US to withdraw from Syria and pull troops from Afghanistan

This was a bit of a surprise and I’ve got mixed feelings about it.

But, first, the story from the New York Times:


WASHINGTON — The Trump administration has ordered the military to start withdrawing roughly 7,000 troops from Afghanistan in the coming months, two defense officials said Thursday, an abrupt shift in the 17-year-old war there and a decision that stunned Afghan officials, who said they had not been briefed on the plans.


President Trump made the decision to pull the troops — about half the number the United States has in Afghanistan now — at the same time he decided to pull American forces out of Syria, one official said.


The announcement came hours after Jim Mattis, the secretary of defense, said that he would resign from his position at the end of February after disagreeing with the president over his approach to policy in the Middle East.


The whirlwind of troop withdrawals and the resignation of Mr. Mattis leave a murky picture for what is next in the United States’ longest war, and they come as Afghanistan has been troubled by spasms of violence afflicting the capital, Kabul, and other important areas. The United States has also been conducting talks with representatives of the Taliban, in what officials have described as discussions that could lead to formal talks to end the conflict.

Senior Afghan officials and Western diplomats in Kabul woke up to the shock of the news on Friday morning, and many of them braced for chaos ahead. Several Afghan officials, often in the loop on security planning and decision-making, said they had received no indication in recent days that the Americans would pull troops out. The fear that Mr. Trump might take impulsive actions, however, often loomed in the background of discussions with the United States, they said.

They saw the abrupt decision as a further sign that voices from the ground were lacking in the debate over the war and that with Mr. Mattis’s resignation, Afghanistan had lost one of the last influential voices in Washington who channeled the reality of the conflict into the White House’s deliberations.

The reduction of American forces in Afghanistan, one American official said, is an effort to make Afghan forces more reliant on their own troops and not Western support.

But some fear the move could only imperil the Afghan troops, who have struggled in the field against the Taliban and have suffered high casualty rates, even with the current level of American support.

Cmdr. Rebecca Rebarich, a Pentagon spokeswoman, declined to comment on the plan to remove troops from Afghanistan.

The president long campaigned on bringing troops home, but in 2017, at the request of Mr. Mattis, he begrudgingly pledged an additional 4,000 troops to the Afghan campaign to try to hasten an end to the conflict.
Though Pentagon officials have said the influx of forces — coupled with a more aggressive air campaign — was helping the war effort, Afghan forces continued to take nearly unsustainable levels of casualties and lose ground to the Taliban.


The renewed American effort in 2017 was the first step in ensuring Afghan forces could become more independent without a set timeline for a withdrawal. But with plans to quickly reduce the number of American troops in the country, it is unclear if the Afghans can hold their own against an increasingly aggressive Taliban.

You can read the rest over at the NYT. We are also pulling out of Syria as well; and Turkey says they will take over that conflict.

Via Reuters:

ISTANBUL/BEIRUT (Reuters) – Turkey will take over the fight against Islamic State militants in Syria as the United States withdraws its troops, President Tayyip Erdogan said on Friday, in the latest upheaval wrought by Washington’s abrupt policy shift.

The surprise announcement by U.S. President Donald Trump this week that he would withdraw roughly 2,000 troops has felled a pillar of American policy in the Middle East. Critics say Trump’s decision will make it harder to find a diplomatic solution to Syria’s seven-year-old conflict.


For Turkey, the step removes a source of friction with the United States. Erdogan has long castigated his NATO ally over its support for Syrian Kurdish YPG fighters against Islamic State. Turkey considers the YPG a terrorist group and an offshoot of the armed Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), fighting for Kurdish autonomy across the border on Turkish soil.

In a speech in Istanbul, Erdogan said Turkey would mobilize to fight remaining Islamic State forces in Syria and temporarily delay plans to attack Kurdish fighters in the northeast of the country – shifts both precipitated by the American decision to withdraw.

The news was less welcome for other U.S. allies. Both France and Germany warned that the U.S. change of course risked damaging the campaign against Islamic State, the jihadists who seized big swathes of Iraq and Syria in 2014-15 but have now been beaten back to a sliver of Syrian territory.

Likewise, the U.S.-backed militia spearheaded by the YPG said a Turkish attack would force it to divert fighters from the battle against Islamic State to protect its territory.

Islamic State launched an attack in Syria’s southeast against the U.S.-backed SDF militia, employing car bombs and dozens of militants.
“We will be working on our operational plans to eliminate ISIS elements, which are said to remain intact in Syria, in line with our conversation with President Trump,” Erdogan said, referring to Islamic State.

