Iran is under serious pressure to dismantle its nuclear program by the world powers. It has been under political and economic pressure for years now as every effort has been made to use all non-military options to stop a suicidal martyrdom state from obtaining the most horrific Weapon of Mass Destruction man has created. Armed with nuclear weapons the Iranian Mullahcracy would be able to send its Islamo Fascist suicide squads out to ravage the non-believers.

Iran wants to feel powerful and is hell bent to gain the power and bring hell to Earth. The problem is they are not mature enough to handle the power they strive for, which is clear in the resistance to all reasonable offers for them to have nuclear power for electricity but to stay out of the business of making nuclear material (which can be for power or destruction depending on how pure the processing of the nuclear material makes the product).

Iran has responded to this pressure by trying to destabilize Iraq. A Pro-Iranian spokesman said as much on Iraqi TV recently. The current excuse for Iran’s arming and training the Mahdi Forces now battling US and Iraqi forces in Iraq is because America threatens Iran and its plans. The entire Mahdi Force is meant to distract the US forces, tying them down in a guerilla urban war. The plan is failing because the Iraqi forces strong enough (and backed by US air power) to do the job mostly themselves. The US is still drawing down its Surge forces as planned despite the effort to take out the Mahdi-Iranian forces in Iraq. This part of the Iranian distraction plan is not working as expected - which is pretty standard for Iranian plans (they’re another sign that Iran is just not ready to be a world power yet).

Now we see another element of the distraction plan playing out in Lebanon as Hezbollah (another Iranian trained, armed and backed illegal militia like the Mahdi Army in Iraq) starts to disrupt that country - clearly in an effort to distract Israel and the US.

Hezbollah is reported to have taken control of large areas of the Lebanese capital from groups loyal to the government following gun battles.

“There are no clashes anymore because no one is standing in the way of the opposition forces,” a Lebanese security official said on Friday.

The street battles, which erupted on Wednesday, have left at least 11 people dead and 20 others wounded.

Lebanese troops began taking up positions in some neighbourhoods in west Beirut abandoned by the pro-government groups.

The army has largely avoided getting involved in the street battles amid fears of being dragged into the conflict.

…

Armed men loyal to Hezbollah also forced Future News, an al-Hariri-owned TV station, off the air in Beirut.
Your Views
Is Lebanon edging towards civil war?

Send us your views

“Armed gunmen surrounded the building, stormed into the garage and demanded that the army shutdown the station,” a senior official at the station, said.

The security sources said Hezbollah and fighters from the allied Amal movement - both Shia groups - had overrun offices of al-Hariri’s Future group across the predominantly Muslim western half of the Lebanese capital.

The article has lots of interesting details and reactions. But the bigger question is why the flare up now? Things like this are sometimes spontaneous, but many times they are timed for some larger purpose. Is this an attempt to bolster the Democrats in the US election by using the standard Islamo Fascist PR stunt of shedding blood for the western liberal news sources to swoon over with hand-wringing headlines of imminent defeat (or Vietnam)? In Iraq that might be a possible reason, but it doesn’t make sense for Lebanon.

What does make sense for both is Iran attempting to divert attention or pressure from the western powers and pro-western regional powers. Is this the old magician’s sleight of hand, distracting the audience from what is actually happening? If so, what could all these flame ups be covering up?

Let me be clear about my speculation here. It could simple be a violent response by Hezbollah to some recent government actions which constrained Hezbollah in Lebanon. Both Hezbollah and the Mahdi Army reflect a common approach used by Tehran to use religious zealots to take control of their Muslim neighboring states. The Nazis used racism, Tehran uses the canard of religious superiority - but both groups strive for violent oppression and raw, brutal power.

And if one speculates on what might proceed a bold Iranian move to break out into the open, like Hitler did with his invasion of Poland, where all the pretenses and charades about how peace could be negotiated through appeasement were finally shredded, one could envision flame ups across the ME as a precursor to Iran starting its own religious Blitzkrieg to free oppressed radical Muslim from western control. What the world needs to keep an eye on is any indication Iran is ready for its martyrdom war to free Islam from the West and take over the world. Because that is, in the end, what the country exists to accomplish, and every action they take is towards that goal.

All General Discussions, Iran | 3 Comments »

As a conservative independent I of course like to view the world through my only lens of preferences, but I think it is safe to say I have my biases fairly well checked when I claim this year American are heading away from the hyper-partisan fringes, weary of nearly 3 decades of hyper-partisan rancor and dysfunctional zer-sum games. We see it playing out in the Democrat and Republican sides.

On the left we see the stronger general election candidate, Hillary Clinton, losing to the more liberal Obama. Clinton is much stronger against McCain, but she keeps losing ground to Obama the more her general election electability shows. The Democrat Party is being taken over by the far left which is itching to come out of the closet. That is why when Wright and Ayers come up it doesn’t hurt Obama in the primaries, just kills him for the general

It is also playing out on the right as the ‘true conservative” far right bemoans McCain’s positions and their 20-25% keep voting against him in GOP primaries. The problem is the GOP is tired of the self destructiveness of the far right who call people who disagree with the Quislings and Traitors (just ask anyone who support Comprehensive Immigration Reform why there will be no alliances with the hyper-right any more).

The most enjoyable example of this was on Sean Hannity’s radio show when he hosted “The Architect” Karl Rove. Hannity made the mistake of trying to paint McCain’s problems with the ‘true conservatives’ as a liability. His two examples were “The Gang of 14″ and Comprehensive Immigration Reform (which I am glad to see McCain is bring back as part of his policy plans when elected), which McCain notes openly with well deserved pride. Hannity was not prepared to be ripped a new one by Rove who just destroyed Hannity’s far right biases against McCain.

On the Gang of 14 Rove noted that the compromise gave Democrats cover to allow numerous conservative federal judges to be seated as well as Roberts and Alito on the US SC. Rove noted that he had his doubts initially, but came to recognize the Gang of 14 was critical to the administration’s efforts to mold the judiciary in line with conservative, constructionist principles.

