If You Strike a King, Kill Him

In regard to Iran (and other matters) I've argued that only ineffective military action against Iran would bolster the Iranian regime (see here and here). Really smash them up and that will surely undermine their hold on power.

Remember, bin Laden and Saddam welcomed American military action on the assumption that our military response would be ineffective. Bin Laden probably considers himself lucky to be living in caves compared to Saddam swinging by the neck until dead.

Apparently, some Iranian dissidents would welcome effective military intervention:

Emissaries from inside Iran have been meeting with Iranian exiles in Europe, the United States, and elsewhere in recent weeks to deliver this provocative message, which they claim comes from pro-U.S. dissidents at the upper-most levels of the regime.

“U.S. airstrikes must be powerful and sustained enough to break the myth of the regime’s absolute power and reveal the weakness of the leadership,” a former official who traveled outside of Iran recently said.

The United States should target the office of Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, as well as the headquarters of the Revolutionary Guards Corp, the offices of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and that of his predecessor and rival, Mullah Hashemi-Rafsanjani, Iranian sources say.

The goal should be to carry out sustained airstrikes over a 48-72 hour period that would “decapitate” the regime.

Such a strike would send a clear message to the Iranian people and to disgruntled officials throughout Iran’s faction-ridden government that the United States is serious about confronting the regime over its bad behavior in Iraq and is willing to strike the leaders responsible for that behavior, the Iranian sources argue.

I think the attack would need to last much longer and not be a shock and awe attempt at leadership decapitation. I've long since discarded the idea that even a four-day assault like Operation Desert Fox would be sufficient.

I don't discount that at some level of our effort (whether too little or too much force), sufficient Iranians might rally to the mullahs under attack to bolster the regime. But it is hardly a given as war opponents like to make out. Regime opponents might welcome an effective American attack on the regime.

And though my mind keeps telling me that we are not going to deal with Iran this year and instead attempt to cope with Iran and hope for the best, I keep remembering that President Bush doesn't like small ball.

The Next Threat in Iraq

We've overcome or blunted many threats inside Iraq: Saddam's military, the Baathist resistance, al Qaeda, domestic jihadis, Sunni tribes, Kurdish impulses to independence, and Iranian-supported Shia thugs. Do we have another threat to weather before we win?

Secretary Gates seems to share my failure to see what the next armed threat inside Iraq could be given our success in defeating Baathists, jihadis, tribal resistance, and Iranian-backed Shia thugs. The fighting is still going on, but the end game is taking shape:

"We are now seeing what the end game in Iraq looks like -- with our forces drawing down over time, in a series of very complex battlefield rearrangements that slowly cede more responsibility for day-to-day security operations to the Iraqis," the prepared remarks said.

"It is a slow process -- slower than most would wish, myself included," he said. "But it is necessary if we are to get the endgame right."

Right now, it seems as if the only armed threat to success in Iraq must come from Iran itself. Is Iran likely to directly intervene overtly in Iraq? I find that hard to imagine, but I don't believe Allah guarantees my success. Who knows what Ahamadinejad believes and is willing to do?

Barring such a direct attack, Gates seems to see only our government as a threat to victory:

"I fear that frustration over slow progress and dismay over sacrifices already made may result in decisions that are gratifying in the short term but very costly to us in the long term," he said.

I think Gates is correct. But I still have that nagging feeling that Iran will not just stand by while armed resistance inside Iraq crumbles, freeing up a hundred thousand US forces for other actions.

Bring it On?

I've mentioned that we don't hear much from the jihadis about how they welcome fighting our troops on the ground rather than facing our cruise missiles. In the early weeks of the Afghan Campaign when our bombing campaign was beginning, that was a common jihadi complaint.

Six-plus years of on-the-ground ass-whipping has ended this enemy boast:

Thanks to the Internet, the word has gotten around that, no matter how U.S. troops are dressed, they are very badass. Even pro-terrorist propagandists no longer try to peddle the "cowardly American soldier" line. It just doesn't play, because too many Iraqis and Afghans have gotten online and described personal experiences fighting alongside, or even against, U.S. troops, or just witnessing it. The general message is, you do not want to mess with the Americans in full battle-rattle.

