lays out over almost 200 pages the evidence we have accumulated about the Iraq-al Qaeda connection. Some that evidence is circumstantial, some of it direct. My goal in writing the book is to encourage people to take another look at this evidence ? or in many cases, a first look at this evidence ? and to consider it as they evaluate the Iraq War. We will be choosing a president in November based largely on the war and its aftermath ? it?s important that people see the entire picture as they make up their minds. "

And in case the partisan anti-Bush folks somehow think the Saddam Al Qaeda link was not beleived by Clinton administration, recall this:

"According to the Clinton Justice Department's spring 1998 indictment of bin Laden, "Al Qaeda reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the Government of Iraq." (Page 114.)

Kirk Sowell's review here on Amazon is on target. Now, the intelligence reviews are coming in, the media is trumpeting assumptions "no formal relationship"; that's like trumpeting the empty part of a glass half full. Well, leave aside the fact that Al Qaeda itself is a nebulous organization (more like a consortium of islamic terror groups than a single rigid group). There wont ever be *evidence* of a strict link, because (duh!) regimes like Saddam's use terror groups precisely as a screen to evade detection.

Examples given in Hayes book include cases like:

"Former Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) Deputy Director Faruq Hijazi, reports a reliable foreign spy agency, supplied blank Yemeni passports to al Qaeda in 1992. (Page 66.)"

"On January 5, 2000, Malaysian intelligence photographed September 11 hijacker Khalid al-Mihdhar being escorted through Kuala Lumpur's airport by VIP facilitator Ahmed Hikmat Shakir, an Iraqi recommended to Malaysian Airlines by Baghdad's embassy there. The pair soon were photographed again at al Qaeda's three-day planning summit for the October 2000 U.S.S. Cole and 9/11 attacks." (shades of the current bruhaha involving Iran and 9/11 hijackers)

"Mohammed Salameh, a 1993 World Trade Center attacker, called Baghdad 46 times in the two months before bomb maker Abdul Rahman Yasin flew from Baghdad to New Jersey to join the plot. Salameh's June 1992 phone bill totaled $1,401, which prompted his disconnection for non-payment. After the blast ? which killed six individuals and injured 1,042 ? Yasin fled to Baghdad, where records and multiple press accounts show he received safe haven and Baathist cash. (Pages 11 and 50.)" (These examples cited from Deroy Murdoch's review of the book.)

PS: REBUTTAL TO THE REVIEWER WHO SAY "READ THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT" - I HAVE. IT SHOWS ITEMS LIKE THIS AND DEBUNKS THE 'NO LINKS' MANTRA: Page 66: "In March 1998, after Bin Ladin's public fatwa against the United States, two al Qaeda members reportedly went to Iraq to meet with Iraq intelligence. In July, an Iraqi delegation traveled to Afghanistan to meet first with the Taliban and then with Bin Ladin. Sources reported that one, or perhaps both of these meetings was apparently arranged through Bin Ladin's Egyptian deputy, Zawahiri, who had ties of his own to the Iraqis."

Page 66: "According to the reporting, Iraqi officials offered Bin Ladin a safe haven in Iraq. Bin Ladin declined, apparently judging that his circumstances in Afghanistan remained more favorable than the Iraqi alternative. The reports describe friendly contacts and indicate some common themes in both sides' hatred of the United States."

p61: "With Sudanese Govt acting as intermediary, Bin Laden himself met with a senior Iraqi intelligence officer in Khartoum in late 1994 and early 1995. Bin Laden is said to ask for space to establish training camps, as well as assistance in procuring weapons,"

There is lots more that debunks the 'no links' myth. More importantly, Hayes adds details and connections between Saddam and terrorism that were not in the scope of what 9/11 commission was looking at, e.g., the 9/11 commission barely mentions Ansar Al-Islam and doesnt mention Abu Wael, the Iraqi intelligence conduit to that al-qaeda-related terrorist group. Ansar Al-Islam is dangerous (and part of what's behind attacks in Iraq today), but werent involved in 9/11, so 9/11 Commission didnt have it in their scope. So reading 9/11 Commission report is in no way a substitute for Hayes' far more detailed and comprehensive analysis, and the 9/11 commission report does *not* support the false claim that Saddam and Al Qaeda did not have links.

We believe that we represent an important segment of the Iraqi people that was never organized before under any category as a result of the oppression of the past regime. Now this segment has come to see the necessity to contribute to the building of a new Iraq in a way that is entirely different from the old ways that are still dominant in the Middle East and that are governed by religious fanaticism and pan-Arab nationalism.

We see that remaining silent is not an option in our battle towards democracy and freedom and that everyone who seeks a better future should take part in this battle.

Through our writings in our weblog and communication with different opinions and view points we find ourselves committed to reconsider the way in which we can serve our nation.

We also saw that our somewhat daring opinions were accepted by many people whether westerners or Iraqis and we see that we have the capability to clarify our vision about Iraq's future through talking to Iraqis directly.

Belmont Club on Al Sadr's 'negotiating demands' last Saturday, pointed out that al Sadr was in a poor position to negotiate, but in the strange moral world of terrorism, where the terrorists hold a higher moral plane than the non-Islamic world.

If granted, and Grand Ayatollah Sistani returns from medical treatment in London, it would only be to a city patrolled by Madhi Army thugs, with Sadr on a throne, and the whole odious arrangement not only sanctified by Baghdad but also indirectly confirmed by Washington.

And what does Sadr offer in exchange? A promise to halt his ineffectual resistance, which has thus far resulted in the annihilation of his men, the defilement of the Imam Ali shrine and injuries to himself. This is less a negotiation between two armies in the field than a conversation between a suicide and the police, with the suicide demanding a phone call to the Governor in exchange for not jumping to his death.

The delegates, who waited for Sadr for three hours in a darkened receiving room, never saw him. His aides said he failed to appear because of continued aggression by U.S. forces ... But a senior American commander in Najaf insisted that operations paused during the attempted peace talks. "We sat still for the entire time," said Maj. David Holahan of the 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit, which commands U.S. forces in Najaf.

One of the eight members, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the meeting "was not as successful" as the group had hoped it would be. "Moqtada needs to make a dramatic move for peace," the member said. "We had hoped to convey that to him directly."

And lest you think this is US vs al-Sadr, or doubt the thuggishness of the Mahdi army, read this: Najaf police chief vows to crush militia

Sadr aides have already signalled their unwillingness to compromise. But Najaf's police chief, Ghaleb al-Jazairi, was even more contemptuous of the peace efforts. He ordered the insurgents to surrender, disarm and leave Najaf.

"We'll never stop fighting them, even if there are any negotiations, until they leave the city unarmed," he said. "If they refuse to surrender their guns and leave, we will have to storm the place and kill them all. We want to win the battle and end the bloodshed as quickly as possible." ... This week, Shia militants in the southern city of Basra took his 80-year-old father, Hashim, hostage. The police chief says the captors want him to go to Basra and give himself up in exchange.

"I want to ask the Mahdi army: is it a good thing that they kidnapped a very old man, who is very sick, who cannot eat, who cannot walk and who needs medicine, just because he is my father and I am his son?

"Where is their humanity? How can they say that they are religious, that they are Muslim, when they do that?"

Another relative of Mr Jazairi, a young man recruited into the Najaf police, was abducted by militiamen. "They beheaded him and burnt his body," he said, his voice quivering. "We had to bury him like that. We're still searching for the head." The police chief said 19 of his men had been beheaded by the Mahdi army since April.

Leave aside the gimme bias in 'made a mistake', the opposite of 'right' is 'wrong' and clearly you can force people in the 'mistake' column if they think the war was overall a good thing but was imperfect in some way. the interesting 'spin' here is the 'losing support' claim that AP makes. AP exagerrates.

While AP spins this as a case of losing support, in fact, the December 2003 was a euphoric "bump" from capturing Saddam, as going back to June 2003, the 'was it worth it' figure was 56% to 42%, and the support level (upper 40s) was reached in April/ May timeframe, when: "More people than not believe that going to war with Iraq was the right thing to do, but that number has declined to 48 percent in this poll [May], compared to 53 percent in April. And 56 percent of those polled say the war is not worth U.S. lives and other costs." That was in May 2004.

This poll indicates also the polarization of the question: Republicans favor the war still, by 86-14. Democrats, who used to have a significant number (40% in December 2003) favoring the war, now oppose it: 19-80.