The Turkish president had announced plans last week to start an operation east of the Euphrates River in northern Syria to oust the YPG from the area that it largely controls. This week, he said the campaign could come at any moment. But on Friday, he cited the talk with Trump as a reason to wait.

“Our phone call with President Trump, along with contacts between our diplomats and security officials and statements by the United States, have led us to wait a little longer,” he said.

“We have postponed our military operation against the east of the Euphrates river until we see on the ground the result of America’s decision to withdraw from Syria.”

The Turkish president said, however, that this was not an “open-ended waiting period”.

Turkey has repeatedly voiced frustration over what it says is the slow implementation of a deal with Washington to pull YPG fighters out of Manbij, a town in mainly Arab territory west of the Euphrates in northern Syria.

Now, the neocon right is not happy about this. You can read that here, here and here.

Now here is my personal opinion on this subject. If ISIL or ISIS or Dash, as it is called; is truly defeated in Syria; then great, we are doing the right thing. If we are wrong about that, and ISIS regroups and starts again, we’ll regret we left that Country. As far as Afghanistan goes, we should have left that Country the day that Osama Bin Laden was found and killed in Pakistan. The fact that we have been there, this long, is a terrible thing. Now, I would hate to see the Taliban come back there. But, we have no business being the policeman of the World.

The truth is, is that the Taliban were in power there years before; and we did nothing, until 2001 when the United States was hit by the terrorists. As far as Mathis is concerned, screw him. The President of the United States is the commander and chief of the military and what he says goes and if this guy did not like it. He should have quit long ago.

Many people will say that this was an olive branch to the left and also to many in Trump’s base. But, as far as I am concerned, this is something that should have happened a long time ago. We finally have a President that has a realistic sense of foreign policy.

Mini-Movie: The frame job against Bashar al-Assad

This comes via Conservative-Headlines.com, and I know some people might not like it that I linked to these guys. Well, you know what? Tough! This video is a eye-opener; and I really do not even like Alex Jones for some very good reasons.

https://youtu.be/pqj4WzgnxDc

Just like Al-Qaeda, ISIS was created by the United States. Our biggest threat as Americans, is not terrorism; it is our own Government.

More dark money tied to Jeb Bush’s run for 2016

Now, why am I not shocked nor surprised at this?

Jeb Bush has given his tacit endorsement to a new group that can collect unlimited amounts of money in secret, part of a bold effort by his advisers to create a robust external political operation before he declares his expected White House bid.

The nonprofit group, Right to Rise Policy Solutions, was quietly established in Arkansas in February by a friend and former Bush staffer. The group shares the name of two political committees for which Bush has been aggressively raising money — blurring the line that is supposed to separate a campaign from independent groups.

While ideological nonprofits have become major players in national politics in recent years, this marks the first time one has been so embedded in the network of a prospective candidate.

via How a Bush-allied nonprofit could inject more secret money into ’16 race – The Washington Post.

The Republican establishment is going to stop at nothing at maintaining business as usual in the Republican Party. Jeb Bush is their guy; and they are going to do anything they can to get him into the White House. I have my doubts as to whether Jeb Bush will make it out of the primaries or not.

The reason why I say this is because the Conservative grassroots are much more informed; by means of social media and quite frankly, they are very much fired up, because of the Obama Presidency. They are absolutely demanding a drastic stark change from the disaster of the Democrat’s past 8 years. Jeb Bush simply does not offer that; the fact is that Jeb Bush stands for the Republican Party moderate establishment; and as a relic of the past.

It is widely known that Jeb Bush is soft on immigration and supports common core; two very big hot button topic within the conservative grassroots. Not to mention that fact that the conservative grassroots is demanding a full repeal of the Affordable Healthcare Act. Something that only Ted Cruz has given a full-throated promise to carry out, should he be elected. I am not a supporter of Cruz at all; I am simply making observations.

Another thing that is of great concern to this writer, is the fact that Jeb Bush is a bona fide neoconservative. It would not be an incorrect observation that say that Jeb Bush would be carry out the wishes of AIPAC and the rest of the Jewish lobby and yes, that would include bombing Iran. Furthermore, Jeb Bush would be a stooge for the Council on Foreign Relations and the United Nations. Thus, making him a pigeon of the New World Order.

