Give "Em Surrender Harry's War - On The Surge & General Petraeus

Could there be a more odious individual then Harry Reid, supreme Surrendocrat in the Senate. Reid and Pelosi both led their party's charge against the surge before it even began in February. On the two occaisions of notable terrorist acts since February, Harry Reid immediately tried to capitalize by declaring the surge a "failure." But Harry Reid does not end there in his effort to undermine the war. He and his fellow Surrendocrats have started a campaign to preempt anything General Petraeus might say about Iraq by claiming that General Petraeus cannot be trusted to tell the truth. And now, just as all troops are on the ground and the surge is beginning in earnest, Reid goes over the top yet again in his effort to undermine the war in Iraq by calling General Petraeus and General Pace "incompetent:"

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid called Marine Gen. Peter Pace, the outgoing chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, "incompetent" during an interview Tuesday with a group of liberal bloggers, a comment that was never reported.

Reid made similar disparaging remarks about Army Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, said several sources familiar with the interview.

This is but the latest example of how Reid, under pressure from liberal activists to do more to stop the war, is going on the attack against President Bush and his military leaders in anticipation of a September showdown to end U.S. involvement in Iraq, according to Democratic senators and aides.

Reid, who was bashed by Republicans for suggesting earlier this year that the Iraq war was "lost," is lashing out at top commanders while putting the finishing touches on a plan to force a series of votes on Iraq designed exclusively to make Republicans up for reelection in 2008 go on record in favor of continuing an unpopular war.

Reid, the senators and aides said, does not expect any of the Iraq measures to pass but hopes the effort will drive a deep enough wedge between wavering Republicans and Bush that, by September, Republican senators will break with the president and help end the war.

Read the entire story here. Make no mistake, our own far left led by Pelosi and Reid, al Qaeda and Iran, are all leading the war against the surge. Yet moderates and conservatives are all but silent. It is mindboggling in its insanity. Moderate and Conservative leaders, please find a broadcast microphone and repeat after me:

Its obvious at this point that the terrorists of al Qaeda, the terror supporting state of Iran and our own Democratic Congressional leaders Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi all share precisely the same motivation. They all want to portray the surge as a failure and have America surrender in Iraq. Al Qaeda in Iraq wants to destroy America. Iran wants America weakened and out of the Middle East so that they can exapand their theocracy. As to Hary Reid and Nancy Pelosi, they want the surge to fail so that they can get political power. Reid and Pelosi are quite willing to sacrifice our long term national interests for their own short term political gain.

Harry Reid has criticized President Bush, claiming that our President is asking America for a blank check to finish the war in Iraq and leave behind a stable democracy in the Middle East. But Harry Reid is also asking for a blank check - a much larger one, in fact. Harry Reid is asking America for a blank check to pay the costs that will ensue to our nation, our national security and our foreign policy if we surrender and retreat from Iraq in the face of attacks by al Qaeda and Iran. Every act has costs. But Harry Reid never addresses the costs of his surrender plan. He doesn't because the only upside is Harry Reid and the Democrats getting political power in 2008. As to the cost of the blank check for his surender plan, that cost will most assuredly make the cost of stabilizing Iraq look like chump change. Harry Reid is fine with that, just so long as no one realizes that truth until after the 2008 elections.

Read More...

Summary only...

So When Do The Gloves Finally Come Off?

According to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Marine Corps General Peter Pace, Iran is providing arms and EFP's not only to the Shia militants, but also to Sunni militants in Iraq, as well as the Taliban in Afghanistan.

"We surmise from that, one of two things: Either the leadership of the country knows what their armed forces are doing, or they don't know. In either case, that's a problem," Gen. Pace said.

There are also reports Iran is stepping up support for Iraqi insurgents. Army Lt. Gen. Ray Odierno, commander of Multinational Corps-Iraq, told reporters Friday there are new signs that Iran is "not only providing support to Shia groups, but also Sunni insurgent groups."

"We don't have any specific proof of that yet, but there's been some indications that that could in fact be the case," he said.

Asked why the Iranians would be supporting Sunnis, when in the past their support was primarily for Shi'ites, Gen. Odierno said: "I think it's mainly because they want to continue to create chaos in Iraq. They do not want this government potentially to succeed."

Iran also is trying to "try to tie down coalition forces here," Gen. Odierno said.

Read the entire article here. General Pace, when asked how the U.S. military will "respond to the Iranian backing for insurgents," stated "We will continue to be very aggressive . . . inside of Iraq and inside of Afghanistan against any elements that are posing a threat to our own forces." At this point, that is not sufficient.

One, the question of whether the "leadership" of Iran knows what its military is doing is a canard. This is a deliberate act for which the mullah's are responsible. Moreover, given the command structure of Iran - the IRGC reports directely to the Supreme Guide - it cannot be assumed that the ongoing provision of weapons and, in fact, the training of militants, are simply rogue acts. Two, while we are taking aggressive actions against the Iranians inside Iraq - at this point we hold some 300 Iranians and are targeting any in Iraq we deem connected to terrorism - such actions are obviously not yet sufficient to deter Iran from involving themselves to an even greater extent in a proxy war against us in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The most appropriate response would be, if we can identify and verify the Iranian base at which the IRGC are training the Iraqi militants, then destroy it. Is that an act of war? Of course. But so is what the Iranians are doing. Ahmedinejad will rant and rave - but in the lexicon of the military, he has an alligator mouth and a tweety bird ass. It will give the mad mullahs a dose of reality and a very stark choice - particularly with two aircraft carriers in the gulf and a third enroute.

The mullahs must be made to grasp the seriousness of the game they are playing -- a game in which they seem to think that they hold the upper hand. Indeed, for thirty years Iran has not paid any price for the murder and mayhem of this ilk that they have caused, arming and acting through proxies, causing untold slaughter. They must be disabused of the belief that the U.S. will continue to tolerate it, and a line in the sand must be drawn. Allowing this to continue is ridiculous, and it is our soldiers and Britain's soldiers on the ground who are paying the price. The gloves must come off.

Read More...

Summary only...