On immigration reform Rove really nailed Hannity and the “Amnesty Hypochondriacs”. Of course the word “Amnesty” was selected by the opponents of immigration reform because it was the root of their resistance - they did not want the 1 in 5 workers (Rove’s number) here illegally to get off with a fine, paying back taxes and proving they are free of violent crimes. This obsession with desiring much stronger actions than the law or America were prepared to invoke is why I call the “Amnesty Hypochondriacs”.

Besides pointing out to Hannity that 1 in 5 workers here are illegal and we cannot simply have them leave without killing our economy, he noted that Bush ended the 30 year long practice of catch-and-release, where illegals found on the border were given a date to be in court and then released, wherein they never showed up. Rove noted the last catch-and-release was in 2006, after Bush led the way in providing all sorts of resources for personnel and facilities required to end the practice.

Another point Rove hammered home is most people do not know that 1.3 million illegal aliens attempting to cross our borders were sent back home last year - a very, very impressive number which shows our borders ARE being strengthened. Nothing will be foolproof, but that is amazing progress the Amnesty Hypochondriacs dismiss out of fear that the day will come when we do deal with the long term illegals with less than deportation or coerced deportation. Oh well, those far right dreams will never happen.

Which brings me back to why McCain is doing so well right now. Every time Hannity or Ingraham or Malkin go ballistic because McCain is not conservative enough the provide McCain distance from the one association that would give him trouble in the general election. Obama has problems because of his new found ties to the radical left. McCain is gaining credibility with the continued flames from the far right (who are not radical like the left, just way out of the mainstream like the left).

I have seen attempts by the far left to tie McCain to folks on the far right - and it fails because everyone knows the far right is ready to sit out this election, especially if McCain keeps his pledge to implement comprehensive immigration reform. So while Obama can be attacked by his far left political associations (which avoids the backlash of attacking Obama directly), McCain cannot be tied to a group that cannot stop spouting off their dislike of the man.

And this is why I am fairly certain this year America is staying away from the hyper-partisans. All indications are McCain is perfectly set up to take advantage of this, and the far right is doing their part to help him. And all indications are Hillary is losing because of this, and Obama and his far left buddies are doing their part in hurting him more in the general election. Sweet.

BTW - just a reminder McCain was one of my last choices from the beginning and I posted on his weak support for the sanctity of life through his support of Embryonic Stem Cell Research, an issue I care very deeply about. So am by no means a McCainiac, but like most independence more pragmatic than driven to the political extremes on either side.

All General Discussions, Illegal Immigration, 2008 Elections | 20 Comments »

Major Update: US says Masri not captured. - end update

al-Qaeda’s forces in Iraq have been spending the last year, since President George Bush decided to implement General David Petraeus’ counter insurgency strategy that had by this time last year turned the Sunni Province of Anbar, the center of al-Qaeda’s operations in Iraq at the time, into a model of an al-Qaeda free Iraq. From this time last year until now al-Qaeda has been chased out of all its strongholds leaving it with its last toe-hold in the Northern Provinces of Iraq around Mosul. Today we have excellent news on the war on terror as another al-Qaeda leader has been captured, further decimating al-Qaeda’s ability to operate in Iraq:

The leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq, Abu Ayyub al-Masri, has been arrested, according to media reports quoting the country’s defence ministry.

Masri, also known as Abu Hamza al-Muhajir, was detained in the northern Iraqi city of Mosul, the reports said.

The US military in Iraq said it was currently looking into the reports.

The Egyptian-born militant took over the leadership of the group from Abu Musab al-Zarqawi shortly after he was killed in a US air strike in June 2006.

Masri is believed to have helped Zarqawi form the first al-Qaeda cell in Baghdad following the US-led invasion in 2003.

After becoming leader, he vowed to “continue what Sheikh Abu Musab began” and avenge his death with attacks that would “turn your children’s hair white”.

al-Masri had promised a return of al-Qaeda this month with renewed attacks which really have not transpired. Why this is such a huge blow to AQ is the man was captured, which means he is going to be interrogated and lots of intelligence will be in his possession for the US to identify and destroy the remnants of al-Qaeda’s dwindling forces in Iraq. I would not be surprised if the coming weeks see large numbers of AQ cells captured or killed. AQ truly is on its last legs in Iraq. While it has taken longer than many of us had hoped, each time one of these top leaders is caught AQ suffers major setbacks. At their current strength this could be a blow they don’t survive. At least we can hope!

Thank God we did not listen to the Surrendercrats and run away from Iraq or al-Masri would be running a major fighting force right now, working hard to inflict attacks on the West comparable or worse than 9-11. Instead he is now sitting in a cell undergoing some aggressive interrogations so Iraq and America can stop his thugs from shedding any more blood.

All General Discussions, Iraq, Bin Laden/GWOT | 9 Comments »

Yep, things are definitely coming to a between Sadr’s Iranian (i.e., Persian) backed Mahdi Militia and the Iraqi (i.e., Arab) Shiite led government of Iraq. Before the latest news on the pressure being brought to bear on Moqtada al-Sadr to end the stand-off peacefully, I want to reference coverage of a recent news show from Iraq to set the local context, which is sorely lacking from the Western Media’s reporting:

Al-Ramahi begins by saying that although “intermittent clashes” continue between the Iraqi security forces assisted by US forces and the supporters of Shi’i leader Muqtada al-Sadr, both sides criticize Iran and “hold it responsible for the incidents in Iraq.” She adds that the current Iraqi Government’s position has changed towards Iran, and that it has begun “to directly accuse Iran of fanning violence in Iraq.” She notes that a huge amount of Iranian weapons has been revealed in addition to documents that indict Iran in this regard. Al-Ramahi says that observers were surprised to hear Salih al-Ubaydi, spokesman for the Al-Sadr Trend, strongly criticize Iran. She notes that the recent criticism coincides with former Iranian President Khatami’s criticism of the Iranian regime, in which he stressed that exporting violence to other countries, which he did not name, is “treason against Islam and the Iranian Revolution.”