So the real story is this: After a year of persistent insurgency and terrorist attacks more stubborn than most expected, we see that support for the war in Iraq has gone down from 56% to 48%, and opinions have become more politically polarized. This masks the shifts of opinion and the underlying facts that we know: In June 2003, 37% thought the Bush administration deliberately misled the public about Iraqi weapons - something that is clearly discredited by now. Maybe because the now-discredited Joe Wilson was pumping out his story in June and July 2003 (although since then the slander against Bush has persisted in many minds). The real story, of CIA intelligence failures about stockpile estimates, doesn't help Bush inasmuch as even if he gets his credibility back, it does impact the perception of the cassus belli.

Which is a pity, since this belli had plenty of cassus to go around: The horror of Saddam's genocide and mass graves; the fact that Saddam had terrorists in country, gave terrorists money, built terrorist camps, had contacts with Al Qaeda via Abu Weal, Ansar al-islam, and offered Bin Laden safe haven in 1998; the fact, irrespective of WMD stockpiles, that he had programs for them, had biotoxins, plans to make nuclear weapons, remnants (if not more) of chemical weapons, and illicit arms including missile development fobidden by UN resolutions.

It is possible that political reaction and partisanship rather than events in Iraq are driving poll numbers. The attacks by Howard Dean, Michael Moore, the political hyperbole over prison abuse, and the heaping of scorn on President Bush for 'failings' over WMDs, all combined has made it a partisan issue that has deflated Democrat support for the war, as it has also sharpened world-view differences in the American voters.

I was and I am in the camp that the real WMD was Saddam Hussein himself, killer of 500,000 kurds and hundreds of thousands of others. Consider the sheer magnitude of the death and destruction. A whole medium-sized city in America wiped away - that is what Saddam did. He killed more in Hallabjah (7,000) in a single day of Sarin and VX gas attacks that were killed in 9/11. His capture in December 2003 was the ultimate WMD find. Replacing him with freedom and democracy in Iraq is a dangerous, difficult, but profoundly worthwhile project. Our biggest obstacle is the mind-set of Jihad and anti-American poison (of the Al-Jazeera variety) that prevents the establishment of civil order in Iraq; our biggest hope is the common decency and sanity of the Iraqi people, especially the educated ones.

Some of us are "9/11 Americans" and we "get it" - that the liberation of Iraq is a key battle in the overall war on terror. We know that defeating terror means taking away their safe havens and defeating their sponsors (like Saddam), as well as creating a new governing model for the Middle East. And other Americans (the 9/10 Americans) have been convinced that Iraq is nothing to do with Al Qaeda or terrorism (notwithstanding the many links the media suppresses); that we need a more 'sensitive' and 'inclusive' war on terror; that we should attack terrorism with lawyers and courts not Marines; and that we - America - are to blame for terrorist attacks.

So, with superbly executed Operation Iraq Freedom that overthrew Saddam, and then the overall successful follow-through in occupation and transition, despite the persistent and horrible terrorism campaign of our enemies, we have to ask a simple question: EVEN IF IT COST THOUSANDS OF SOLDIERS LIVES AND TAKES 10 YEARS, IS WINNING THE WAR ON TERROR WORTH IT?

I for one would like an answer to that question in an AP poll.

UPDATE: Polling Report on Iraq a summary of several polls. The trends polls taken since March 2003 do indicate a gradual falling off of support over the year after March 2003, and that April 2004 was the nadir of support for the war and it has flattened (and slightly improved) since then.

Hero Pfc. Fernandez is awarded a Silver Star for defending wounded soldiers under fire from militants during an ambush IED-plus-small-arms-fire attack:

An improvised explosive device hit the patrol’s rear vehicle. Two U.S. Soldiers were killed and five others were wounded in the IED explosion and their vehicle was inoperable. ... In all the chaos, Fernandez saw the stricken vehicle’s M-240B machine gun was unused.... He left his vehicle, ran to the disabled humvee and recovered the weapon and its ammunition. ... The hand guards covering the machine-gun’s barrel, so the gunner’s hands won’t burn, were blown off in the explosion. That didn’t matter to Fernandez though; he kept firing even though his hands were burning. Almost 10 minutes later, the wounded were loaded onto the Fernandez’s vehicle and the ambush site abandoned.

“Pfc. Christopher Fernandez is a hero,” Chiarelli said. “He represents the best of us. He embodies the Army Values and the Warrior Ethos.”

Anaconda-based Soldiers joined local sheiks and community leaders to break ground for a new school in Al Albin near Balad Aug. 16. The 226th Medical Logistics Battalion from Miesau, Germany is sponsoring the construction of the new school, which will be built from the ground up."

A question for Zarqawi's Tawhid terrorist cells, the baathist IED planters, the angry clerics, al-Sadr, and the haters shouting slogans against the US: How many schools have you opened?

As reported, Iraq Delegates to Urge Cleric to End Fight and leave the Imam Ali shrine. All true, but the reports does not do justice to statements made in the Iraqi conference. The Shiite cleric Husayn al-Sadr gave this report of the committee that studied the Najaf standoff to the Iraqi National Conference in Baghdad, and in it made clear that this new democracy was making non-negotiable demands:

There are a number of constants that cannot be negotiated. First there is no room for armed militia in a modern state [applause]. We need to cooperate to convince Muqtada al-Sadr and Al-Mahdi Army elements to transform Al-Mahdi Army into a political organization or political party [applause]. There is a vast scope for all Iraqis, irrespective of their religions, sects, and nationalities, to openly engage in politics, as a political organization, political party, formation, society, or league. They are free to call them what they may. But, the existence of armed militia is a red line under the law and in civilized countries [Applause].

To my knowledge, this issue has been all but accepted even by the other party. Frankly -- and I am speaking you to you only from a sense of responsibility toward the homeland, new Iraq, and every Iraqi in this country -- the existence of armed militia means that there is a state within a state, and this is unacceptable [Applause].

“We demand Muqtada al-Sadr withdraw from the holy shrine because it’s not the specific property of one person ... It belongs to everybody. Shrines should not be controlled by one man, regardless of his status.

The Wizard of Oz-like power of extremists in lands without democracy is attributable to the fact that ballots record votes, not passion, and so temper extremism. These extremists are fools, but a fool with an AK-47 gets your attention. And an extremist with the Al Jazeera megaphone becomes a movement. Sadr is an extremist who gains his popularity only by "crossing the red lines" that instigate a response from authorities.

If Sadr accepts the demand of the new democracy, and becomes merely a "mortal" politician without his guns, he will find himself the Ralph Nader, the Ross Perot, of the season, a fleeting figure of no lasting consequence. I am reminded of the comment of a political wit who said that, had Lenin been active in the U.S. he would have been a harmless crank, perhaps running a nudist commune somewhere. Democracy tames extremism the way running water smoothes the edges of rocks. It's a slow, grinding patient force.

The voice of Iraqis in this democratic conference is more encouraging than the double-talk of the radical Sunni clerics: Abd-al-Ghafur al-Samarra'i, a member of the Association of Muslim Scholars, warned: "They must stop the bloodbath, respect us and leave our land now." This is the association that hangs out with the baathist and terrorist insurgents that assassinate and kill policemen, terrorize Christians, kidnap civilian foreigners, and indiscriminately engage in attacks on the coalition that kill bystanders as often as they kill soldiers. So statements like this have a strange irony: "We demand that criminals like the interior and defense ministers and the Al-Najaf governor resign and face trial." Where are their demands for the terrorists to stop their bloodbath, for the killers of innocents in Baquoba, Baghdad and throughout Iraq to stand trial? Are they blind to the violence of the so-called 'insurgents'?

The voice of the conference is the voice of grownups, ready for a 'normal' society, calling on a child, al-Sadr, to grow up. These other clerics - these Saddam-baathist-friendly fanatics - let their voices be hollow, empty and insignificant in the new Iraqi democracy.

"Sulaiman was kidnapped Aug. 9 in an elaborate plot that implicates religious and city leaders. Insurgents also overran and looted his headquarters on the western edge of the city. ... Sulaiman was killed and his body beaten beyond recognition, according to intelligence reports. Fallujah officials claim he died of a heart attack. His body was dumped in front a youth sport ministry where he set up his first headquarters in January. At least one more Fallujah ING officer was also kidnapped -- Sulaiman's intelligence officer, a man named Capt. Ali.

Now, we are going back to confrontation. Both here and in Najaf, we tried the hopeful approach of containing rather than destroying the enemy, and hoped it would calm them down over time or that Iraqis could police themselves. It didn't work, the forces of terrorism were greater than the forces of civility. Terrorism Delenda Est.

"We fight right now to prevent losing Iraq, or else we'll be paying the price for years to come," Toolan said. "If we try to emulate the qualities of Lt. Col. Sulaiman then I don't believe these insurgents will have a chance," he said.