The Bottom Line: The GOP establishment must be joking. They want to actually try to run a basic clone of George W. Bush? Good luck with that one guys. Because Americans; both Democrat and Republican, Liberal and Conservative — and everything else in between — are a bit more informed, smarter and do communicate better these days, than they did in 2000. America has not forgotten about the foolish actions of President George W. Bush in 2003; and the utter disaster that it has created in the middle east.  The GOP could do better, by running something a bit smarter than another Bush; sadly, I believe that the GOP is hell-bent on repeating the same mistakes of 2008 and 2012; and that, my friends —- is an American tragedy.

Others: Reuters and Prairie Weather

Interesting Reading: American Sniper’s Myths and Misrepresentations

This is some seriously interesting reading:

Few these days will admit to supporting the 2003 Iraq invasion, especially given that we now know that it helped give rise to ISIS. But the forerunner and current ally of ISIS was al-Qaeda in Iraq [AQI], bad people defeated by sometimes reluctant heroes in places the Baghdad-centric media avoided. I know; I have both celebrated and suffered with them. And I now suffer disgust at how Clint Eastwood used one of them—deeply troubled and flawed—and denigrated the others for a box-office and Oscar bonanza.

I was embedded twice with SEAL Team Three, American Sniper author Chris Kyle’s unit, as a photo-journalist in Task Force Currahee. At that time it was deployed to what was the headquarters of AQI and perhaps the most violent part of most dangerous city in the world, during what’s now known as The Battle of Ramadi. My first firefight was with ST3; like everything else these days you can watch it on YouTube. Ramadi claimed the lives of the first four SEALs to die in Iraq; my two journalist predecessors were both shot by snipers; an IED claimed my own public affairs “handler,” Marine Maj. Megan McClung. I escaped injury during both embeds, but my previous one in Fallujah led to a horrific noncombat injury and seven surgeries.

All of which is to say that I’ve got a stake in making sure that the story of the warriors I knew is told the right way—the truthful way. Which brings me to “American Sniper.”

via American Sniper’s Myths and Misrepresentations | The American Conservative.

As someone who supported the invasion of Iraq originally in 2003 and until it became very obvious that there was no WMD’s, which is why we went in there in the first place —- and sorry, parts for bombs from the first gulf war do not count at all; we went looking for ACTIVE and NEW bombs —-  this article is very interesting to read. One thing I will say is that the neoconservatives and their contemporaries in the media will do all that they can to portray war as something righteous, romantic or glamorous.

As someone who has had family members in various wars over the years; I can tell you first hand that none of that nonsense is even remotely true about any sort of war. War, my friends, is literally hell on earth. It damages people. For example, my Grandmother’s step-brother served in World War 2. He came back shell-shocked; we was never ever able to work after that either. My Mom has told me stories that my grandmother told her, about her step-brother roaming the house at night, because of his flashbacks. It scared my grandmother to death. The point is this: War should never be used as a political tool, as was the case with the Iraq War. It should only be used as very last resort, when all other means have been exhausted.

Which is just how Ronald Reagan conducted his foreign policy. He never used the United States military, unless he felt that the Republic of the United States was in mortal danger. It was a sensible foreign policy and one that the Republican Party should adapt as their own and stop taking marching orders from the neoconservative right. Our Nation would be better off, as a result.

 

I have a bad feeling about Iraq, that we are going back there, again…..

This is sad and I have a bad feeling as to what is coming…:

The Story:

Iraq’s government is investigating reports that the ancient archaeological site of Khorsabad in northern Iraq is the latest to be attacked by the Islamic State militant group.

Adel Shirshab, the country’s tourism and antiquities minister, told The Associated Press there are concerns the militants will remove artifacts and damage the site, located 15 kilometers (9 miles) northeast of Mosul. Saeed Mamuzini, a Kurdish official from Mosul, told the AP that the militants had already begun demolishing the Khorsabad site on Sunday, citing multiple witnesses.

On Friday, the group razed 3,000-year old Nimrod and on Saturday, they bulldozed 2,000-year old Hatra — both UNESCO world heritage sites. The move was described by UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon as a “war crime.”

via Associated Press.

I hate to say it; but, I have sinking feeling that the United States is going to have to end up going back into Iraq again. This time to destroy ISIS in Iraq and maybe even Libya too; and possibly the entire Arab peninsula. I hope like heck that I am wrong about it; but I have a bad feeling. We, of course, will not be doing it alone. But, we and the coalition allies will be going into the middle east again.