…

The programme then presents a three-minute report by Najah Muhammad Ali. Ali says that when the United States accused Iran of interfering in Iraq to undermine its stability, Iran’s supporters in the Iraqi Government, including the president and the prime minister, did not hesitate to defend Iran. However, he says that the situation changed following Operation Charge of the Knights in Basra and the international conference that was held recently in Kuwait. He adds that Iraqi Prime Minister Al-Maliki and his supporters have launched an unprecedented campaign against Iran without naming it. Moreover, he says that the Iraqi Government has been declaring on a daily basis the arrest of fighters supported by Iran and the discovery of Iranian weapons. … Ali notes former Iranian President Khatami’s remarks in which he said that “exporting violence to other countries is treason against Islam and the Islamic Revolution.” He concludes by wondering if the Iraqis in the post- Saddam government “have become fed up with remaining under the Iranian cloak,” or if Iran’s intervention in Iraq has crossed all limits.

Clearly the Iraqis are tired of being in the middle of this conflict. What is interesting is this next section where a pro-Iranian guest on the show makes the lame excuse that Iran had to meddle in Iraq because it was being threatened by America - which ends the debate as to why Iran is working to destabilize Iraq by training and arming killers:

Addressing former Iraqi Minister Salam al-Maliki, Al-Ramahi asks him to comment on the change in the Al-Sadr Trend’s position. Al- Maliki says that the issue of Iran’s intervention in Iraq and its support for the Al-Sadr Trend does not exist in reality. He admits that there are accusations, but argues that the Al-Sadr Trend’s positions in the political process are “independent.”

Interrupting, Al-Ramahi says that Salam al-Maliki’s remarks are surprising, because even Iranians talk about Iran’s intervention in Iraq. Al-Maliki says that there is clear intervention, but that he is talking about the Al-Sadr Trend’s position and Iran’s support for the Al-Sadr Trend. He adds that the Iraqi Government must determine whether the Iranian role is positive or negative. He says that the Iraqi Government’s spokesman said that the government needs to verify the situation, but that military officials have openly accused Iran of intervention. Al-Maliki stresses that problems must not be resolved through the media. He says that the problem is that the Iraqi Government “has not yet drawn its foreign policy in a clear manner.” He argues that the United States encouraged Iran to interfere in Iraq in light of its hostile position towards Iran which prompted it to defend itself and its presence.

Is Iraq buying this excuse? I argue it isn’t because the pressure is not being reduced on Sadr and the Mahdi Militia, but is being escalated by Maliki and a large sector of the Shiite block in Iraq:

A senior Iraqi representative of the Shiite parliamentary bloc says a committee is meeting representatives of radical cleric Muqtada al-Sadr to get his fighters in Sadr City to lay down their arms.

Jalal Eddin al-Sagheer of the United Iraqi Alliance, the largest bloc in parliament which includes Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s party, says the committee will tell al-Sadr that wanted militants must surrender and roadside bombs cleared.

Maliki is not going to negotiate at gunpoint. The path to negotiations is simple - lay down the arms and weapons. The fact Mahdi Militia refuses, and most of their arms are now coming from Iran, tells the truth behind the lies coming out of their mouths about peace and dialogue. Again, only the liberal SurrenderMedia would buy into the idea Maliki should surrender in the face of armed aggression backed by Iran and discuss terms of his surrender with these thugs. Iraq is standing up and telling Iran and Sadr that this ends only one way, when the Mahdi surrenders its arms.

All General Discussions, Iraq | 9 Comments »

As I posted yesterday the Iraqi government is preparing for a final thrust into Sadr City to clear out Mahdi Militia thugs who have been hiding and using weapons amongst the people living there in order to attack the Iraqi government and US forces:

raqi soldiers for the first time warned residents in the embattled Sadr City district to leave their houses Thursday, signaling a new push by the U.S.-backed forces against Shiite extremist who have been waging street battles for seven weeks.

Iraqi soldiers, using loudspeakers, told residents in some virtually abandoned areas of southeastern Sadr City to go to nearby soccer stadiums, residents said. UNICEF says about 6,000 people have been forced to flee their homes in Sadr City, most of them from the southeastern section.

U.S. forces have increased air power and armored patrols in an attempt to cripple Shiite militia influence in Sadr City, a slum of 2.5 million people that serves as the Baghdad base for the Mahdi Army led by anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.

The U.S. military is trying to weaken the militia’s grip in the slum and disrupt rocket and mortar strikes from Sadr City on the U.S.-protected Green Zone, which includes the U.S. Embassy and key Iraqi government offices.

Like most Islamo Fascist criminals the Mahdi have been using the residents of Sadr City as human shields, setting up command posts next to hospitals and firing rocket and missile launchers in neighborhoods with families. All of these acts are war crimes - but the SurrenderMedia will never remind people of that. Conversely, at least the Iraqi Army is trying to warn innocent citizens to move away from the Islamo Fascists.

Interestingly enough soccer fields don’t strike me as long term housing areas. My guess is this will be quite short. Ed Morrissey has more on the matter at Hot Air.

All General Discussions, Iraq | 4 Comments »

One thing the News Media forgets is voters don’t like their apparent influence and efforts to twist a race towards their preferred candidates. Typically this meddling in our democracy by the very liberal news media (note their multi-year effort to get us to surrender in Iraq, which is why many times I refer to them as the SurrenderMedia) is in support of the democrat and opposing the conservative. They are itching right now to go after their one time darling McCain (who is a tad left of most noteworthy Republicans) since he is the GOP nominee.

But the liberal news media have been held back for months as their long battle to crown their choice in the Democrat Party’s primary process has been fought. Now that Clinton fell below expectations they have jumped the gun this week as the news media try to push Hillary under the bus. Just check out this (H/T Drudge:

And this pleasant hint regarding a VP slot for Hillary:

There’s certainly a strong and highly logical case to be made. Between the two of them, Obama and Clinton will have attracted upward of 36 million votes when all of the primaries are over, with only a few hundred thousand votes separating them. That’s nearly 60 percent of the total number of votes George W. Bush received in the 2004 general election.

