Andrew Hagen

The Iraq Study Group has released its report. (*) The call for drawing down US forces in Iraq puts great pressure on the Maliki government of Iraq to establish security and the rule of law in Iraq, especially in the immediate area around Baghdad, where 80% of insurgent attacks take place.

Iraqi reaction from ruling party Shia elements has been negative. (†) Nevertheless, Sunni politicians will see this as an opportunity to swing the government away from sectarian politics and toward national unity. The Kurds appear to be negative on the ISG, as is likely. The ISG wisely disagrees with the notion of splitting Iraq into three countries, and furthermore suggests the US should draw its force levels down, reducing the chances of an irresponsible Kurdish independence.

ISG panelist and former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor made the following remarks at the press conference today. But first, remarks by President Clinton’s former chief of staff Leon Panetta.

LEON PANETTA: As I told the President this morning, this war has badly divided this country. It’s divided Republicans from Democrats and to some extent the President from the people. And policy sometimes with those divisions has been reduced to a thirty-second soundbite that runs the gamut from victory or stay the course to cut and run. And what this group tried to do, five Democrats and five Republicans, is to try to set aside those code words and those divisions and try to look at the realities that are there.

And I would suggest to the President and to the American people that if you look at the realities of what’s taking place there, the fact that violence is out of control, the fact that Iraqis ultimately have to control their future, they have to take care of security, they’ve got to deal with the region in that area, that ultimately you can find consensus here. This country cannot be at war and be as divided as we are today. You’ve got to unify this country. And I’d suggest to the President that what we did in this group can perhaps serve as an example to try to pull together the leadership of the Congress and try to focus on the recommendations we’ve made.

We have made a terrible commitment in Iraq in terms of our blood and our treasure. And I think we owe it to them to try one last chance at making Iraq work, and more importantly to take one last chance at unifying this country on this war. I think the President understands that he simply is not going to be able to proceed with whatever policy changes he wants to implement if we’re divided. That is the principal goal in my mind that he has to accomplish.

SANDRA DAY O’CONNOR: I would be willing to add a comment about what Leon Panetta has just expressed so well. We’ve said in the report that we agree with the goal of US policy in Iraq as stated by the President: an Iraq that can govern itself, sustain itself, and defend itself. And to do that, we’ve made these various recommendations on a consensus basis. It’s my belief that if a large segment of our country gets behind that on a consensus basis that it’s very likely we can move forward and make some progress toward that statement of goals. And this is not an ongoing commission. It really is out of our hands having done what we did.

It’s up to you, frankly. You are the people who speak to the American people. You’re there interpreting this and talking to America. And I hope the American people feel that if they are behind something in broad terms that we’ll be better off. I think we will and I hope in general that others think so too.

(Video available from C-SPAN. )

The primary objective of the ISG was to find a workable political consensus for implementing the inevitable changes that will occur to US policy in Iraq. That is a worthy cause, and perhaps they have achieved it.

The other, perhaps unexpected result is the pressure ratcheting up on the Maliki government of Iraq. If Iraq is to establish security, it must come primarily from the government of Iraq. My guess is that Maliki is too closely tied with militant Shia groups like that of Muqtada al-Sadr. We are likely to see Maliki’s coalition implode within the coming months. Hopefully, we will then see a transition to more effective Iraq governance.

I would hope that the US government has learned the lessons of Mossadegh, Diem, and Allende. Assassinating foreign leaders does not work. Forcing a coup d’etat would also be incredibly foolish.

Allow the organic political processes to work in Iraq. Continue to push the Iraqi government into the lead role in its country’s security.

As for talking with Iran and Syria, that is better than just bombing them now. The whole point of creating an active front in the war on terror in Iraq was to stave off a larger, wider war. That objective remains as possible as ever. Nevertheless, our strategic dealings with Iran need deeper contemplation than they are currently receiving.

Terrorists in Iraq are targeting American troops in Iraq with sniper fire. CNN obtained videotape taken by the terrorists for the purpose of propaganda. (*)

The newsclip video from CNN features an interview with an American serviceman. († video) He says:

One of the attacks, you know, the locals, they talk to us about what they see, and they said they saw a car pull up, a guy get out the back seat, uh, get out the front seat, get in the back seat, remove a panel from off his car and aim from the car to our rooftop position. Which unfortunately resulted in the death of one Marine who was on the rooftop.