Some 70 factions are participating in the conference, but it is being boycotted by extremist groups, e.g., the Muslim Clerics Association, the Sunni clerics who are more friendly to the 'resistance' and the terrorists than they are to the Government. As Iraq the Model has explained, these are Sunni clerics that Saddam bought in the past, wanting to continue to have influence by helping their former (and current?) baathist and salafist masters.

In Najaf, the truce broke off after al-Sadr's unreasonable demands were not met. "A major assault by forces will be launched quickly to bring the Najaf fight to an end," interior ministry spokesman Sabah Kadhim said Sunday. Again we see the tearing apart of the accomodationist versus more insistent approach. There are many responses to someone who makes unreasonable demands that he has not the power to extract. (the normal word is hijacker, al-Sadr has hijacked the new Iraq here.) The choices are Acceptance (ie give in totally)- Accomodation - Co-option (what they have offered al-Sadr but he has spurned) - Marginalization (what we tried last time with previous ceasefire but it didnt stop the difficulties) - destruction (what is necessary now to do to Mahdi army to move forward since there is no other way).

Iraq the model explains why some in the SCIRI and Al Da’awa party have a different stance, and why there are the usual forces against coalition also joining al-Sadr: "all the parties who support Sadr do not want him to succeed. Some just want him not destroyed because it will harm them too (She’at clerics)" He also links to BBC forum comments on the matter. The comments from Iraq are both chilling and encouraging,

I am writing to you from Najaf. Moqtada Sadr is trying to take full control of the city, as a stepping stone to expand his influence all over the Shia Islamic world. The 'Sadr Movement' men are armed gangs who have turned religious schools into training camps and arms storages. They have also instated tribunals ordering torture against civilians despite the fact that Moqtada doesn't have the authority to issue religious decrees according to Jaafari jurisprudence. Ali Abdul Majid, Najaf, Iraq

I hold Moqtada and his men responsible for the destruction of the city of Najaf. They have nothing but contempt for this city and its people. Some of them are baathists or former members of Saddam's intelligence and security apparatuses. Mohammad Al Najafi, Najaf, Iraq

To those who consider the Mehdi Army terrorists, I ask them: Do terrorists defend their faith to the extent of sacrificing their own lives? Did you forget what the occupying forces did to our men and women in Abu Ghraib prison and other prisons? If you did, the Mehdi Army and the other resistants never will. Fawzy Al Ghazaly, Najaf, Iraq

From BBCArabic.com: I call on the whole world to come to Najaf to bear witness. The BBC should not call these people the Mehdi Army. They are unworthy of this holy name. They kill children because they shake hands with the American "infidels". How can they claim to be religious? Benna, Najaf, Iraq

From BBCArabic.com: People here should know that all Najafis totally reject Moqtada Sadr. His militia's alleged defence of the city is just a cover-up for its members' reckless acts. They are desecrating the city's Holy Shrines and treat the local population exactly like Saddam's henchmen use to. Jasim Al Zubaydi, Najaf, Iraq

I am an Iraqi living in the US and my relatives are clerics in Najaf. People there strive to be relieved from Moqtada and his men. They deprived us from the tranquillity we were hoping for after the fall of Saddam. Moqtada fights the US Army and poses as a national hero. So I ask him: where were you when Saddam was filling the mass graves? Don't you think we should be thankful to the American Army that liberated the people of Najaf? Nawfal Al Jazay'ri, USA

I live in the area that witnessed the outbreak of fighting. The Mehdi Army fired 60mm mortar shells at my house. Maybe they thought my children were their master's enemy? How long will we be subjected to Moqtada's random shelling and false propositions? It is ironic that the United States will rid Iraq of Moqtada like it did Saddam. Maybe this is what they wanted after all? Amer, Najaf, Iraq

From BBCArabic.com: Every day, I meet at work people from Sadr City. They say they suffer from the exactions of the Mehdi Army. Its gunmen fire mortars on residential areas (which they are not from) and then flee in their vehicles to escape US army fire. They don't care where their rockets land or whether civilians are hit. A few days ago I saw on television one of the militiamen wearing a watch with the effigy of Al Sadr, reminiscent of those issued under Saddam. From where do they get all this funding? Mohamed, Baghdad, Iraq

I am a resident of Najaf. I saw outsider gunmen - some of them foreign - sneaking into the city. Their intention is to threaten its peace and security under the cover of the Mehdi Army. Iraq has become a battlefield for settling scores. Some claim Islam, and they couldn't be farther from it. There is also involvement by intelligence of neighbouring countries, and farther field. Najaf Resident, Iraq

From BBCArabic.com: I am from Najaf and I did see a number of Iranians fighting there. A friend of mine saw lots of Iranian weapons in the hands of Al Sadr followers. Haidar Mohammed, Najaf, Iraq

Large scale arrests of Al Mahdi Army took place in the city of Al Samawa. This was to prevent an outbreak of violence in this city, 80 km from Al Najaf, after militiamen from Mahdi Army attacked an Iraqi patrol and burned two police cars, wounding several policemen. Early this morning, we heard explosions in the Japanese base near Samawa, probably by mortar shells. Ahmed Al Samawi, Samawa, Iraq

From BBCArabic.com: These murderers must be stopped. I saw heart rending pictures of children given mortars instead of pencils and colouring books. I was astounded why on earth they were wearing green headbands like the Iranian Revolution Guards use to wear during the eight year war between Iran and Iraq. Iranian influence should be curbed and those who follow its orders in Iraq must be prosecuted. Mariah, Baghdad, Iraq

Here at home, in the US democracy, Kerry stumbles over Iraq as it becomes clearer to people how inconsistent Kerry has been on Iraq. Even the Kerry-friendy New York Times frets over Kerry's shifting positions, saying he "tailored his positions ... to his presidential ambitions". There are dangers in democracy as in other forms of Govt: "A Kerry victory based on anger at Bush would not prepare the country for the difficult choices ahead."

The Weekly Standard sheds light on Zarqawi's terrorist network, reporting on a memo "Structure of Tawhid and Jihad Islamic Group," that "details several days of recent interrogations of one of Zarqawi's captured lieutenants. Umar Baziyani, Zarqawi's number four," who was captured in May 2004:

There are nine regional leaders of the Falluja-based Tawhid and Jihad under Zarqawi. His deputy, also based in Falluja, is known as Mahi Shami. If U.S. intelligence manages to catch up with these two top leaders, there are still regional "emirs" fanned out around Iraq, which could make the network incredibly difficult to break. ... He lists seven military commanders under Zarqawi's control throughout Iraq with about 1,400 fighters at their disposal. Not surprisingly, Baziyani stated that the Falluja group, headed by Abu Nawas Falujayee, has the most fighters with 500. Second to Falluja is Mosul, with 400 fighters. (Analysts believe Mosul is a haven for former Ansar al Islam fighters.) There are also strongholds in Anbar (60 fighters), Baghdad (40 fighters), and Diyala, the province just northeast of Baghdad (80 fighters).

Tawhid and Jihad maintains a strong military presence (150 fighters) in the town of al-Qaim, which is close to the Syrian border ... the town is said to be a depot for weapons, cash, and fighters supplied by Zarqawi's financiers--the bulk of whom are now believed by U.S. intelligence to be operating out of Syria.

... the Zarqawi network received a great deal of assistance from Iran. One Tawhid and Jihad militant, Othman, was reportedly responsible for transferring former Ansar al Islam fighters and other jihadis back and forth from Iran to Baghdad once the U.S. occupation was underway.

The captured militant says that U.S. forces have hammered the Falluja bases of his organization in recent months. This, he said, has caused the network's leadership to disperse. Thus, Baziyani states, some of Zarqawi's deputies have considered Samarra as a new base. According to one Iraqi source close to the new Iraqi security cabinet, there has been some indication of "command and control in the Samarra area."

This puts in perspective the Aug 14th AP News reports of bombing of "known enemy locations" near Samarra The military said about 50 militants were killed in the operation. Also: "The military said soldiers the 1st Infantry Division's 2nd Brigade Combat Team detained three suspected weapons suppliers and confiscated weapons and bomb-making material during raids in Samarrah."

Coalition military surrounded the Imam Ali Shrine in Najaf yesterday in a 'clearing operation' that was quite successful. Then the Iraqi Government, after calling on Mahdi army to lay down their arms, agreed to a truce when al-Sadr aides came to them to talk. This seems the Arab way - talk your way out when you can't shoot your way out. A few points: Hammorabi declares: "Muqtada Sadr injury is a fabrication by his thugs!" Al-Sadr came to the government to talk but most media seem to elide that point. The coalition military found a network of tunnels (reported by Fox), indicating that even if we wanted to storm the shrine, it would have only made the rats flee into holes.