…

No one thinks that Obama, in his heart, wants Clinton on his ticket. And he certainly doesn’t want her and her husband in his administration, pursuing their own agendas and threatening to overshadow and undermine him every step of the way. The question, though, is whether he can take a pass on her for V.P. without severely complicating his general election chances.

For several reasons, the answer is yes.

So, the SurrenderMedia has turned its surrender-now-or-else guns on Hillary and her followers, expecting them to bow down and get in line. Yeah, like voters are going to listen to overpaid, egotistical journalist majors? Instead of giving Hillary and her supporters space for a face saving exit this onslaught negativity is just going to cement the rift on the left.

The folks over at RCP see the media meddling too.

Hillary Clinton’s biggest problem right now isn’t her lack of money, and it isn’t that undecided superdelegates will suddenly move against her. Indeed, yesterday was notable for the fact that so few superdelegates declared, and that multiple Democratic party bigwigs went public saying Hillary has every right to stay in the race and shouldn’t necessarily get out just yet.

The biggest threat to Clinton’s candidacy right now is the media, and the instant (and almost universally accepted) conventional wisdom among the pundit class that it’s over. Yesterday Clinton suffered through a barrage of political obituaries, from talking head heavyweights like Tim Russert and George Stephanopoulos to opinion columnists from across the political spectrum.

One thing to watch to see if this is true is for Obama’s numbers against McCain to start sinking. If the Hillary supporters do decide to abandon the liberals and their liberal candidate (as I suspect they will, just as moderates on the right have abandoned ‘true conservatives’) then Obama will start falling behind in the polls where he runs even right now. I have said for over a year now this race will be one by the least partisan candidate, the one closest to the middle - and that is not Obama from the Church of Wright and buddy of Bomber Bill (Ayers).

Update: Interestingly all this comes at a time when Hillary finally may ‘win’ Michigan and have its delegates sat giving her 10 more delegates than Obama (she could have deserved up to 18). Wonder what happens if Florida’s delegates are sat soon as well?

All General Discussions, 2008 Elections | 4 Comments »

All indications are that Iraq is preparing for a final, two-pronged push against the Mahdi Militia in Iraq. The first prong is on the political front with legislation that will outlaw political organizations which support armed militias:

Iraq’s parliament has begun debating a bill on provincial elections that will ban any party from competing in the Oct. 1 polls if they have a militia.

If the law passes, as is expected, it could spark a major showdown with Shi’ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, whose movement should do well in the elections but who has refused to disarm his Mehdi Army militia despite an order from Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki to do so.

…

The provincial elections law was presented to parliament on Tuesday. It should be debated in the next 1-2 weeks.

I can’t see how anyone can be against this effort, no matter what side of the Iraq war issue one is on. The fact is parties that support armed insurgents cannot be allowed to participate in the very democratic process their fighters are trying to destroy. It is clear the Iraqis have had it with armed Islamo Fascists and are going to go full bore towards a peaceful and lawful democracy.

The second front is of course escalating the removal of armed groups inside Baghdad and across the country. While it may seem the fighting in Sadr City has been tough it is about to get a lot tougher - for the Mahdi Militia trained and armed by Iranians:

The authorities in Baghdad say they are preparing for an exodus of thousands of people from eastern parts of the city.

Fighting between government and US troops on one side, and Shia militia on the other, has intensified recently.

Two football stadiums are on stand-by to receive residents from two neighbourhoods in the Sadr City area.
The government has warned of an imminent push to clear the areas of members of the Mehdi Army, loyal to the anti-American cleric, Moqtada Sadr.

In the last seven weeks around 1,000 people have died, and more than 2,500 others have been injured, most of them civilians.

The fighting so far in Sadr City has been fierce - street to street, and house to house.

Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Maliki is showing a determination to disarm the country’s Shia militia groups - particularly the Mehdi Army - that he has never displayed before.

Maliki and the US must see the light at the end of the tunnel to broadcast this final push so publicly. It makes sense. After weeks of pushing the fighters into an ever shrinking area inside Sadr City at some point you decide to go in and clean out the hornets nest once and for all. Clearly that time is approaching.

It is also clear that Baghdad is not the only area of interest, as actions are ramping up in many areas of Iraq which still have terrorists and militia forces:

At least 22 people died Wednesday in a fresh bout of violence in Iraq, including eight people in a US strike on Baghdad’s Shia enclave of Sadr City, while the police found rockets in a big weapons cache in the south. At least eight people were killed and 13 injured Wednesday when US aircraft bombed positions of the Mahdi Army militia in Sadr City in eastern Baghdad, according to witnesses.

…

Iraqi special forces backed by US troops conducted operations in the area “to reduce special groups’ criminal activity”, the US military said in a statement Wednesday.

Special groups is the term the military used to describe Iranian- backed Shia militiamen.

Seven suspected militiamen were arrested during the operation Tuesday.

The military said its aircraft destroyed gunmen’s positions in Sadr City Tuesday but could not ascertain whether people were killed or injured in the strike.

In south-east Baghdad, police killed eight gunmen during a raid in Amin district, General Qasim Atta, the spokesman for the Baghdad operations, told the Voices of Iraq (VOI) news agency.

…

Police discovered a big weapon cache on a farm north of Karbala, 110 km south of Baghdad, VOI quoted the city police chief, General Raid Shakir, as saying.

The cache, which was buried about five metres underground, contained 25 SBG-9 rockets, 25 rocket launch pads and other weapons.

These weapons caches are typically being discovered based on tips from locals, so as they continue to be discovered it is easy to extrapolate that the Iraq Muslim Street is turning on the militia more and more. There is no popular uprising in support of Sadr’s Mahdi thugs, which is another indication Maliki is more than likely to succeed in his efforts to clean house and stabilize his country.

Other interesting reads include:

Bill Ardolino’s report at Long War Journal on efforts to take out the Iranian backed “Special Groups”.

MEMRI has an interview with a senior Iraqi official who states Syria and Iran are behind most of the terrorism in and from the ME.