In another video clip, CNN interviews Jack Coughlin, a retired Marine sniper who was shown the terrorist videos. (‡ video) The retired Marine sniper states that he believes that some of the videotaped shots may have come from a location different from the cameraman, perhaps hundreds of yards away. Others may have been closer.

When John Allen Muhammad, 41, a US citizen, and 17-year-old John Lee Malvo, a Jamaican citizen. were arrested for the DC sniper attacks that occurred in 2002, their method of operation came to light. CNN reported on how the DC snipers used a car with a customized panel that could swing open, through which a shot could be fired, and then swung closed to make an unnoticed getaway. (§)

The Chevrolet Caprice used by the sniper suspects was a “killing machine” with two holes in the trunk, one for the rifle, the other for the scope, a senior law enforcement official told CNN Thursday.

The two holes were there so that shots could be fired without opening the trunk, a source said, adding that the back seat could fold down, enabling a potential shooter to stretch out in the back without stepping foot outside.

The source called it a “perfect place” for a shooting platform.

This appears to be quite a coincidence. Perhaps the Iraqi terrorist snipers learned from the DC snipers, or perhaps there was another source for this concept.

Directly implicated in torture, brutality, and thousands of attacks and murders, Jordanian-born terrorist, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi has been killed in an air raid, says the Iraqi prime minister. (*)

This is a great day for humanity, as one of the most loathsome, vile, blood-drenched savages of our time has been put down like the rabid dog he was.

Zarqawi was the head of Al Qaeda in Iraq. The news of his death will have the worldwide Al Qaeda organization in freefall. Additionally, his death opens the door to the killing and arrests of the rest of the insurgency of all wings. There are hard battles ahead, but now as plain for all to see, we can and will win every one of them.

This is a great day for Iraq. Not only is the head of Al Qaeda in Iraq dead, but now the freely-elected, democratically constituted Iraqi government will be able to take major steps forward in consolidating peace and security in Iraq, the birthplace of civilization.

The Iraqi people have suffered countless heartaches and losses at the hands of Al Qaeda and other insurgent groups. The courage and grit and determination of the Iraqi people has been unbelievable. They have endured this storm, and now it has passed. Of course other great challenges remain. As I have said over and again, however, never underestimate the people of Iraq.

Congratulations to all of the coalition forces. You have stuck together amidst an onslaught of the worst inhumane tactics of war used against you, such as the vile and evil IED, lies and slander, and you have proved valorous through it all.

As an American citizen, thank you to our heroes, our troops on the front, in the battle, and behind the lines, and their families, who have sustained such a heavy toll of life and limb and health. You are an inspiration to us all, and your sacrifice is shortening the war and bringing America and humanity closer to victory in the war on terrorism. I cannot say how important these fights and victories have been, except to say there is nothing more important.

Zarqawi is dead. The myth of the immortal terrorist is shown to be a lie. The way of the terrorist is more starkly drawn than even before: it is the way of death. This terrorist jihad is doomed. The human race and our God-given freedoms and liberty shall prevail.

Agitator Cindy Sheehan appeared on the Donny Deutsch program on CNBC in September 2005. On the opposing side was Laura Youngblood, the widow of Casey Youngblood, a servicemember killed in the line of duty in Iraq. Apparently there is no official transcript posted online. Based on web sources, the conversation went like this.

WIDOW: My husband was hit with a IED July 15th and died July 21st. He was part of the 325 unit out of Ohio. He was a Navy corpsman. He died two weeks before 21 Marines died out of Ohio. Everyone keeps saying Al-Qaeda is not in Iraq. Al-Qaeda took responsibility for the IED that killed my husband, and –

SHEEHAN: Well, sweetie, they weren’t there before they invaded and opened the doors borders to the terrorists –

WIDOW: No, we don’t know that, though.

SHEEHAN: — that came pouring in.

WIDOW: No one knows that.

SHEEHAN: Yeah, there’s been reports –

WIDOW: I served five years and, you know what? I’m going to have our baby in 12 more days, and if I do get called I will go back, and I will serve my country the way my husband would want me to. (applause) I am proud of my husband, because, you know what? You can’t let them come back and not finish what we started.

SHEEHAN: You know what? Your baby is going to be fatherless for a lie, for two lies, weapons of mass destruction and terrorism.