Interior Minister Naqib denied Sadr was wounded and said a truce had been in force since last night. He said the government was negotiating Sadr's departure from the revered Imam Ali shrine, where he has been holed up with his fighters.

But the fate of the shrine is emblematic of the fate of Iraq. It's a delicate structure, and we don't want to "destroy it in order to save it". And the real beseigers of the shrine are the militants who have abused the protected shrine for debased ends. They are beseiging Iraq. Time to break their seige of Iraq's future.

UPDATE - 8/12: Jed Babbin on NRO says winning the fight in Najaf is vital and blames Iranian interference for problems.

Joint Iraqi Police Service, Iraqi National Guard, and U.S. Special Forces operations in Al Kut, Aug. 11, against Mehdi Militiamen may have broken the back of anti-Iraqi forces in the city, according to the city's governor, ... the fighting culminated in one area when Iraqi guardsmen and police launched an assault across the Tigris River in a small boat under machinegun fire and retook a key bridge in the city. Iraqi forces continue to hold the bridge.

CENTCOM battle assessment was:

Multi-National Forces, additionally, launched an AC-130 gunship - providing close air support to forces in the city. Included in the MNF battle damage assessment were the destruction of the Al Kut "Sadr Bureau," one Mehdi Militia manned-and-controlled Iraqi police station that had been overrun, 23 other buildings and eight vehicles. One MNF serviceman was reported injured in the fight and evacuated after briefly returning to the action. Iraqi forces were fighting side-by-side with the MNF forces in the area.

The office of Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi issued a statement assuring that the holy shrine would remain safe from all attacks and said he had not approved the entry of multinational forces into the Imam Ali.

"They want the Americans to shoot the holy shrine," a Najaf resident advised Army Maj. Doug Ollivant as the he mingled with Iraqis in the industrial section of the city. Relatively few in Najaf support Sadr, who they view as disrespectful of Sistani.

"Take Moqtada Sadr's army out from Najaf," said another resident, Hassan Yusuf, clutching a spark plug box in front of a row of repair shops. "We don't want them." "Ha! Neither do we!" Ollivant replied.

Picture of US forces detaining militants

Why does she blog? She agreed with Kurdo's words that: "It is to increase the interactions between the locals, and the outside world. I guess in the west some people (not all) see Iraqis as masked men with RPG s , and suicide bombers, and Sader Militias, etc etc (all the negative images which are shown on TV)." It's her goal to change that image. The wisdom, intelligence, and desire for justice and freedom on the Iraqi blogs is surely an antidote to that false impression, and a reminder that their freedom and an Iraqi civil society is something worth fighting for.

"Major operations to destroy the militia have begun," said Maj. David Holahan, executive officer of the 1st Battalion, 4th Marine Regiment. Thousands of U.S. troops were participating, he said.

As of August 12th, Iraq Government officials claim 1200 militants have been captured and weapons have been captured as well. Militants are now besieged at the Imam Ali Shrine in Najaf, and have also stirred up trouble in Kut. CENTCOM reports: "Members of the Mehdi Militia fired 25 mortar rounds at the main IP station in Najaf from inside the walls of the Imam Ali Shrine, the courtyard area, beginning around 10:45 a.m." While not attacking the shrines, CENTCOM reports:

Current clearing operations by Iraqi Security Forces and Multi-National Forces in Kufa and Najaf are focused on areas in both cities, but do not include the Imam Ali Mosque nor the Kufa Mosque. Today’s operations are designed to restrict freedom of movement of Sadr forces in Kufa and Najaf and to further isolate them in these mosques which they use as a base of operations.

Military operations in Najaf will continue to take place until these fighters evacuate the holy shrine, the Iraqi ministers said.

The New York Times is whining that Kerry's muddled message isn't getting across, a sign Bush's attempt to pin Kerry down is working.

Mr. Kerry's problems began last week when President Bush challenged him for a yes-or-no answer on a critical campaign issue: If Mr. Kerry knew more than a year ago what he knows today about the failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, would he still have voted to authorize the use of military force to oust Saddam Hussein? ... it is a question that can upset the difficult balance Mr. Kerry must strike. He has to portray himself as tough and competent enough to be commander in chief, yet appeal to the faction of Democrats that hates the war and eggs him on to call Mr. Bush a liar. ... Across the weekend, the Kerry campaign debated how Mr. Kerry should respond. "There were a lot of ideas," said one official, "from silence, to throwing the question back in the president's face."

Meanwhile, The Dissident Frogman has created the BEST campaign message of 2004, in a flash movie. But perhaps the most disturbing too.

He's been mocked for that seeming contradictory statement, but there was no irony here. As Fox News explained at the time, Qasim Ghida Kadhim and eight other Iraqis had their hands crudely amputated in 1995 at Abu Ghraib, on the orders of Saddam Hussein. Bush was indeed shaking the new prosthetic hand of a man given a second chance after Saddam removed his hands for a meaningless political crime.

How did he and others get their new hands? It started with Saddam's orders to cut off their hands for the 'crime' of currency trading:

Not trusting that doctors would carry out his grisly orders, Saddam directed prison officials to videotape the entire procedure and deliver the nine severed hands to him. Besides amputating the hands, surgeons at Abu Ghraib methodically tattooed an X on each man's forehand to mark him as a criminal. ...

After their surgery and visit to the President, the Iraqis paid tribute to U.S. servicemen who gave their lives and expressed their thanks:

At a Washington press conference, the men expressed their unwavering gratitude to the American government and the American people for liberating their homeland from Saddam's tyranny.

"The Iraqi people and the American people are brothers in humanity," said Salah Znad, a teacher. "We appreciate that you paid a price to help the Iraqis out of these problems and injustice. We are thankful to the American people."

But I am also reminded by another story. General Franks tells the story of the best advice he got, from his Dad. A working man from Oklahoma, and back then and there a 'hand' was someone who did work for others. His Dad's advice was simply:

"Be a Good Hand"

Speaking of hands ... Shaking hands with dictators.

Howard said he noted that 42 of the 43 had retired from public service before al-Qaeda attacked the U.S. on Sept. 11, 2001 -- and in some cases long before then. "The terrorist attacks which occurred on that day profoundly changed the world in which we lived. New and different challenges exist for which new and different approaches are needed." ... He noted that one of the most prominent of the signatories, retired Gen. Peter Gration -- defense chief from 1987 to 1993 - had himself written before the war that Iraq probably possessed WMD.

"Allawi is doing the right thing. These people have no popular support. They are terrorists. He needs to be tough," said a retired education ministry employee from Najaf who only gave his name as Abu Saad for fear of reprisals.

Allawi has to destroy the Mehdi Army. They are criminals who pop pills and drink alcohol and then go out and cause problems," said automobile parts shop owner Talal Ahmed, 57, a Sunni. "I have my rifle ready in case they come round here. They should be crushed."

"The approach of force against the Mehdi Army is right but the Americans should not be fighting. This should be an Iraqi struggle," said Abu Ahmed.

Latest Reuters report states:

Iraqi and U.S. forces are making final preparations as we get ready to finish this fight that the Moqtada militia started," Colonel Anthony Haslam, commanding officer of the 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit in Najaf, said in a statement.

BTW, Belmont Club has a World War 3 update - what we need to do, what we are doing. Another good "big picture" essay. We are making progress, and also we are understanding better where we are. Sometimes the fog of war lifts and you can almost glimpse victory on the horizon.

"I have personally heard from an informed source who is a close relative of Sistani's agent in Basrah that he has been suffering from ischemic heart disease for some time and that he had recently experienced a myocardial infarction just 2 or 3 weeks before the fighting broke out in Najaf."

More footage was released yesterday of an old tired Sistani lying down in a bed at the Cromwell hospital. He is said to have been visited by an Iranian official who offered him Tehran's services, and that he snapped back at him that all he wanted was for Iran to leave him and Iraq alone.

Najaf is a most critical battle facing us. While Spring 'uprisings' failed and were quelled, the forces were not extinguished. Like a bad cold, the remaining insurgent force has been debilitating the reconstruction process, even if it can't kill the transition to democracy. This battle for Najaf, if won, would portend a clearer path to security and successful transition.

The coalition and interim Government are taking the right approach. First with resolve - they are refusing the 'negotiation' ploy and Prime Minister Allawi in Najaf and others in the Iraqi Government have demanded the militants lay down their arms and leave Najaf. They won't negotiate, nor will they be satisfied with a ceasefire that lets Mahdi army regroup to cause trouble later.