All General Discussions, Iraq, Iran | 2 Comments »

Well, it seems Clinton did not pull off the big win she needed, while Obama did in NC. But if you step back from the media hype we still have the same basic tie that has been in place for weeks. The Democrat party voters are split and not budging one way or the other, and there are arguments on both sides. While Obama has the delegate math he is losing support of the white voter - which makes his general election run problematic. He is getting ~90% of the African American vote, which is why he is leading Clinton. But Dems always get ~90% of the vote in the general, and it is not enough to win the presidency.

The big question is what does Hillary do? I have been saving some articles from last week to see how things played out in IN and NC, and now is a good time to dust them off and look at them. One option Hillary has is to convince the party Obama is doomed in the fall and use the rules committees for the convention to seat the MI and FL delegates and pull the hat out of the rabbit:

With at least 50 percent of the Democratic Party’s 30-member Rules and Bylaws Committee committed to Clinton, her backers could — when the committee meets at the end of this month — try to ram through a decision to seat the disputed 210-member Florida and 156-member Michigan delegations. Such a decision would give Clinton an estimated 55 or more delegates than Obama, according to Clinton campaign operatives. The Obama campaign has declined to give an estimate.

Using the Rules and Bylaws Committee to force the seating of two pro-Hillary delegations would provoke a massive outcry from Obama forces.

David Broder actually said it best last week when he asked: can Clinton win without crippling the party?

Does the Clinton camp still see any realistic way she can deny Barack Obama the Democratic nomination without blowing up the party?

…

To have a chance, the Clinton folks figure, she must win Indiana on Tuesday and do well enough to keep Obama’s lead by the end of the primaries closer to 100 than to 200. She must also find a way to get some votes counted from Michigan and Florida, whose delegations are barred from the convention for violating the party’s primary timetable.

Then the superdelegates would have their moment. The first thing my Clinton friend noted about them is that, over the past two months, their conversations have shifted from a fascination with the rush of young people onto the voting rolls, benefiting Obama, to a focus on older voters and Catholics, who have broken heavily for Clinton in Pennsylvania, Ohio and other states vital to Democratic chances of assembling an Electoral College majority.

Second, he said, the Jeremiah Wright affair and other recent incidents have reminded the uncommitted how little they really know about Obama — including his ability to deal with political crises, real or manufactured. Clinton has plenty of scars from past battles that weaken her compared to Obama, but the uncommitted have seen her demonstrate repeatedly that she has the will to survive and fight back.

Those two factors have begun to change some superdelegates’ minds about the candidate they want to see nominated. But, as my friend acknowledged, they have not yet overcome the deep discomfort many of them feel, as they contemplate taking the nomination away from Obama. They know that would break the hearts of his African-American supporters, who have been the most loyal of Democratic constituencies.

…

The Clinton camp’s answer comes in two parts. First, they say that the institutional party — the unions, the environmental groups, the abortion-rights groups and others who are desperate for victory after losing twice to George Bush and who recognize the potential appeal of John McCain — would exert heavy pressure on the losing side not to sulk or erupt.

…

In effect, my friend was saying that may well be beyond Clinton’s power to win the nomination without severely damaging the party. Only Obama can make her winning seem right.

Interestingly, the reverse question is never asked. Can Obama win without blowing up the party? Both sides are so entrenched that large segments from each camp are ready to go to McCain than to the opposing Democrat should their candidate lose. We shall see how badly Hillary wants this. Right now I see no reason for her to stop with 6 races left. She might as well go to the end and then assess her options. Either she succumbs (not likely) or she blows up the party somehow. Even if she is bribed by Obama to step aside I am not sure that would appease the supporters.

Update: Clinton is not giving up - as I suspected.

All General Discussions, 2008 Elections | 5 Comments »

5:50 PM Eastern: Here we go again, with early exit polls leaning Obama - which have been proven wrong time and time again in these primaries. Huge turnout has never helped Obama (recall how PA played out!). So all the hype about exit polls showing a large Obama lead in NC are possibly right, but history would dictate they are not.

5:55 PM Eastern: Someone on the phone with Fox News is predicting a high single digit win in NC for Obama - not the resounding win the exit polls claim. Pass out the popcorn!

6:00 PM Eastern: OK, here are the early exits and they claim Obama by 12 points, but that is just not reasonable. Exit polls are useless, so I am predicting it will be closer to 5 points than 12. Will definitely post around 7:00 PM Eastern when polls close. BTW - here was my morning predictions.

6:05 PM Eastern: Clinton is taking the white male vote in IN and NC (roughly 60 -40), which is not good for Obama. He doesn’t do well in primaries unless he has the white male vote. Both states show significant impacts from the Wright debacle - another bad sign for Obama.

6:55 PM Eastern: The exit polls seem to be trending to the absolutely bizarre, which would simply be another example of busted exit polls (like we haven’t seen that before). With 3% precincts reporting in from IN it is Clinton 59-41% 61-39%, which is meaningless. What will be interesting at 7:00 PM is whether Fox News and others do a quick call on IN. That would imply a strong Clinton showing (which is what I think is going to pan out). Back in a few minutes.

7:02 PM Eastern: OK, Fox News has decided not to call Indiana quickly for Clinton, which means Obama may be doing well. But it also could mean insufficient data is in and the call for Clinton will come soon. With almost half indicating Wright had an effect on their vote my guess it will be hard to call until at least 20% report in. Back in a few!

7:10 PM Eastern: The implosion inside the Democrat party is building with each primary according to the exit polls:

Forget the horse race numbers for a moment: if the surveys are accurate, the polarization within the Democratic Party has reached critical levels. Nearly six in ten Obama supporters in Indiana say they would be dissatisfied if Clinton were the nominee — that’s (I believe) the high percentage of Obama supporters who have ever said that.

In both IN and NC, two thirds of Clinton supporters say they’d be dissatisfied if Obama were the nominee — I believe that’s the highest number recorded for that question, too.