WIDOW: (Holding up a photograph of her husband) My child will never be fatherless because his father is an angel and they know that, and they will know their father loved him more than anything in this world.

(*) (†) (‡)

No child is fatherless.

US General John R. Vines states that Zarqawi and Al Qaeda are leaving Iraq, conceding defeat. (*)

Apparently they will go jihad somewhere else from now on.

It’s a little early to start uncorking the champagne, but we’re getting close.

Update: This would be great opportunity for Zarqawi. He might want to contact Yale University and send in an application for enrollment.

In the New York Times, Edward Wong writes: (*)

BAGHDAD, Iraq, April 13 — Osama bin Laden’s top lieutenant [Zawahiri] has released an Internet video calling on Iraqi insurgents to remain strong in the fight against Americans and praising the leadership of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the Jordanian militant who directs Al Qaeda’s operations in Iraq.

Now even the New York Times admits that Zarqawi works for the Iraqi branch of Al Qaeda, the group responsible for the criminal atrocity of 9/11.

Michael Yon has a must-see series of photos of Iraqi kids. (*)

They want us to turn our backs on them.

No.

NPR is reporting that checkpoints and other measures have helped to reduce attacks on the key road to Baghdad’s airport. (*)

It’s another hopeful sign that we are winning in Iraq.

Update: 6 November 2005. Lara Logan of CBS News “60 Minutes” reports that “attacks continue.” She doesn’t specify whether they are decreasing. (†) It sounds like a classic example of the fog of war. I still find the NPR report more persuasive because it’s more specific.

When Ambassador Paul Bremer led the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq, it was US policy to not allow Islamic sharia law into the Iraq constitution. (*) Now that Iraq has its sovereignty, and is governed partially by elected officials, a new constitution is drafted that will make sharia part of the Iraq constitution, significantly reducing women’s rights. (†) The US should tell the government that we will not accept this, and we will remove most of our economic aid to Iraq and accelerate troop withdrawal unless it is removed. Sharia should serve no more than a heritage or background role in Iraqi law.

Women had some rights under Saddam, but those were often unenforced and unprotected.

Most likely, the Bush Administration will not risk offending the Iraqi government. Iraqi women will have a chance to vote down this overmastering draft constitution, however. Let’s hope they do.

The Q and O Blog states that the kill ratio for the US in Iraq is about 100 to 1, and he notes that military planners disregard this ratio as for the most part unimportant. (*) This is probably a decent ballpark estimate. I tend to agree with the kill ratio being unimportant. It was taken as a very important statistic in the Vietnam War, but the focus on that number did not help achieve our war aims there.

I have no military training or experience. Please take this with a trainload of salt.

The basic problem we face in Iraq is that we are not achieving our strategic objectives as quickly as we might. In particular, I’m interested here in the goals of locating and destroying terrorist networks in Iraq.

A common complaint against our Iraq war effort is that we have had too few troops. I take a different position here.

Technology makes for one of the US’s decisive battlefield advantages. In essence, battlefield technology is a force multiplier. Smaller numbers of better-equipped troops have the same or greater effectiveness as larger numbers of poorer-equipped troops.

In a battle with equal numbers of troops to a side, and a technological advantage strongly on one of the sides, that side will have the advantage. Technology is so critical that with sufficiently advantageous technology, a low number of troops can defeat a high number of troops.

In modern, fourth-generation warfare, the holder of superior information has a key battlefield advantage. Information is not limited to hi-tech communication networks, however. Information can traverse low-tech networks, including networks of human couriers, and be managed with various wetware methods.

Superior technology does not necessarily result in superior information. Small groups of committed individuals are more likely to learn new information, particularly wetware information, and more likely to be able to react to the new information quickly. This is one reason why a decentralized command structure is often thought superior in 4GW.

The high kill ratio in Iraq may be evidence that US troops are deployed in units of too great a size for maximum effectiveness. Smaller deployments may result in more rapid information gathering and reactions to terrorist groups. Technology should protect the troops, but the kill ratio would likely decrease somewhat. Smaller deployments could achieve strategic objectives sooner, shortening the war, and resulting in an overall lower death rate for US troops.

In summary, the high kill ratio may be evidence that smaller, more autonomous deployments could be a good choice in the current context. On the other hand, it might not. Perhaps this could be of some assistance to the war effort.

Again, I am far removed from any expertise or actual knowledge.