As this realization spreads, it becomes more socially acceptable for angry young Moslem men to decline the offer to participate in the jihad. And young men who go off to jihad yet survive a few days will be able to more credibly explain why they are back from Iraq or Pakistan. These men will have incentive to play up our fighting prowess to make their return more acceptable and understandable.

It's a cycle of virtue! Who says killing the enemy is counter-productive and just creates more enemies? Certainly not I. As I've always written, only ineffectively fighting encourages an enemy.

If Near, Appear Far

The Chinese are on a charm offensive with the kinder gentler Ma government on Taiwan:

China vowed on Thursday to seize a chance for reconciliation with Taiwan and espect the desire of Taiwan's people to be their own masters, a sign it is in no hurry to bring the island it claims as its own back to the fold.

No hurry? Far be it from me to belittle a charm offensive by a regime that has in the past shown no sympathy for Taiwan's continued de facto independence, but might not the Chinese have heard of Sun Tzu? If near, appear far. And who would suspect anything amiss amidst the warm feelings spawned by Taiwanese sympathy for the China earthquake victims and the Chinese charm offensive that suddenly sees no rush to resolving the Taiwan issue.

And quite honestly, this new development doesn't fill me with the warmth of the moment:

In Taiwan, eight airports are adding safety and currency exchange features to receive up to 3,000 Chinese tourists daily from early July after the two sides signed a landmark weekend direct flight agreement, Premier Liu Chao-hsiun said.

So in three days, 9,000 fit young Chinese men with short hair cuts--"tourists"--could be landed at eight Taiwanese airports with nothing but a customs official to stand in their way. Were I of a suspicious mind, I might call that an airborne division's worth of troops representing part of the first wave of an invasion. Local warehouses could have light weapons and ammunition stocked, and local car dealerships and stores would provide transportation and food. Civilian ships might bring in heavier weapons for the tourists before shooting starts, as well as setting up forces in Taiwanese harbors.

Were I in charge of the Taiwanese military, I would not grant any leave to military personnel during this July and August. And I'd search and monitor every warehouse on the island starting next month.

Better safe than sorry you didn't see the first wave of the invasion asking for directions to their hotel.

Talking to Fanatical Enemies

In a brave new diplomatic world, we will talk to our enemies and all will be fine as our enemies see the light of reason. And apparently, that new age of hope has begun about eight months early. Yes indeed, our enemies are going to enjoy talking to us.

I, too, share the confusion over how we arrived in this situation.

What will we talk about with the Iranians? What we have to give them to stop killing Americans in Iraq? How many Americans they are allowed to kill per week? What weapons they are allowed to kill Americans with? Or will we just make sure they kill Iraqis and that will be fine with us?

Sadly, it isn't just us. The Pakistanis will (again) be disappointed with the results of their recent talking:

Pakistan's government promised to "gradually" pull out troops from the northwestern valley of Swat after signing a peace agreement with Taliban militants on Wednesday.

The deal was done a day after the United States advised its ally against negotiating with militants, saying it could give them breathing space to plot attacks in Pakistan and abroad.

Authorities in North West Frontier Province also agreed to enforce sharia, Islamic law, in Swat in return for assurances that militants led by charismatic cleric Fazlullah will cease attacks, allow girls to go to school and stop carrying weapons in public.

"We hope this agreement will help bring peace in Swat," Bashir Ahmed Bilour, senior provincial minister, told reporters after signing the 15-point pact.

Ali Bakhsh, the militants' representative in the talks, said he was fully satisfied with the agreement.

No doubt Bakhsh was fully satisfied. That speaks well of the agreement, eh?

In time, gradually perhaps, the more excitable Swat residents will get twitchy about strolling sans weapons, mere girls going to school, and of course the fading memories of their last bomb planted by a road. And with no Pakistani troops about, the reason for no weapons, girls in schools, and undamaged roads will get all hazy. Isn't that the whole point of enforcing Sharia, they'll think. We've been hoodwinked!