As the two camps dig in more and more it becomes more and more likely no one will put the party back together again. There is too much bitterness ready to boil over. No word on whether there will be a rush on bibles and guns yet.

With 6% of the precincts reporting Clinton is holding onto her 59-41% lead.

7:15 PM Eastern: Fox News is reporting that the exit polls show a 52-48 win in IN for Clinton, but they are warning their viewers that Obama never does as well as in the final results as the exit polls show. Fair warning!

7:25 PM Eastern: Well, looks like this is Obama’s night because Fox is going to call NC right when the polls close at 7:30 PM Eastern, and has yet to call IN where Clinton is leading (now with 15% reporting it is 57-43 Clinton in IN). Be back at the bottom of the hour when NC is called for Obama.

7:30 PM Eastern: Fox has called NC for Obama, now the question is what will the margins of victory be in what is turning out to be another primary day tie. They called it on the large number of black voters (but that is all based on exit polls). Still not sure where this ends tonight - both win their states by 5%??

7:45 PM Eastern: OK, with 25% of the precincts reporting in for IN Clinton still holds a sizable lead of 57-43%. It seems someone should call this soon as a win (Fox still holding off). The margins are the last bit of data required to see how hard it will be for Clinton to stay alive through June 3rd. Right now she looks to still have some serious life left in her campaign.

7:52 PM Eastern: With 31% in Clinton still holds a 57-43% lead. Apparently some Obama precincts were allowed to stay open late due to lack of ballots. I doubt they would move these numbers much with so many other precincts in. Something is holding the networks from making the call, which means the margin should shrink as the vote comes in.

8:01 PM Eastern: With 35% reporting for IN and the ever stable 57-43% lead for Clinton is holding. The reason people are holding off in IN because they don’t have any primary model and the exit polls are not lining up with the results. Two big counties with large African American populations have very little returns. Again as the reporting precincts climb even these large voter pools for Obama cannot change the totals much.

8:16 PM Eastern: With 41% reporting for IN Cltinon holding onto a 56-44% lead. Seems the networks are going to wait until this gets well above the 50% reporting mark.

8:34 PM Eastern: Last post (I need to get onto non-blog stuff tonight). IN will be called for Clinton sometime soon. With 52% reporting in she still holds a hefty 54-46% win. NC looks to be a big Obama win. With 14% reporting in Obama leads 63-35% in NC. I am sure this will shrink, but will it go to single digits as some hinted earlier this evening?

All General Discussions, 2008 Elections | 4 Comments »

It had to happen sooner or later - the Mahdi Forces have started to openly admit they are getting support from Iran in their fight against the elected government of Iraq and the US forces supporting it:

Abu Baqr, now a commander in the Mahdi Army militia of cleric Muqtada Sadr, blames Iran for what happened to his friend more than 20 years ago during Iraq’s war with Iran, just as he blames Saddam Hussein for that conflict.

He still hates Iran. But now, he said, he accepts its weapons to fight the U.S. military, figuring he can deal with his distaste for the Iranians later. So he takes bombs that can rip a hole in a U.S. tank and rockets that can pound Baghdad’s Green Zone without apology or regret.

“I think that the Iranians are more dangerous than the Americans. I hate them and I don’t trust them,” he said in an interview over soft drinks. But the militia has limited resources, he said, and “therefore, when somebody gives you or offers help, it’s hard to say no.”

…

Abu Baqr’s attitudes illustrate the pragmatism of a movement under siege. Elements of the Mahdi Army are engaged in an intense conflict with rival Shiite Muslim parties in the Iraqi government that benefit from their own close ties to Iran and, more advantageously, the assistance of America’s superior firepower.

The attitudes of commanders such as Abu Baqr would seem to confirm U.S. accusations of Iranian meddling in Iraq. Although the extent of their relationship remains unclear, the commanders have embraced a hardened stance that may bode ill for the U.S. military.

…

A year ago, in one of a series of interviews with The Times, his voice rose in anger when he talked of Iran’s efforts to co-opt the Mahdi Army movement. He seethed about Tehran’s drive to recruit fighters to bomb U.S. convoys at a time when Sadr was trying to halt such activities. He railed against militia members whom Iran had bought off.

At this time of immense pressure, however, he embraces the breakaway factions.

“Not all Jaish al Mahdi members are angels,” he acknowledged, using the group’s Arabic name. “Some have material interests in mind and they’re greedy, and so Iran was able to hit on this particular angle and put them on its side.”

Emphasis mine. Geez, even when the SurrenderMedia digs up their own clear evidence of Iranian support for the Mahdi fighters in Iraq they cannot face up to the fact, they have to weasel-word the connection as if it is still in doubt. What a crock. The LA Times tries to paint these thugs as fighters in hopeless cause against bad players. But these people oppress their fellow Muslims brutally, while the other side has worked to free the people from oppression and establish a democratic form of government.

This lame propaganda game is only going to work on the gullible. It is the Iraqis who have decided they have had enough of brutality, whether it comes from sadists like Hussein or sadists wrapped up in Islamo Fascism - they know liberation is the preferred outcome. They are not flocking to the Mahdi cause in Iraq, not matter how much the LA Times tries to romanticize a bunch of killers who prey on the innocent and unarmed.

What is clear is now that the SurrenderMedia has shown it has evidence of Iranian involvement from eye witnesses inside the Mahdi command structure, which means there is no doubt the US is correct in its claims against Iran. And it means the US is correct in any decisions it makes to send a signal to Iran to stop arming, training and supporting thugs who want to kill American troops in Iraq.

All General Discussions, Iraq, Iran | 4 Comments »

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me!

That is a saying the less than credible liberal left needs to ponder. After predicting certain failure in Iraq and a useless Surge the far left failed to manufacture a stinging defeat and retreat in Iraq. And once you fail to make good on your promises, you are seen as someone who was simply “wrong”. Once failure is the result there is no other label to put on it - it was a failure and those promoting the whole thing (whatever it was) wee wrong. Making excuses and blaming others is just simply failing ugly and without honor and respect. We all make mistakes which makes us human. Loser blame everyone and anyone else for their mistakes.