Iraqi President Jalal Talibani writes: (*)

American forces are in Iraq at the invitation of the democratically elected government of Iraq, and with the backing of a United Nations Security Council resolution. Your soldiers are in my country because of your commitment to democracy. Moreover, [there is the] United States’ complete support for the Iraqi political process toward sustainable democracy, and for the fight to defeat fascist and jihadist terrorism in Iraq.

That commitment to liberty has shaped our opposition to any timetable for withdrawal. There are also two practical, policy reasons to avoid such a scheduled reduction in foreign troop numbers. First, a timetable will aid the terrorists and tell them that all they have to do is wait. Second, military plans must be flexible. We should have the suppleness to respond to the often-changing level of terrorist threat. Indeed, we will require ongoing security assistance in many forms for many years to come.

If we keep progressing at the present rate, Iraqis may be able to take over many security functions from foreign forces by the end of 2006. That is not a deadline, but it is reasonable aspiration. . . .

Americans should be proud of what its soldiers have achieved. The presence of foreign forces has prevented a renewed civil war in Iraq–renewed because there has already been a civil war in Iraq. For 35 years, Saddam and his Baath Party made war on the Iraqi people. The liberation of Iraq ended that civil war. . . .

While the problem of some of our neighbors supporting terrorism is bad enough, we can only imagine what our neighbors might have done if American troops had not been present. Most likely, Iraq would have been transformed into a regional battlefield with disastrous consequences for Middle Eastern and global security.

Without American forces, the vision of American leadership and the quiet fortitude of the American people, Iraqis would be almost alone in the world.

(emphasis added) Let me summarize why we are staying to finish the job in Iraq.

America remains in Iraq because our friends, the Iraqi people, would otherwise face all-out war, jihad, and repression at least as repugnant as that under Saddam.

We are there because Iraqis are our friends and our friends are in need.

Additionally, by helping to cultivate a peaceful and stable Iraq, we cultivate a peaceful and stable Middle East, and a peaceful and stable world.

This is our noble cause in Iraq.

God bless our troops over there, and around the world.

Austin Bay thinks that three dollars a gallon could significantly help the emerging Iraqi government. (*) Current US prices are approaching that level.

They could use the money to finance a quicker defeat of the terrorists.

There is now a report that the US has attempted to begin negotiations with Sunni insurgent groups. They can be brought into the Iraqi political system, and held accountable at the ballot box. This would exclude Al Qaeda. (*)

Excellent. The end result will be the same, but less can blood will be shed if a deal can be struck.

The insurgent groups might hold off on any commitment until after the Iraqi constitution is finalized, and perhaps until after it is ratified by referendum. Assurances from all the principal drafters of the constitution should be just as good, however. This shouldn’t cause much of a delay.

If the Sunni insurgent groups do not wish to negotiate, they will be destroyed.

American troops in Iraq continue to perform at the highest level. They, Coalition partners, Iraqi troops, Iraqi civic leaders, and the Iraqi people deserve our praise.

The Iraq campaign is critical to America’s national interests. It is the first point of attack by Al Qaeda. Iraq is the main battlefield of the Global War on Terrorism. As we learned on 9/11, what goes on in the Middle East has a direct effect on the national security of the United States.

There is recently a public sense in America, however, that the campaign to form a peaceful, secure, and democratic Iraq has become aimless. It has not. Nevertheless, there are calls for a timetable for the withdrawal of American troops. That would be the same thing as simply surrendering to the terrorists.

Our troops will come home when the job is done because then they will have achieved victory. It is victory for which we have strived, and it is victory we will have. Yes. It is happening. It is within reach.

A review is in order of our major accomplishments. Second, a look ahead is warranted at milestones we can expect to accomplish with in the future.