And then the war will be resumed and the "militants" will be fully satisfied.

But I'm sure our talking with homicidal jihadi maniacs will go much better.

The Bizarro Strait

The election of a KMT president for Taiwan makes for bizarre reading:

"We will not engage in an arms race with China because it is not in our interests and we would not be able to afford that," Ma told a press conference.

"We will continue arms procurement on defensive weapons. We will not build or acquire nuclear weapons or weapons of mass destruction," he added.

Ma from the China-friendly Kuomintang (KMT) party also reiterated his calls for diplomatic reconciliation with its giant neighbour.

First of all, reading that the KMT--the losing side in the Chinese Civil War--is the "China-friendly" party is just odd. Once the KMT claimed to rule all of China. Now they seem content to become part of China--which isn't all that far removed from the mainland position.

But democracy seems to have cemented a Taiwanese identity for large parts of the island country and Ma appears to be constrained by this opinion to bolster Taiwan's status.

Most importantly, the idea that there isn't a race going on is nonsense. Of course, China has been racing ahead anyway. Arthur K. wrote that in the mid-1970s, just seeing a Chinese plane flying over the water was considered astounding. Now Chinese planes crowd Taiwanese air space in the strait.

So the idea that Taiwan shouldn't arm up just because running neck and neck with China would be a race is nonsense. Taiwan needs a military sufficient to defend their island democracy. Anything less because it might look like a race is suicidal. Sre, if Ma can get the Chinese to slow their running to a brisk stride, that would be progress. But for Taiwan to refuse to match China stride for stride?

And what is this talk about not being able to afford to defend themselves? At what point is subjugation by China considered better than the burden of defense? Taiwan has had prosperity and democracy for only a short time. Are the Taiwanese tiring of this so soon?

Finally, when many in the West consider Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons to be understandable in light of their fears of America, why on Earth would the Taiwanese state plainly that they will never acquire nuclear weapons? Isn't a little ambiguity on this score prudent under the circumstances?

I wonder what China will have to do in order to disillusion Ma over the prospects of warmer relations with China.

Good War. Bad Location

Wretchard writes about the problems we are having with our supply line to Afghanistan through Pakistan.

I wrote last month:

I have repeatedly expressed my concerns about committing too many forces to Afghanistan. I would much rather achieve our goals imperfectly with fewer troops than risk the loss of our forces if they are cut off from supplies.

In November I reported on the supply issue and how our reliance on Pakistan for supplies is a problem that keeps us from pressuring Pakistan too much.

And NATO issues are complicated by the alternative line of supply through Russia.

Once we complete the developing victory in Iraq, I would dearly love to be able to focus on the Taliban Campaign that now spans the Afghan-Pakistan border and threatens Pakistan as much as it threatens Afghanistan. Given the failures of al Qaeda and the jihad elsewhere in the world after the Moslem world saw al Qaeda get their butts kicked in Iraq, I would truly like to wage the last jihad against al Qaeda in their Pakistan sancturaries.

But until we have a secure supply line into Afghanistan, say through a friendly Iran, as I noted nearly two years ago, there is no way we can afford to risk a large army fighting the "good" war against al Qaeda in that part of the world.

But you aren't foolish enough to accept military advice from our Left, are you?

I didn't think so.

The Campaign Continues

Operations against Sadr's Shia militias and their Iranian murder pals have continued since our media churnalists agreed in the first hours of Knights' Charge that the Iraqi government had lost and Sadr won.

I wasn't worried that the last ceasefire agreed to by the Iraqi government and Sadr in Sadr City meant that Sadr had won:

The "cease-fire" between the Sadrists and the Iraqi government just lasts four days. But it looks more like the Sadrists have just agreed to get out of the way while the mission of the government and US forces continues to grip Sadr City[.]

The campaign continues in Sadr City:

Thousands of Iraqi troops moved unchallenged into Baghdad's Sadr City Tuesday to seize the Shiite militia stronghold, in the largest attempt yet by the government to impose control, an Iraqi military spokesman said.