The anti-war left cannot create a Vietnam style defeat out of Iraq because, thankfully, the American public understand history (in terms of the price we paid in other wars) and they understand defeat is never an option if you can avoid it. The anti-war movement is over now<, its credibility shot to pieces:

Three protesters, a half-dozen signs and a missing petition.

“People walk past and say, ‘I’m glad you’re doing something,’ ” said Marty O’Malley, a Forest Hills council member who has attended more than 100 anti-Iraq war events, as he stood in front of Democratic U.S. Rep. Mike Doyle’s Downtown office last week with the small gathering of activists.

“I want to shake them and say, ‘Why aren’t you doing something!?’ ”

…

Americans still have strong feelings about the conflict: 62 percent want the next president to pull out of Iraq within a year or two of taking office, the poll said. Yet war opponents and supporters are having trouble getting the public’s — and the media’s — attention.

A March survey from the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press discovered that just 28 percent of Americans knew the approximate number of U.S. deaths in the war.

“Obviously, I wish that the American people were more engaged in understanding what’s at stake in Iraq,” said Pete Hegseth, who served there with the 101st Airborne Division and is now executive director of Vets for Freedom. “I think it’s unfortunate that here on the homefront we’re not interested in what’s going on overseas.”

Too many people confusing disagreement with lack of understanding. The fact is the doom and gloom predictions are simply wild, emotional speculation without any regard for the resulting bloodshed that would follow if the speculation was followed. So far we have been avoiding defeat as well as can be expected in a situation like Iraq and the War on Terror. We have even done better than those superior Europeans who let Basra and southern Iraq fall under the influence of Islamo Fascists (the UK, who are our staunchest ally, make no mistake) and those even more superior leftist Europeans who are in Afghanistan and refuse to fight Islamo Fascism. They simply move food and direct traffic I suppose. We are clearly doing more to turn back al-Qaeda than those kinds of approaches.

The fact is Americans understand we have more than a small chance to actually win the effort in Iraq. And they know the huge benefits we can reap if we do win it. All they have to do is compare success to all those failed predictions of quagmires and body bags the left has been spouting and see which outcome is preferable. Now the only question in their minds is can we really pull it off this time?

The fact is we have been moving closer to success just about all the time. Our enemy, who is willing to murder, torture and die for the cause has been brutally hard to beat down (which is what you have to do to win the day). But our enemy’s brutality also turned the Muslim street against them, giving us what we need to snuff out our enemies momentum and shrink them down to something manageable. al-Qaeda is not on the rise as the future of Islam. It is holed up in backwards and isolated enclaves now contained in the tribal regions of Pakistan. It is the enemy of Islam hiding out with a bunch of radicals in the hills of Pakistan.

And that does mean we are close to good victory. Not days close, but maybe months close. Only time will tell, and America has decided to wait and see for a bit more.

All General Discussions, Iraq | No Comments »

Well, I was going to predict it was going to be a good day for Hillary Clinton. I am sure she will do well in Indiana, but North Carolina was going to be the test of whether she had some momentum (or, conversely, if Obama was losing support). The problem we have in all this is the media distorts the reality and it has been overreacting in its usual mob-think mood-swings, so it is hard to see where the electorate is through the news media lens.

Then I see this news splashed across Drudge Report: “DANGER DAY: HILLARY FACES ‘15-POINT DEFEAT’ IN NC; SEES INDIANA WIN“

Hillary Clinton’s inner circle now fears a stinging defeat is likely in North Carolina.

“Look, we worked hard and gave it our best shot, but the demographics, well, they are what they are,” a top campaign source explained to the DRUDGE REPORT as voting began Tuesday morning.

The campaign now believes a 15 point loss, or more, would not be surprising. Her team will work hard throughout the day to lower all expectations in North Carolina.

So I was faced with a decision. Is this the Clinton campaign trying to tamp down expectations for real, or was this laying the ground for the miracle come back. Hard decision to be honest. Polls in NC have been tightening to the point Obama was looking at a 5-7% lead in many cases. It all depended on turn out model mix, which was going to be historically high again (as it has been all year for the democrats). The wild card - Rev Wright. Did Wright hurt Obama more with Whites than he energized African Americans? Which side is going to react stronger?

There is a bit of anger in the African American community over all the Obama bashing, so they could either be energized or turned off as they see Hillary’s kitchen sinks start to damage Obama both in the primary and in the general. We all know Hillary cannot afford to let Obama in the WH in 2008 if she wants a crack at 2012. Conversely, did White Obama supporters get spooked by Rev Wrights spectacle and decide to switch to Clinton or stay home?

I am lousy at predicting but I will go with the long term polls and not PR being ‘leaked’ to the headlines of the Drudge Report. I think Hillary does well in NC bringing that state to a near tie - which is where the democrat primary has been all season. After today - there will still be no clear winner.

All General Discussions, 2008 Elections | 1 Comment »

The Iranians are clearly fools if they think their latest ravings are going to impress anyone:

State Department deputy spokesman Tom Casey was reacting to Iran’s announcement it will not hold a fourth round of security talks with the United States as long as US forces continue attacking Shiite militias in Baghdad.

“It’s meaningless to have talks on anything with Iran as long as they don’t change their behavior,” Casey told reporters.

Like the title of the posts says Iran is demanding we stop killing those killers they trained and armed, and who have stated publicly they only want to kill Americans, if the US wants to ‘talk’ to Iran. Well, at least we know from the absurdity of their comments the time for talking is over. Now it is time to send a different message to Iran - stop sending killers after our troops in Iraq, or we will send thousands of pounds of precision guided munitions into Iran for every soldier killed or wounded.

Tehran - can you hear us now? BTW, it turns out those training camps I posted on below actually belong to the Quds Force of Iranian Revolutionary Guard.