Of course, this will be used as a recruitment tool for the likes of ISIS and Al-Qaeda. Not to mention all of the rest of the things that go with war. It is a sad thing; but, at this point, I do believe that it is inevitable. I just hope that this Presidential administration  manages things this time better than the last one did. The last one was a disaster. I have my doubts about that too. Because the track record is just not that good. Normally, I would just pray for peace; but in this case, with this ISIS group — that is just not possible. If anything at all, I pray that the Nations that ISIS are in and are conducting terrorist actions, would rise up and attack these terrorists, so that the United States would not have to do it. However, if I know things like I do; they will not do it and will rely on the United States to bring its military in to deal with the problem.

There are people who will want to blame Bush for this mess. I think that would be foolish, at this point. Because President Bush had a plan in place, that would have insured Iraq’s safety for many years to come. However, President Obama came in and changed the plan and pulled out the troops before the plan could even be implemented. Because he was under pressure from the anti-war faction of his party.

Now, because of that idiotic move; we now have ISIS and it is a bigger problem than Al-Qaeda ever was and are much crazier. So, it is back to the war game. Hopefully, the Republic will survive.

(Cross-posted to Beforeitsnews.com)

UAE conducts airstrikes on ISIS oil pipelines

Good to see that someone else besides The US having to the heavy lifting against ISIS.

The story:

The United Arab Emirates said Saturday its warplanes had carried out raids against oil installations held by the Islamic State group, which controls large swathes of Iraq and Syria.

The state news agency WAM did not say where the raids struck, only that UAE fighter jets took off overnight Friday from their base in Jordan, another partner in the US-led coalition against the jihadists.

“UAE Air Force F-16 squadron deployed to an airbase in Jordan conducted fresh air strikes last night against the terrorist organization (ISIS),” WAM said.

The planes hit several ISIS “operation and extraction points along crude oil pipelines in order to dry up the terror group’s sources of funding”, it said, adding they all returned safely.

It was the second reported air strikes by UAE aircraft since February 16 when warplanes from the Gulf federation also took off from Jordan and hit oil refineries held by ISIS.

via UAE Airstrikes Hit ISIS Oil Pipelines – Middle East – News – Arutz Sheva.

 

Hmmmmmm: Did Osama Bin Laden have ties to Iran?

Neocon propaganda or fact? I report, you decide.

The Story:

This week, prosecutors in New York introduced eight documents recovered in Osama bin Laden’s compound in Pakistan as evidence in the trial of a terrorism suspect. The U.S. government accuses Abid Naseer of taking part in al Qaeda’s scheme to attack targets in Europe and New York City. And prosecutors say the documents are essential for understanding the scope of al Qaeda’s plotting.

More than 1 million documents and files were captured by the Navy Seals who raided bin Laden’s safe house in Abbottabad, Pakistan in May 2011. One year later, in May 2012, the Obama administration released just 17 of them.

While there is some overlap between the files introduced as evidence in Brooklyn and those that were previously made public in 2012, much of what is in the trial exhibits had never been made public before

via New Docs Reveal Osama bin Laden’s Secret Ties With Iran | The Weekly Standard.

Interesting….

The Mahablog says:

They don’t quit. The neocons at National Review — including Stephen Hayes, who will insist on his deathbed that before 9/11 Mohamed Atta did too meet with agents of Saddam Hussein in Prague — now are flogging documents that “reveal”Osama bin Laden had secret ties to Iran.

Yes, and I’m Shirley Temple’s zombie.

If you keep reading the articles, it turns out that these documents say nothing about secret ties to the Iraniangovernment, just that a small number of al Qaeda operatives had been in Iran, somewhere, doing something, including “training.” But for all we know their long-term plans were to set off bombs in Tehran, not attend parties with the ayatollahs.

The documents were among those recovered in Osama bin Laden’s compound and were introduced in court in the trial of “a terrorism suspect.” I believe they are referring to Faruq Khalil Muhammad ‘Isa, a Canadian national currently on trial in Brooklyn for murdering five U.S. servicemen in Iraq in 2009. However, for some reason, the National Review propagandists are not calling this suspect by name or imagining he has secret ties to Iran. I guess they have no beef with Canada. Yet.

No Quarter Says this:

Fox News is busy today carrying water for the NeoCons and the Netanyahu crowd with the claim that the Obama Administration is sitting on intel recovered from Osama Bin Laden’s porn palace in Abottabad 5 years ago that shows Iran and Al Qaeda are working together.

Horseshit!! We’ve seen this play before. Remember the hot insistence by many of these same characters in late 2001 and thru 2002 that Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda were working in tandem? Laurie Mylroie, who allegedly had been involved romantically with a senior Iraqi military guy, was the go-to gal for people like Paul Wolfowitz and Dick Cheney in “proving” that link.