The military is also going for liquidation of the enemy. Coalition military is attacking militant bases at the Wadi Al Salam cemetery in Najaf, and finding and eliminating enemy weapon's caches, so Mahdi's army cannot count on any sanctuary. CENTCOM reports that militants - or AIF (anti-Iraq Forces) are using hit-and-run back-to-the-shrine tactics: "AIF today are conducting the same tactics -- launching attacks from the cemetery and surrounding areas, only to immediately run back and seek sanctuary in the mosques and buildings surrounding the Imam Ali Shrine."

Box score: The U.S. military has estimated that 360 insurgents were killed in Najaf between Thursday, when fighting began, and Sunday night. Five U.S. troops have been killed, 19 injured, four Iraqi national guardsmen have been killed and 12 injured. One lesson is that the 'ceasefires' just delay the inevitable conflict, to the advantage of the enemy: Militants have been training since May: "More professional," said Miyamasu, the 5th Regiment battalion commander whose troops provided Najaf reinforcement. "I don't mean to give them too much, but they're good. These guys really make us work to kill them, but in the end, they're dead."

This Guardian (via FR) article, showing the enemies point of view, indicates that most are not from Najaf:

"Mr Shaibani, a cleric in his early 30s, originally from the impoverished southern town of Nassiriya, sat in a narrow alleyway not far from the centre. ... He was surrounded by his platoon, a dozen or so men, of different ages and from different towns and cities. Some from Basra; others from the Shia slums around Baghdad."

The noose is tightening. Coalition controls most of Najaf now: "Najaf Gov. Adnan Zurfi said that after five days of fighting, U.S. and Iraqi forces were in control of the city except for the area around the golden-domed Imam Ali Mosque." Iraq the Model says also:

The chief of Najaf IP, brigadier Ghalib Al Jazaeri was interviewed by Al Sharqyia TV today and gave some important statements. Mr. Ghalib confirmed the IP control over the majority Najaf and said that Al Mahdi militia are besieged in small areas.

The ripple effects will be wide. Iran's nefarious involvement is exposed now: Shaalan, speaking on the Dubai-based Al-Arabiya satellite television station, said Iranian-made weapons have been discovered in Najaf and accused Iran of being "the number one enemy" of the Iraqi people. And oil too: Oil exports from Iraq back to normal.

UPDATE 8/10: John Burns of New York Times reports on Najaf: "grip on Iraqi Militia in Najaf Is Tight".

• Saddam's 9/11 pic
• Saddam and 9/11
• Saddam's regime and Al Qaeda, has 9/11 Commission perspective and added items (including a Hayes "Connection" summary)
• 9/11 Commission vindicates Bush on terror and on Iraq
• Hayes on Senate Intel report

Other external links and articles:

• Abu Wael - "Saddam's Ambassador to Al Qaeda"
• Frontpage mag on Feith memo Nov 03
• Case Closed, by Steven Hayes lays out Feith memo evidence
• Iraq-Al Qaeda Connection (links post on FR)
• A Terror Sugar Daddy named Saddam, Deroy Murdock
• Ahmed Hikmat Shakir story (Newsmax; it's disputed whether this man is really lists on Fedayeen payroll lists, but "He was last seen heading home to Baghdad")
• Abu Nidal, harbored by Saddam then killed by him
• Sabah Khodada interview on Salman Pak
• Claudia Rossett Oil-for-terror, see also Friends of Saddam, UN Oil for Food scam
• Saddam's Regime payed 1993 WTC bomber Yasin - Yasin fled to Iraq after 1993 and has $25 million price on his head. FR post on Yasin.

• Hassan Ghul of Al-Qaeda caught in Iraq

We seem to have forgotten Libya. Like the Lackawanna terror cell that was busted, the diffusing of a potentially terrible threat gets smaller news than, say, the next 9/11. But what we prevented was huge, a threat as big as Iran will be if we don't stop them soon. AQ Khan, the Pakistan nuke chief, was turning rogue nations into WMD nations like they were Starbucks franchises. We didn't know this during the era of complacency (ie Clinton administration); heck we were even surprised when India and Pakistan both set off nuclear weapons tests. We busted the AQ Khan nuclear technology ring in 2003 through a multilateral effort to track down and stop the trafficking in WMDs called the The Proliferation Security Initiative, whose successes are decribed well in this TCS must-read article. Cracking that case led us to Libya.

A March 2004 AEI article by Thomas Donnelly debunks the claim put forward by some officials like Martin Indyk that diplomacy brought Libya to heel on WMDs:

"In August 2003, the U.S. and British intelligence communities scored a remarkable coup, blowing open the vast nuclear black market operated by Abdul Qadeer Khan, father of Pakistan's nuclear bomb.

... "Soft power" advocates also overlook the fact that negotiations with Gaddafi had been dragging on for years--a steady process of wooing and cajoling the dictator with offers of international acceptance and lucrative oil contracts, but with no conceivable end in sight. What ultimately shuttered the Libyans' secret WMD programs were not these blandishments but a more tangible reality: namely, they got caught.

... It hardly seems a coincidence that Gaddafi's intelligence chief, Moussa Kussa, opened the dialogue on WMDs in March 2003, immediately before the invasion of Iraq. Gaddafi's own testimony at the time reveals the extent to which America's sudden willingness to assert its power in the Middle East weighed heavily on him. "When Bush is finished with Iraq, we'll have a clear idea of where he's going," he told the French daily Le Figaro on the eve of the war. "It won't take long to find out if Iran, Saudi Arabia, or Libya will be targets as well."8

Those critics of the war who opposed our 'strong resolve' in Iraq, and that assume "negotiations" with rogue nations would work are learning the wrong lesson. They have a "What, me worry?" attitude about WMD threats and are confabulating a diplomatic record to explain what is better explained by dictator's calculations of what will keep him in power. Good intelligence and Strong resolve combined saved us from facing a graver threat and challenge from a nuclear-armed Libya.

If intelligence was not good, we ought not condemn the strong resolve that was not at all part of the problem. The real lesson then is to improve our intelligence while we maintain a posture of strong resolve to face down emerging threats before they get worse. It would a tragedy for the "lesson" of Iraq to be an encouragement of sweeping problems and threats under the rug.

He also paints Al-Sadr's Madhi army as "Beggar's Opera" bit players: "... a dangerous, lunatic and murderous minority; serpents and blind scorpions let loose; the menace cannot be underestimated." A verbal JDAM - powerful and right on target.

• The Iraqi Police Service, Facilities Protection Service, and Department of Border Enforcement currently stand at some 183,781 working officers (MNF number).
• The Civilian Police Assistance Training Team’s Emergency Response Unit - an elite 270-man Iraqi Police Service unit trained to respond to national-level law enforcement emergencies.
• The Iraqi army will deploy a fully trained and operational force of more than 29,000 soldiers and 27 battalions by early 2005. Several battalions are already deployed: Also last week, the 5th battalion activated and two additional battalions deployed to the Baghdad area, joining the previously deployed Iraqi Intervention Force's 2nd Battalion, to form an army security force of three fully-trained regular army units in and around the capital city. See also: Iraqi Army's 5th Battalion has deployed to Baghdad
• Iraqi Intervention Force, a branch of the Iraqi Army specifically trained in counterinsurgency operations: Iraqi Intervention Forces' 4th Battalion was deployed to Baghdad early August.
• The Iraqi National Guard: Currently comprised of 38,250 trained soldiers. Another 3,000-plus troops are in training and will soon bring the force to a full strength of 41,254 personnel. Iraqi National Guard and police have teamed up on operations.

Training has also been going on, graduates of basic training have bolstered Iraqi Army, Iraqi National Guard, and now NATO has joined in helping training. A number of countries are assisting in training and equipping to help Iraq get security forces standing up.

Assessments in the media? Iraqi Security Has Come Far, With Far to Go some data points to a clear improvement today versus, say, in April, where police, outgunned by RPG-carrying insurgents, were fleeing posts, and also notes the much more forceful current posture of the Iraqi army:

• "Now, he [Defense Minister Shalan] says, his forces are getting organized. He pointed to a recent sweep through Baghdad's tough Haifa Street neighborhood that resulted in more than 150 arrests and to recent gun battles in which the National Guard stood its ground."
• "Allawi announced soon after taking office that the army would be used for domestic security, and Shalan said he expected to transform at least part of the National Guard into the core of a new Iraqi army of six divisions with about 50,000 soldiers. With small air force and marine contingents, he said, Iraq's total armed services would be about 70,000."
• "Schwitters said the training programs would soon start to produce more soldiers. "We will have five battalions by the end of this month, and by the end of the year, 27 battalions," he said."
• On the Iraqi Police Service: "They have come a long way. We have given them equipment -- but we haven't given them enough. More needs to come. But they are around. They are visible. They are responding. They are conducting individual operations that they plan themselves, execute themselves, and do the follow-up themselves." He and other officers cite examples of police stations that come under mortar attack one day and are fully manned the next, of wounded officers returning to work, of applicants still streaming into recruiting offices."
• Ali Edan, 23, was shot once while on duty, but "I don't want to quit. I want to protect my country," he said. "I will show my children that I was hurt protecting Iraq. I am proud of that."