Major accomplishments

• Iraq prevented from conquering Kuwait and other Middle East countries.
• Oppressive regimes of no-fly zones and “oil-for-food” abolished.
• UN and individuals investigated for oil-for-food corruption.
• Iraq liberated.
• Neighboring countries shielded from scud missile attacks.
• Saddam deposed.
• Determination that Iraq did not have a current stock of WMD in any great quantities, or that some WMD may have been destroyed or transferred out of country.
• With Saddam deposed, elimination of the previously plausible potential of Saddam building WMD and giving it to terrorists.
• All US troops withdrawn from Saudi Arabia, eliminating one of Al Qaeda’s major recruiting points.
• UN sanctions on Iraq eliminated, eliminating another of Al Qaeda’s major recruiting points.
• Saddam’s two sons, both murderous criminals, killed.
• Saddam captured. Prosecution for crimes against humanity in a free Iraqi court readied.
• Iraq oil revenue secured for the Iraqi people.
• Prevention of ethnic cleansing.
• Corrupt and tainted Iraq security force structure disbanded.
• New Iraq currency introduced.
• Economic development in Iraq promoted.
• Sovereignty over Iraq transferred to Iraqi government.
• Iranian-backed rebellion of Shia leader Moqtada Al-Sadr quashed. His group is brought into regular, accountable Iraq political system.
• Free elections in Iraq held and leaders are elected.
• Key insurgent strongholds rooted out in Fallujah and elsewhere.
• Many Al Qaeda lieutenants killed or captured.
• In wake of fate of Saddam, Libyan leader Col. Khaddafy voluntarily gives up nuclear weapons program, leading to unraveling of Pakistani scientist A.Q. Khan’s black market in nuclear weapons technology.
• In wake of liberation of Iraq, Lebanese people emboldened to speak up and resist Syrian oppression. Syria forced to withdraw troops from Lebanon.
• Iran exposed to increased scrutiny over nuclear weapons program, oppression of citizens, and phony elections.

What can we expect in the future as a result of our great efforts and sacrifices in Iraq? What are the milestones that we should expect to see in the future?

Future milestones

• August 15, 2005: new Iraq constitution is due to be submitted.
• Referendum held on new constitution.
• Comprehensive free Iraqi elections to be held and put on normal schedule.
• Iraqi army, police, and security forces rebuilt over time.
• Iraqi upper-level military command structure, including generals, rebuilt over time.
• As Iraqi forces grow in strength, training, and number, so that Iraq can defend herself, American and Coalition troop strength gradually reduced over time.
• Baathist insurgents are fought, and possibly offered a deal to break off fighting.
• Increased Sunni participation in Iraq government and public affairs.
• Al Qaeda general Zarqawi captured or killed.
• Growing stability and security in Iraq. Reduced number of terrorist murders over given time periods.
• Reacting to liberty in Iraq, internal political pressure grows on Syrian dictator Bashar Assad.
• Lebanon regains self-determination.
• Free elections held in Libya.
• International community emboldened to hold Iranian regime to closer account. Iranian people emboldened to stand up straight for their own freedom.
• Securing of Iraq’s borders.
• Prosecution of Saddam Hussein.

As we reach these milestones, we draw closer to victory.

Our brave and inspiring troops have already accomplished much in the course of this historic campaign. They know how to finish the job and they are capable of doing it. They just need our support.

I want our servicemen and servicewomen to know our thoughts and prayers are with them, and that we back them 100%. They are earning a special place in the hearts of Americans, of Iraqis, and of freedom-loving people around the world. They are leaving their mark, and changing history for the better.

Update: 25 June 2005. Added referendum.

Reports are confirmed that Baathist indigenous Iraqi nationalists have traded fire with foreign fighter resistance units (most likely linked to Al Qaeda). (*) The Baathists are said to dislike Al Qaeda’s targeting of civilians.

Now is the time for the Iraqi government and the Coalition to up the ante and offer the Baathists a deal. Let them come into the system as politically legitimate as long as they drop all insurgent activity and cooperate with securing Iraq. This would be a bitter pill to swallow for both sides, but in the long-run, it will be easier to hold the Baathists accountable at the ballot box then elsewhere. This would prop up badly-needed Sunni support for the new government. It will also isolate Zarqawi and Al Qaeda further.

This may be a propitious moment. It would seem that the time is ripe to be bold.

Since the Iraqi free election earlier this year, numerous top terrorists have been killed or arrested. The latest is Mullah Mahdi, a Zarqawi high associate. (*)

We are witnessing the inevitable. Zarqawi and the Jihad Nazis in Iraq are being rapidly liquidated. Zarqawi himself has admitted to being wounded. The free Iraqi people have proved themselves to be steadfast and hardy, and unyielding to the psychopathological hatred and homicidal mania of the Jihad Nazis.

The Iranian regime’s rapid moves to build nuclear weapons and the Syrian regime’s rapid moves to bolster its ballistic missile technology are indications that those two regimes are not confident about the future of their friends, the Jihad Nazis in Iraq.