[…]

Iran and Al Qaeda are not ideologically nor theologically soulmates. They are diametrically opposed. Al Qaeda is a radical Sunni entity. They despise Shias. There was a time about 20 years ago when Bin Laden, in a visionary move, sought to build ties with the Shia and Iran. That is true. But, over time, AQ became more sectarian and more opposed to all things Shia.

The current effort to link AQ and Iran has one purpose–derail and/or thwart any potential agreement with Iran on its nuclear program. Just keep this in mind as the propaganda floods the networks on the eve of Prime Minister Netanyahu’s speech to the US Congress next week.

Only blogger who is saying basically, “Yeah boy howdy! We gotta nuke Iran!” is this guy here. Not mention posting racist photos like this here:

Neocons, racist?

No wonder the war party got sacked in the last election. 🙄

You know, I am just going to say this; it is pretty freakin’ bad, when a Paleoconservative, like myself, has to point out the fact that those who support the Neoconservatives, are stooping to racism of this low-brow sort. In case this knucklehead above has forgotten; the Republican Party is the Party of Lincoln and they should start acting like it. Instead of the racists of the old Democratic Party. But, then again; are not neocons former Democrats? Why, Yes! Yes they are! …and they brought their Wilsonian foreign policy and their ugly bigotry with them.

I could see running into something like this, on, maybe, Stormfront. But, on a so-called Conservative blog? Come on. 😡

The best words that John Mccain has ever spoken

These are the words of Senator John McCain from the Senate floor. Via his website:

“Mr. President, I rise in support of the release – the long-delayed release – of the Senate Intelligence Committee’s summarized, unclassified review of the so-called ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’ that were employed by the previous administration to extract information from captured terrorists. It is a thorough and thoughtful study of practices that I believe not only failed their purpose – to secure actionable intelligence to prevent further attacks on the U.S. and our allies – but actually damaged our security interests, as well as our reputation as a force for good in the world.

“I believe the American people have a right – indeed, a responsibility – to know what was done in their name; how these practices did or did not serve our interests; and how they comported with our most important values.

“I commend Chairman Feinstein and her staff for their diligence in seeking a truthful accounting of policies I hope we will never resort to again. I thank them for persevering against persistent opposition from many members of the intelligence community, from officials in two administrations, and from some of our colleagues.

“The truth is sometimes a hard pill to swallow. It sometimes causes us difficulties at home and abroad. It is sometimes used by our enemies in attempts to hurt us. But the American people are entitled to it, nonetheless.

“They must know when the values that define our nation are intentionally disregarded by our security policies, even those policies that are conducted in secret. They must be able to make informed judgments about whether those policies and the personnel who supported them were justified in compromising our values; whether they served a greater good; or whether, as I believe, they stained our national honor, did much harm and little practical good.

“What were the policies? What was their purpose? Did they achieve it? Did they make us safer? Less safe? Or did they make no difference? What did they gain us? What did they cost us? The American people need the answers to these questions. Yes, some things must be kept from public disclosure to protect clandestine operations, sources and methods, but not the answers to these questions.

“By providing them, the Committee has empowered the American people to come to their own decisions about whether we should have employed such practices in the past and whether we should consider permitting them in the future. This report strengthens self-government and, ultimately, I believe, America’s security and stature in the world. I thank the Committee for that valuable public service.

“I have long believed some of these practices amounted to torture, as a reasonable person would define it, especially, but not only the practice of waterboarding, which is a mock execution and an exquisite form of torture. Its use was shameful and unnecessary; and, contrary to assertions made by some of its defenders and as the Committee’s report makes clear, it produced little useful intelligence to help us track down the perpetrators of 9/11 or prevent new attacks and atrocities.

“I know from personal experience that the abuse of prisoners will produce more bad than good intelligence. I know that victims of torture will offer intentionally misleading information if they think their captors will believe it. I know they will say whatever they think their torturers want them to say if they believe it will stop their suffering. Most of all, I know the use of torture compromises that which most distinguishes us from our enemies, our belief that all people, even captured enemies, possess basic human rights, which are protected by international conventions the U.S. not only joined, but for the most part authored.

“I know, too, that bad things happen in war. I know in war good people can feel obliged for good reasons to do things they would normally object to and recoil from.

“I understand the reasons that governed the decision to resort to these interrogation methods, and I know that those who approved them and those who used them were dedicated to securing justice for the victims of terrorist attacks and to protecting Americans from further harm. I know their responsibilities were grave and urgent, and the strain of their duty was onerous.