The trends are in the right direction, the security forces are getting better support and training than in the past. These deployments are turning into successful operations, netting large numbers of criminals in Baghdad, and the recent capture of hundreds of militants in Najaf. The operations are turning into the capture and imprisonment of insurgents, terrorists, and criminals. Insurgents and suppliers of weapons are getting jailed for their crimes. As of the end of July, 37 criminal cases involving 55 defendants have been tried before the Central Criminal Court of Iraq for AIF activities directed against the Multi-National Force and the security of Iraq. These trials resulted in 49 insurgents being convicted with sentences ranging from six months to 30 years. AIF are turned over to the Iraqi Corrections Service after their convictions for imprisonment. And as Iraqis re-impose death penalty, the pressure on insurgents increases.

Interview with Interior Ministry spokesman Sabah Kadhim On Amnesty:We're discussing giving everyone a chance to participate in the new Iraq. As long as they didn't cause violence in the past, they're welcome to get involved.
On coalition troops: Iraqis are quite intelligent - they know how to handle the security issues here. Ultimately, we want the foreign troops to leave in the next six months to a year. ... This is a recognised government. If it were quiet in Iraq, tomorrow, they [US-led troops] would leave. They want to go. I don't think the government wants them to stay, no matter who is in power.

Given the prospect of 27 trained battalions protecting Iraqi security by the end of the year, he may well be right.

Interim Government: Already they are showing strength, resolve, confidence, and are increasingly improving security. A Bush re-election cements the US/Iraqi interim Government relationship, whereas Kerry's plans are a different course - "exit strategy".
Military: If there is any risk-aversion (not sure there is), they will be lessened post-election season.
Syria/Iran: Iran needs Kerry on the throne or the regime's days are numbered. So Iran is pumping money into the insurgency to try to get Bush defeated. Once Bush is re-elected, the calculation shifts to avoiding confrontation with Iraq and US - Iran retreats.
Media: They are today trying to defeat Bush, and as a consequence are skewing the news about Iraq. We will have markedly less negative news.
UN, allies, Europe: Acceptance of Bush and therefore more willing to help? Like the media, they are behaving in a biased way to discourage Bush's reelection. Post-election reality will change their tune as well.

Conclusion: After Bush gets re-elected, the interim Government and the military will have more resolve than ever, and the insurgencies will have less external support. So they will collapse. As insurgencies collapse, violence subsides, and the main impediment to democracy and elections will be removed.

UPDATE - Mahdi Army insurgents in Sadr City join the campaign. The graffiti states in Arabic "No more Bush":

Kerry: "If I get other countries involved in the training of troops" ... NATO begins training Iraqi forces
Kerry:"You need to have more people involved in the process" ... 31 Member Coalition in Iraq
Riyadh, July 29: Colin Powell held talks in Jeddah with Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal to discuss possibility of deploying a Muslim force in Iraq
Kerry:"We have not seen this Administration do the statesmanship" Powell in Brit Hume interview: Now in the last year or so, I have worked on, I think it's four or five -- I don't I can get that count for you -- resolutions dealing with Iraq before the United Nations. And every one of them was passed unanimously: 1483, 1500, 1511, 1546.

Tacitus rightly puts his finger on the gaping hole in Kerry's plan: The goal is to reduce our commitment, not achieve victory. That means, when the Europeans fail to pony up troops, when things get wobbly, when needs are greater than planned commitments ... Kerry will be bugging out. Since a picture is worth a thousand words, here's my substitute for an essay on what that means, courtesy of http://polipundit.com

UPDATE 2 Aug 8:Complete Stars and Stripe interview with Kerry A review from a contractor posted in Iraq: "We were reading excerpts aloud to each other at lunch and alternatately groaning or howling with laughter."

UPDATE 3 Aug 8: "Iraqi people, however, ask not to be turned into pawns of U.S. election politics":

"The Democratic Party's apparent embrace of filmmaker Michael Moore -- who equates these terrorists who, he says, "will win," with the Minutemen who fought for American freedom in the Revolutionary War -- sends a dangerous message to America's friends and foes that the country is wavering in the face of this challenge.

U.S. allies and friends may see a future Democratic administration as one that may disengage from Iraq and leave its people -- once again -- high and dry.

Foes, on the other hand, may see a future Democratic administration as one that will see them as noble resistance fighters rather than the thugs and terrorists they are. Mr. Kerry's advisers may tell you that is wrong, but that is the impression that is being created.

The Iraqi people are not as starry-eyed as Mr. Moore -- and by extension, the Democrats who endorse his line. They know this "resistance" is little more than the Ba'athists who filled the mass graves and who bled them to death for decades and jihadists who envision a Taliban-like state in oil-wealthy Iraq. For those who lived under Saddam's reign of terror, the U.S.-led war was liberation, regardless of the underlying U.S. motives. Few Iraqis have any desire to return to that regime. Nor do they wish to live under a harsh Islamist theocracy. Both are possibilities if the insurgents are victorious. It is hard to imagine that Americans would want to see either scenario play out -- certainly they would not wish it upon themselves. But those American liberals who are willing to use a simplistic "Bush lied to us, therefore the war was wrong, therefore we should disengage" line for political expediency are fostering such a possibility, promoting an outcome that would hurt the United States and Iraq.

UPDATE 4 Aug 8: Tacitus on Red State delivers Kerry's disengagement pt 2, where we get a firm "maybe yes" on whether Kerry would have gone to war to depose Saddam, and more disturbing details on Kerry's determined plan to bug out of Iraq.

"There are many rumors about Sistani's trip to London. Some people believe it's part of a conspiracy aimed at isolating Sadr from Sistani and depriving him of any possible support although it's a well known fact that Sistani doesn't support Sadr at all and that Sadr had surrounded Sistani's house soon after the war and asked him to leave Iraq. Other people say that Sadr deputies had visited Sistani lately and had asked him to declare Jihad but Sistani, as expected refuse strongly which lead to those men threatining to kill him! So they think that the government arranged for his departure for a while to protect him until dealing with Sadr permanently."

The UN has idiotically and unhelpfully offered to intervene to save the Mahdi Army criminals from final and total defeat. Genocide in Darfur they wont stop, but rounding up criminals and defeating thugs they will stop?!? Encouragingly, the new intermim Government is not biting on this 'offer':

But echoing pledges from government officials in Baghdad, police General Ghaleb el-Jazairi ruled out any possibility of truce talks, two months after a June ceasefire quelled Sadr's first uprising. "We have received reinforcements and we have received new weapons. We will finish with them, control the city and no longer tolerate militias in Najaf," said Jazairi.

Allawi (reported in Iraq the Model) showed a strong tone against Sadr's militia in his latest news conference:

... most people think that Sadr militia will soon be history and most of them think this is a good thing since they know that a large number of people who joint Sadr militia were originally thieves and looters who want chaos to spread so that they can repeat what they did after the war. This was confirmed today by Ayad Allawi in the press conference I mentioned above when he said that out of the 1200 Sadr’s militia members who where arrested or surrendered there were 400 convicts who were released by Saddam just prior to the war...

Allawi seemed so determined in this conference and when one reporter asked him, “Why do you maintain the pressure and continue to push things to the extreme against Iraqi citizens?” He answered the reporter with a harsh tone, “What citizens?? These are outlaws and no one is allowed to break the law here no matter who he was” and he added, “We will continue to push harder and we will keep the course against these criminals”

Now Al-Sadr's cronies are demanding a truce, only 2 days after breaking it. I wonder why.

UPDATE: 8/6 - Fascinating Strategy Page article on our recent successes against Al Qaeda: the arrest of al Qaeda communications specialist Mohammed Naeem Noor Khan, has apparently unleashed another flood of arrests and alerts about al Qaeda operations ... the lesson: your IT guy knows all!