Iraqis are receiving the training at camps operated by the Quds Force, Air Force Col. Donald Bacon told the Associated Press. “We have multiple detainees who state Lebanese Hezbollah are providing training to Iraqis in Iranian IRGC-QF training camps near Tehran,” said Bacon, a U.S. military spokesman in Baghdad. (The Quds Force is also known as the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps-Quds Force, or IRGC-QF. Al-Quds is the Arabic name for Jerusalem.)

That is a direct tie to the Iranian government in my book. How would that be different from finding armed forces in Iran trained by the Pentagon? That would implicate our government, would it not?

All General Discussions, Iran | 4 Comments »

Boy this does not take much discussion to see how this picture of Obama buddy and 1960’s terrorists bomber stomping the US flag one month before 9-11 will play out for Clinton this week. Poor Barack, he never seemed to see it coming.

The caption above says, in part, about Ayers and the Weather Underground “The group was dealing with the past with a kind of amnesia about violence. Bill Ayers recollected his adventurous violence with practiced jokes “Guilty as hell, free as a bird, it’s a great country” “.

Boy, don’t we all miss those adventurous days of our youth and all the bombing and killing and spitting on soldiers? Man, those were the days - right Barack? This will leave a mark on Obama.

All General Discussions, 2008 Elections | 12 Comments »

Michael Yon correctly points out that each time we have faced down the enemy we have seen a spike in casualties followed by a massive drop off in overall violence and casualties as we dispatch our enemies:

April saw 49 U.S. casualties in Iraq, the highest total in seven months. Does this mean, as some insist, that the enormous progress we have made since the start of the military surge is being lost?
As one who has spent nearly two years with American soldiers and Marines and British Army troops in Iraq - having returned from my last trip a month ago - here’s my short answer: no.

We are taking more casualties now, just as we did in the first part of 2007, because we have taken up the next crucial challenge of this war: confronting the Shia militias.

In early 2007, under the leadership of Gen. David Petraeus, we began to wage an effective counterinsurgency campaign against the reign of terror Al Qaeda in Iraq had established over much of the midsection of the country. That campaign, which moved many of our troops off of big centralized bases and out into small neighborhood outposts, carried real risks.

In every one of the first eight months of 2007, we lost more soldiers than we had the previous year. Only as the campaign bore fruit - in the form of Iraqi citizens working with American soldiers on a daily basis, helping uncover terrorist hideouts together - did the casualty numbers begin to improve.

What we don’t need is another round of “it will never work” from the liberal appeasers. They were wrong last time and they will be wrong again. They have zero credibility it predicting what will happen in Iraq (it is even worse than their ability to predict global warming). What will happen is the Mahdi will be decimated because Iran chose to (or was ‘coerced’ to) end their support of the militias. And when that happens Iraq will enter a new phase of elections and the war in Iraq will be over - with victory.

I linked to this interview with a major Iraqi Shiite leader in the previous post, but his last statement in the interview makes perfect sense when combined with what Michael Yon is saying. He lays out the most probable future for Iraq, at least the one the Iraqis are working towards:

LAT: Whenever I ask the Iranian officials why Iran insists on an immediate U.S. troop withdrawal from Iraq, despite the fact that its Iraqi allies do not share your idea, they evade my answer me and beat around the bush. What do you think?

HAKIM: [Bursts outs laughing] You know political rhetoric is different from heartfelt belief. Perhaps when [Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr] Mottaki comes for a private visit here, he accepts that if the U.S. and its allied forces leave today, the insecurity will spill over the borders of Iraq and make everywhere unsafe. We want the withdrawal too. But first at the end of 2008 we will strike a security and political treaty with the U.S. and then the combating forces will go out, and some staff will stay in the U.S. garrisons in Iraq. Iraq has almost no air force now, and only ground forces have been restored. How can we defend ourselves without an air force? You have seen in Basra. To fight a militia, an air force was needed and the Maliki government had no air force. For sure, the U.S. administration doesn’t want to keep all 160,000 troops there for a long time. But it does not mean all of them will leave Iraq soon.

It is a much more pragmatic and sane prediction than the ones you hear from the Surrendercrat presidential candidates and the rest of the Surrendercrat left. Their answer is to run away and wait for things to fall apart, and then come in again. It is amazing what some people will say to get a vote.

But back to Yon and his crystal clear insights:

To comprehend our strategy here, we need to understand the goals of these militias, which pundits, politicians and the press all too often gloss over. Al Qaeda’s aim was to destroy Iraq in civil war. Allegedly devout Muslims, the terrorist savages were willing to rape, murder and pillage their own people just as long as they could catch America in the middle. One reason Al Qaeda in Iraq can regenerate so quickly, despite being hated by most Iraqis, is that, armed with generous funding from outside Iraq, they mostly recruit young men and boys from Iraqi street gangs, giving them money, guns and drugs.

In contrast, JAM and the other Shia militias do not want to destroy Iraq; they want power in the new Iraq. They did not, for the most part, start out as criminal gangs, but as self-defense organizations protecting Shia neighborhoods from the chaos of post-invasion Iraq, including Al Qaeda.

…

These critics miss a crucial on-the-ground reality: Virtually all insurgencies, however noble their original purpose, eventually degenerate into criminal organizations, classic Mafia-like protection rackets, especially as they achieve their original goals.

With Al Qaeda mostly wiped out of Baghdad, the militias that once defended Shia neighborhoods now prey on them. In Basra to the south, where al Qaeda always feared to tread, the situation is even worse. Practically speaking, that city has been ruled by an uneasy coalition of rival Shia gangs for years.

These animals are not the future of Islam. And the Iraqis have made it clear they see them now as the enemies of Islam. When the Islamo Fascists succumbed to lawlessness and oppression they lost the support of the people, who see them for what they really are. And no amount of Western news media disinformation and glossing over the details will wipe the images from the psyche of Iraq regarding what an Islamo Fascist will do for power . They have lived and died through all this - there is no way to game their reality with propaganda from the West. That is why all the liberal efforts to ‘frame’ Iraq are a joke - you cannot ‘frame’ the forces in Iraq and the Muslim world right now - they are on a path all their own.

All General Discussions, Iraq | 5 Comments »