“I respect their dedication and appreciate their dilemma. But I dispute wholeheartedly that it was right for them to use these methods, which this report makes clear were neither in the best interests of justice nor our security nor the ideals we have sacrificed so much blood and treasure to defend.

“The knowledge of torture’s dubious efficacy and my moral objections to the abuse of prisoners motivated my sponsorship of the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005, which prohibits ‘cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment’ of captured combatants, whether they wear a nation’s uniform or not, and which passed the Senate by a vote of 90-9.

“Subsequently, I successfully offered amendments to the Military Commissions Act of 2006, which, among other things, prevented the attempt to weaken Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, and broadened definitions in the War Crimes Act to make the future use of waterboarding and other ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’ punishable as war crimes.

“There was considerable misinformation disseminated then about what was and wasn’t achieved using these methods in an effort to discourage support for the legislation. There was a good amount of misinformation used in 2011 to credit the use of these methods with the death of Osama bin Laden. And there is, I fear, misinformation being used today to prevent the release of this report, disputing its findings and warning about the security consequences of their public disclosure.

“Will the report’s release cause outrage that leads to violence in some parts of the Muslim world? Yes, I suppose that’s possible, perhaps likely. Sadly, violence needs little incentive in some quarters of the world today. But that doesn’t mean we will be telling the world something it will be shocked to learn. The entire world already knows that we water-boarded prisoners. It knows we subjected prisoners to various other types of degrading treatment. It knows we used black sites, secret prisons. Those practices haven’t been a secret for a decade.

“Terrorists might use the report’s re-identification of the practices as an excuse to attack Americans, but they hardly need an excuse for that. That has been their life’s calling for a while now.

“What might come as a surprise, not just to our enemies, but to many Americans, is how little these practices did to aid our efforts to bring 9/11 culprits to justice and to find and prevent terrorist attacks today and tomorrow. That could be a real surprise, since it contradicts the many assurances provided by intelligence officials on the record and in private that enhanced interrogation techniques were indispensable in the war against terrorism. And I suspect the objection of those same officials to the release of this report is really focused on that disclosure – torture’s ineffectiveness – because we gave up much in the expectation that torture would make us safer. Too much.

“Obviously, we need intelligence to defeat our enemies, but we need reliable intelligence. Torture produces more misleading information than actionable intelligence. And what the advocates of harsh and cruel interrogation methods have never established is that we couldn’t have gathered as good or more reliable intelligence from using humane methods.

“The most important lead we got in the search for bin Laden came from using conventional interrogation methods. I think it is an insult to the many intelligence officers who have acquired good intelligence without hurting or degrading prisoners to assert we can’t win this war without such methods. Yes, we can and we will.

“But in the end, torture’s failure to serve its intended purpose isn’t the main reason to oppose its use. I have often said, and will always maintain, that this question isn’t about our enemies; it’s about us. It’s about who we were, who we are and who we aspire to be. It’s about how we represent ourselves to the world.

“We have made our way in this often dangerous and cruel world, not by just strictly pursuing our geopolitical interests, but by exemplifying our political values, and influencing other nations to embrace them. When we fight to defend our security we fight also for an idea, not for a tribe or a twisted interpretation of an ancient religion or for a king, but for an idea that all men are endowed by the Creator with inalienable rights. How much safer the world would be if all nations believed the same. How much more dangerous it can become when we forget it ourselves even momentarily.

“Our enemies act without conscience. We must not. This executive summary of the Committee’s report makes clear that acting without conscience isn’t necessary, it isn’t even helpful, in winning this strange and long war we’re fighting. We should be grateful to have that truth affirmed.

“Now, let us reassert the contrary proposition: that is it essential to our success in this war that we ask those who fight it for us to remember at all times that they are defending a sacred ideal of how nations should be governed and conduct their relations with others – even our enemies.

“Those of us who give them this duty are obliged by history, by our nation’s highest ideals and the many terrible sacrifices made to protect them, by our respect for human dignity to make clear we need not risk our national honor to prevail in this or any war. We need only remember in the worst of times, through the chaos and terror of war, when facing cruelty, suffering and loss, that we are always Americans, and different, stronger, and better than those who would destroy us.

“Thank you.”

God Bless Him for standing up for what is right.

(via Memeoradum)

Video: Art Thompson on Dangers of Arming ‘Moderate’ Muslims

(via JBS HQ)