The final bleat of the terror masters is likely to be an unleashing on the innocent people of Iraq of the terrorists’ remaining munitions stockpiles, which must be swiftly dwindling, or, more likely, a new barrage of unbased allegations and deceptions claiming torture and human rights violations committed by the free Iraqi government and its coalition partners.

Of course, nothing is assured. We must stay the course and finish the job. The Coalition would be wise to steadily increase the intensity of their efforts until the threat is neutralized.

A recent Washington Post report finds that based on Internet data, a large chunk of the suicide bombers terrorizing Iraq are in fact Saudi citizens. (*) (†)

A tighter southern border watch would appear to be in order for the new Iraqi government.

British PM Tony Blair’s recent reelection victory was a defeat for Iraq war opponents. They latched onto some leaked meeting minutes and portentously titled it “The Downing Street Memo.” (*) War opponents claimed the memo proves the war was a lie and so on.

In fact the memo offers little new. At one point it says: “But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran.”

Libya has now given up its WMD program. Iran and North Korea continue to be thorns in the side of peace and liberty.

Opponents continue to misread the war aims of the allies. They were to deny the potential that Saddam would develop or acquire WMD, and also to deny to terrorists Iraq as a haven. The first aim is achieved. We are now tantalizingly close to achieving the second.

The best case against the Iraq war would be that we should have dealt with North Korea or Iran first. That is not the argument of most of the war’s opponent’s, however.

Millions of Iraqi voters streamed to the polls today. (*) They voted in their country’s first free election in half a century. Several suicide bombings today did not deter the vote.

The voters acted in defiance of terrorists, thugs, and murderers. They brought down the notion that they did not want the right to guide their own country’s future at the ballot box.

Thanks to the courageous and noble people of Iraq, the night of terror has given way to the first rays of morning freedom.

It is a glorious day in Iraq.

It is a sad day for the Left. Though I have defended it for long on the basis that its core moral principles remained intact, now I must reconsider whether the Left retains any moral legitimacy.

For many years, Iraq was a country ruled by a brutal dictator, Saddam Hussein. The Left did not fight the dictator’s expansion into Kuwait. The Left opposed sanctions against the dictator. The Left opposed toppling the dictator. The Left opposed fighting the remnants of the dictator’s terroristic security police. The Left opposed helping the people of Iraq who were under murderous attack from the most savage and anti-democratic underground guerilla campaign in recent years. The Left opposed helping the Iraqi people defend themselves long enough to vote. Now the Iraqi people have voted anyway. The Left has failed its own project, and the Iraqi people.

The Left failed abjectly on the Iraq issue to stand by what were once its core moral principles. This failure comes on the heels of its embrace and appeasement of totalitarianism in the 20th century, Chernobyl, and countless other failures of the Left’s. The dream that a good Left can be put back together now looks more like a smokescreen.

I wonder whether there can be any Left again. I wonder if the Left is now finally dead.

One thing is clear. If the Left is dead, the Iraqi people will not regret its loss.

On this grand day, it is appropriate to remember all of the coalition fighting men and women who gave their time and health and lives in Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm, Northern and Southern Watch, Operation Iraqi Freedom, and operations after the fall of Saddam, continuing today. We remember the missing, including Scott Speicher. The security and the liberty of America and the world has been well-guarded by their bravery and sacrifice.

Photo credit: Faleh Kheiber/Reuters.

US Marines and Iraqi soldiers have “broken” the Enemy terror stronghold of Fallujah, Lt Gen John Sattler says. (*) Operation Dawn is a success.

The efforts of American fighting men and women in the Fallujah engagement has been incredible, valorous, and distinctive. Fallujah is nearly free of the terrorist menace.

Our troops are ahead of schedule. They have devastated the Enemy even as they have strained to protect innocent lives. They have taken casualties when they didn’t have to, just to show respect for mosques and civilians.

Now we must send in the rebuilding crews. The example of Fallujah must serve both as a warning to those who would do harm, and as an incentive to those who would choose freedom.

Convincing the Sunnis they are better off with the new government is absolutely key.

Finally, let’s not forget the Americans killed in Fallujah several months ago, dragged through the streets, and hanged from a bridge. The Marines have now left a handwritten message on the bridge. (†)

This is for the Americans of Blackwater that were murdered here in 2004. Semper Fidelis.

3/5

P.S. F*** you.

God bless the US Marines.