Next thing you know, I saw another guy come out of that corner with an RPG in his hands. I freaked the fuck out and yelled "RRRPPPPGGGGGGG!!!" My hands was shaking like crazy, my cross hairs were bouncing all over the screen. I gathered my composure as fast as I could, put the cross hairs on them and engaged them with a good 10 second burst of some 50 cal, right at them. Get Some. My Plt Sgt said "good job!". I didn't see anybody move from behind those tires after that. ... This gunfight went on for 4 1/2 hours. ... My entire DCU uniform was completely wet from sweat and filth. So we all mounted up and drove back to the FOB to get more ammo, water and re-fuel. ... Once we got to the FOB, and parked near the motor pool to re-supply, a Sgt ran up to us holding all his gear and his kit and asked, "Hey you guys rolling back out? Do you have room for one more?" This guy who asked us if he could ride with us back out, was in that vehicle that was right in front of us earlier that got RPG'd. They had to drive back to the FOB, because the RPG went right through their vehicle and hit the guy sitting next to him in the stomach, slicing his guts wide open. And now he was now asking us if he could come with, to go give em some more hell.

In the comments section, this solemn note about a soldier hit who got it in the guts:

From: dan
Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2004 7:33 AM
Subject: Prayers for a fine young man


Please keep in your prayers a fine young Army officer named Damon Armeni. His mom is in my online support group for families of injured Marine recruits. Both Damon and his Marine brother Bryce are in Iraq. Sharon wrote us this morning to tell us that Damon was one of the casualties in the fighting in Mosul yesterday. His vehicle was hit by an RPG and he received severe injuries to his chest and intestines. He had several ribs removed at the field hospital and they are evacuating him to Germany to do more surgeries. He is in critical but stable condition. Sharon and the young man's wife are being flown to Germany to be with him. Needless to say she is extremely upset after getting the second worse phone call you can get from the military. Keep them in your prayers....

Dan

Shawcross' column is well worth reading to clear out the cobweb of group-think that has plagued the post-liberation view on WMD - as if we require either a binary "huge threat" or "no threat". When you have this strange press silence, it is best to review the direct evidence, in this case let's review Charles Duelfer's March 2004 testimony to Congress:
On nuclear WMD development:

the ISG has developed information that suggests Iraqi interest in preserving and expanding the knowledge needed to design and develop nuclear weapons.

Not only were these scientists developing a rail gun, but their laboratory also contained documents describing diagnostic techniques that are important for nuclear weapons experiments, such as flash x-ray radiography, laser velocimetry, and high-speed photography. Other documents found outside the laboratory described a high-voltage switch that can be used to detonate a nuclear weapon, laser detonation, nuclear fusion, radiation measurement, and radiation safety. These fields are certainly not related to air defense.

It is this combination of topics that makes us suspect this lab was intentionally focused on research applicable for nuclear weapons development.

We continued our efforts to determine if Iraq was seeking to develop technologies for a uranium enrichment capability. Iraq’s efforts to procure high tolerance aluminum tubes were examined. Ostensibly these tubes were for small rockets, but the manufacturing tolerances specified were much higher than would normally be required for this purpose.

Iraq imported banned military weapons and technology and dual-use goods through Oil for Food contracts. Companies in several countries were involved in these efforts. Direct roles by government officials are also clearly established.

The interim government is dedicated, committed, they want to build a solid democracy for their 25 million people and we're going to succeed in doing that. ... What we did, in the first place, was to remove a dictator. We removed a dictator and there is no question in our mind that we did the right thing. No more mass graves will be filled. We don't have to debate weapons of mass destruction, intention, capability of actual stockpiles anymore because this new Iraq will not have such weapons of mass destruction and the coalition came together.

A recent clash in Najaf also contibuted the flare-up. This story was misreported as an attempt to arrest Al-Sadr, but was rather a patrol that simply got too close to trigger-happy goons(*) guarding Al-Sadr on a visit. As reported by MNF:

On Aug. 2, 11th MEU Marines conducting a joint security patrol with Iraqi national guardsmen outside the exclusion zone in Najaf were alerted by the guardsmen to RPGs visibly staged in a lot near the An Najaf Maternity Hospital, close to Sadr's home. As the Marines moved to investigate the scene, they came under small arms, RPG and mortar fire. The Marines returned fire, supported by the Iraqi soldiers, killing an estimated seven Madhi Army soldiers. The Marines suffered one injury, though minor; the Marine after treatment immediately returned to his unit.

Al Sadr's mouthpiece today declared "The Ceasefire over". The Mahdi army attempt last night to attack a police station in Najaf was repelled by Iraqi police and Iraqi National Guard: Iraqi national guardsmen quickly reinforced Iraqi police, and the two units successfully defended the station from the attackers. Upon arrival of the Marines, Madhi Army members withdrew into the city's exclusion zone. No shots were fired by the Marines, and there were no Marine casualties. Enemy casualties are unknown at this time. The U.S. said in response to this attack: "The attack is an overt violation of the cease-fire agreement reached in June between coalition forces and Moqtada Sadr."

I hope the coalition and Iraqi Government will this opportunity to completely and entirely deflate Al-Sadr's power and army, even to the point of finally arresting him for the murder of a fellow cleric last April (he's had quite a few murders since then under his belt, but it's a start). And let's use John Edwards, who promised to go after terrorists to do what he does best: Sue Al-Sadr for costing us that helicopter.

(*)Note to Kerry: Note the proper use of the term "goons".

This week, the 31-nation coalition of the courageous (see their flags here) rose to the challenge of terrorist threats. Initiated by Bulgaria, and led by the United States, the coalition struck back against terrorism and declared that No More Kidnap Concessions would be made by any coalition member. The U.S. in particular said:

As members of the Multinational Force in Iraq operating under UN Security Council Resolution 1546, we are united in our resolve to make no concessions to terrorists nor succumb to terrorist threats. We are committed to making sure that the perpetrators of terrorist acts against our citizens and soldiers are brought to justice.

This defiance of terrorist kidnap demands is exactly the united and courageous stand required to defeat terrorism.

UK: THIRTEEN ARRESTED IN TERROR RAIDS

IRAQ: Iraq the Model reports the arrest of (Muthana Harith Al-Dari) the information manager in the (Association of Muslim scholars), a a bomb-making insurgent. MNF Soldiers capture insurgent cell leader, Taha Ahmed Kalif, near Jalula, and captured a known improvised explosive device maker and 11 other individuals. In other violence, insurgents killed Iraqis and coalition troops. In the Al-Sabah news that INTERIOR INTELLIGENCE RELEASES LEBANESE HOSTAGE, CRACK DOWN ON KIDNAPPERS, they say: An intelligence source said that the interrogation has got underway with the detainees to catch other gangs related to the kidnapping of foreigners.

PAKISTAN: More terrorists getting arrested, with information from two finds leading to more and more leads: Mohammad Naeem Noor Khan, a computer engineer who officials say facilitated Al Qaeda's communications, was arrested here July 13. Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani, wanted for the bombings of the American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998, was arrested last Sunday in the city of Gujrat.

UNITED STATES: Thanks to the arrests of these terrorists, we know more about what Al Qaeda has been plotting against the United States homeland. Captured papers indicate Al Qaeda wants to strike US targets, although now there is political backbiting because newly discovered information is from Al Qaeda plotting from several years ago. Ridge says: He said it was essential to release the information, which had just been uncovered in Pakistan. Indeed it is. He is getting criticized for releasing information we just found out about, for the fact that some of the information is old. But the plans for the 9/11 attack were 5 years old when that attack happened too! It surely would be better to be prudent than not.

As we capture one suspect, we roll up the network. And, it is all related. Zarqawi tried to reach Bin Laden, but the courier was intercepted. Victory in one theatre will help us in another - including on the home front.

If a lot is happening, that is because the good guys are on offense in many places. WE ARE TAKING THE BATTLE TO THEM AND WE ARE WINNING.

But there are those who don't get it, the Clueless Leftists who think global war on terror is a charade.

And the culprit? Why the 'local' leader of the cult of death: "The fingerprints of Zarqawi are all over the place," Dr. Rubaie said.

"It's not just because I am a Christian," said Sabbah Slewa, 47, one in a group of Christian men milling Monday morning amid the wreckage in front of the Assyrian church. "We are brothers and sisters in Iraq. They are doing this to delay civilization. They do not want the new government."

UPDATE: PICS OF SALMAN PAK So when a cartoonist (Singe Wilkinson) created a cartoon that was based on a lie ...

I responded to the paper's editor thus:

Contrary to a recent cartoon you published, the 9/11 Commission report cited numerous links between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda.

The 9/11 report mentions contacts going back to 1992, and reports: "Bin Laden himself met with a senior Iraqi intelligence officer in Khartoum in late 1994 and early 1995." A source reported Iraqi military bomb-making experts trained Al Qaeda in Sudan. In 1998, "two al Qaeda members reportedly went to Iraq to meet with Iraq intelligence." Also in July 1998, an Iraqi delegation traveled to Afghanistan, met with Bin Ladin and "offered Bin Ladin a safe haven in Iraq." Iraqi intelligence and Al Qaeda both helped set up and run the Ansar Al-Islam terror group in Iraq in 2001.

The 9/11 Commision reported just a portion of known links between Saddam and Al Qaeda, but what they cite is enough to refute the 'no links' myth.

UPDATE - Aug 2: This cartoonist has a history of dishonest cartoons that ply the theme that Saddam and Bin Ladin were not linked ... Recall the words of the 9/11 Report and compare with this cartoon. 9/11 Report:

"Bin Laden himself met with a senior Iraqi intelligence officer in Khartoum in late 1994 and early 1995. ...In March 1998, after Bin Ladin’s public fatwa against the United States, two al Qaeda members reportedly went to Iraq to meet with Iraq intelligence. In July, an Iraqi delegation traveled to Afghanistan to meet first with the Taliban and then with Bin Ladin. ... According to the reporting, Iraqi officials offered Bin Ladin a safe haven in Iraq. Bin Ladin declined, apparently judging that his circumstances in Afghanistan remained more favorable than the Iraqi alternative."

Jeff Jacoby comments on the under-reported good news and on Chrenkoff's missives.

Kerry made some claims in his convention speech and campaign trail about Iraq. I was going to comment or dissect, but frankly, it's a tissue of gauzy conditional-hypothetical quasi-commitments concocted from well-refined don't-box-me-into-a-corner-of-actually-meaning-anything platitudes. I avoid the specific critique (just mosey to any number of the VRWC type blogs for that) and simply lay it out:

Kerry is simply not a leader.

Kerry is a political back-bench Senator - a blowhard with a title and a billionaire wife. He's a know-it-all and a backseat driver, but no leader. He'll do Iraq better than Bush? His plan is to pretend Powell isnt already trying to do what he claims needs to be done, and envision that he can do it better because the world will like him more, even though his Israel policy and Iraq policy (he pretends) wont really differ. Laughable!

Kerry fudged the difference in his speeches on whether his plan is to increase or decrease troops in Iraq, on whether we would stay there as long as it takes, or make our main goal to simply reduce our commitment. All to evade the yawning chasm between the 'bring em home' camp that makes the majority of die-hard Democrats and the 'stay the course to win' camp, that is the Republicans and the Democrat 'centrists'. Well, I've concluded one thing: Kerry has learned absolutely nothing about the Vietnam war he touts.

The real crisis in Vietnam was a crisis in leadership and an unwillingness to look at the goals and the costs and commit to either pay the price or get out.

We can stay and try to win, with the costs. (Bush) Or we can just bug out. (Kucinich) Take your pick. But WORSE THAN EITHER IS THE TWILIGHT BETWEEN COMMITMENT TO VICTORY AND LETTING GO OF A WAR THAT ISNT WORTH THE PRICE IN BLOOD.

Kerry had 50 minutes to explain where he stood, to answer the question: Would you have gone to war, knowing what you know now? Bush has answered the question and will take the heat if the voters disagree with his call. But he made the call. Kerry has not.

Kerry flubs the basic leadership test at a time when we need leadership, and in my view voters will pick Bush's leadership, even if they think it is flawed, over no leadership at all.

Instead of shutting down Oil-for-Food, Annan on February 1, 1998, urged the Security Council to more than double the amount of oil Saddam was allowed to sell, a prelude to letting Iraq import oil equipment to increase production. ...

On February 23, 1998, Osama bin Laden published his "Kill the Americans" fatwa. An intriguing feature of this fatwa was its prominent mention of Iraq, not just once, but four times. Analysts at the CIA and elsewhere have long propounded the theory that secular Saddam and religious Osama would not have wanted to work together. But Saddam's secular style seemed to bother bin Laden not a whit.

His fatwa presented three basic complaints. Mainly, he deplored the infidel presence in Saudi Arabia (i.e., the U.S. troops stationed there during and after the Gulf War). He also cited grievances about Jerusalem, while not even bothering to mention the Palestinians by name. The rest of his attention, bin Laden devoted to Iraq and "the Americans' continuing aggression against the Iraqi people" as well as "the great devastation inflicted on the Iraqi people by the crusader-Zionist alliance" and--here is the specific reference to U.S.-led sanctions--"the protracted blockade imposed after the ferocious war." Two paragraphs later, bin Laden picked up this theme again, calling Iraq the "strongest neighboring Arab state" of Saudi Arabia, and then citing Iraq, yet again, as first on a list of four states threatened by America ... UNTIL 1998, Iraq had not loomed large in bin Laden's rants. Why, then, such stress on Iraq, at that particular moment, in declaring war on America? It is certainly possible that bin Laden simply figured Iraq had become another good selling point, a handy way to whip up anger at the United States. But it is at least intriguing that the month after bin Laden's fatwa, in March 1998, as the 9/11 Commission reports, two al Qaeda members visited Baghdad. And in July 1998, "an Iraqi delegation traveled to Afghanistan to meet first with the Taliban and then with bin Laden."

...The U.S. Treasury Department, in its hunt for Saddam's assets, is not looking specifically at Oil-for-Food, but has provided some of the most telling snippets of information. In April of this year, Treasury released a list of Saddam front companies its investigation has so far uncovered, including a major Oil-for-Food contractor in the UAE, Dubai-based Al Wasel & Babel. Along with trying to procure a sophisticated surface-to-air missile system for Saddam, Al Wasel & Babel did hundreds of millions' worth of business with Baghdad under Oil-for-Food, and was just one of some 75 contractors authorized by the U.N. to deal with Saddam out of the UAE. (As it happens, the 9/11 Commission found that some of the hijackers' funding flowed through the UAE, but working backward from the al Qaeda end, the trail eventually vanishes.)

UPDATE 8/2: Another Saddam-Al Qaeda connection claimed - 'Hundreds' of Al Qaida Fled to Iraq After 9/11, according to legendary New York City detective-turned-international security expert Bo Dietl.

"What are the Muslims doing? Does this mean that they want us out?" Brother Louis, a deacon at Our Lady of Salvation, asked as he cried outside the damaged Assyrian Catholic church. "Those people who commit these awful criminal acts have nothing to do with God. They will go to hell."

What are they doing? They are killing foreigners, Iraqis. They are killing people in the Government and people out of the Government. they kill civilians, they killed policemen. They killed Shi'ite worshippers, fellow Muslims, now Iraqi Christians. There is no political program to what they do except chaos. No goal except destruction for the sake of destruction. They are beyond even the evil of mere terrorists now - They are a Death Cult.

UPDATE: 8/2 - Shi'ite cleric Sistani condemns the bombing

Franks, however, expresses no regrets about the war and says everyone believed Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. "History reveals that wars often end in chaos that continues for years," he writes. ...

Franks writes that Bush has "the natural leader's ability to put his subordinates at ease" and describes how he gave the final order on March 19, 2003, to invade Iraq.

The book and General Frank's views have gotten notice in the Washington Post and a New York Times review, and one interesting item is yet another world leader assured the US that Saddam had WMDs:

Gen. Tommy R. Franks, also recounts that much of his certainty that his troops would face attacks by banned weapons — in particular biological or chemical arms — came from conversations with King Abdullah II of Jordan and President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt. The king cited "reliable intelligence sources," and Mr. Mubarak quoted conversations between his officials and Mr. Hussein.

In January 2003, Mubarak said point blank to Franks, "Saddam has WMD-biologicals, actually-and he will use them on your troops."

The Iraq war plan was General Frank's, and it was brilliant. This is updated 'blitzkreig' tactics of mobility instead of mass. With our huge informational advantage over the enemies we faced, this is the right way to win a war with smaller casualties and greater speed. History has proven Franks right - extremely right. No time before in history have 2 wars (Iraq and Afghanistan) been waged so quickly and at so much gain and so little cost. Franks did a fabulous job winning the war in Iraq. It does credit to him, to the troops he led, to Rumsfeld and DoD as a whole and to the President.

Now he does mention two aspects that have affected the post-war occupation and transition: The US expected more help from other countries (no thanks to France, etc.), and Franks is disappointed too many Iraqis decided looting and insurgency were a path to take, instead of rebuilding the country. He doesnt think the insurgency could have really been avoided by other actions by the coalition, and he's right - the violence will end in Iraq only when the terrorists cease to choose that path (either willingly or by force).

Hindsight is always 20/20, but Franks is one General who does not need to be second-guessed. His victories in Iraq and Afghanistan were near flawless.