The large Iraq force backed by tanks entered the sprawling district before dawn, with troops taking up positions on street corners and deploying on rooftops as Iraqi Humvees patrolled the streets, residents said.

The move is the strongest attempt yet by the government to impose
control over the district, which has long been the unquestioned bastion of the Mahdi Army, the militia loyal to Muqtada al-Sadr. Iraqi and U.S. troops have in the past largely stayed on the neighborhood's edges.

"Unquestioned" bastion? Basra residents haven't seemed particularly fond of Sadr once his goons were suppressed and scattered (down but not out, I'm sure). Once government security forces are entrenched in Sadr City and the people there face less of a threat from the ire of the militias, we will see if Sadr's support is built on loyalty or fear.

Dunkirk-on-the-Tigris

Jihadi dudes, it's time to get the heck out of Dodge.

With the Iraqi security forces combing Mosul for jihadis more eager to hide than fight, and some of the jihadis fleeing west to Syria to escape, the situation isn't good for the enemy inside Iraq. Al Qaeda in Iraq knows they're toast.

Heck, even the lead cave dweller Osama bin Laden told the jihadis in Iraq that they're on their own. So sorry, but we just remembered that the Palestinian issue is our priority.

And now, the jihadis cheerleaders are noticing that the jihad seems to have hit some real setbacks in Iraq:

A prolific jihadist sympathizer has posted an ‘explosive’ study on one of the main jihadist websites in which he laments the dire situation that the mujaheddin find themselves in Iraq by citing the steep drop in the number of insurgent operations conducted by the various jihadist groups, most notably Al-Qaeda’s 94 percent decline in operational ability over the last 12 months when only a year and half ago Al-Qaeda accounted for 60 percent of all jihadist activity!

The author, writing under the pseudonym ‘Dir’a limen wehhed’ [‘A Shield for the Monotheist’], posted his ‘Brief Study on the Consequences of the Division [Among] the [Jihadist] Groups on the Cause of Jihad in Iraq’ on May 12 and it is being displayed by the administration of the Al-Ekhlaas website—one of Al-Qaeda’s chief media outlets—among its more prominent recent posts. He's considered one of Al-Ekhlaas's "esteemed" writers.

So the jihad's leader knows they've been beaten in Iraq, and is refocusing their goals.

The jihadis in Iraq can see the writing on the wall, and they are in run or hide mode.

And the jihadi cheerleaders can see that all is not well in Jihadworld, lamenting their decline with helpful graphs.

Now all we need to do is convince all the Baghdad Bobs in Congress and their cheerleaders on the Left that the jihadis aren't marching to victory in Iraq.

Perhaps they need a PowerPoint presentation to grasp the developments in Iraq and get over their denial. Or, for the latter group, hand puppets.

Toleration Conflation

The defenders of Islam on the Left are doing more harm to Western-Islamic relations than any jihadi beheading or car bomb can do.

Mark Steyn writes, that the philosophy of our Left is "When somebody points out certain features of Islam, go after the 'Islamophobe'."

It's this going after the so-called "Islamophobe" that is doing the harm. Our Left likes to insist that we should not wage war on an entire religion. Fair enough. But when somebody points out that certain members of that religion actually promote violence, celebrate violence, and carry out violence in a fashion so gruesome as to be sickening, these Western defenders of Islam insist that such a narrowly focused charge against the jihadis in question is, in fact, a slander against the entire Moslem religion.

So these Westerners bolster the jihadists' claim to speak for all Moslems by refusing to distinguish between the jihadis and Moslems.

These sensitive Westerners undermine the bulk of Moslems who'd rather not be lumped in with the jihadis by making criticism of the radicals seem like an assault on Islam. If the jihadis claim to speak for all Islam and Westerners insist that it is anti-Islam to criticize jihadis, how are moderate Moslems supposed to stand up against the jihadis?

And these so-called tolerant Westerners make it more likely for average Western citizens to draw the conclusion that all Moslems must be as crazed as the jihadi head loppers, since these average citizens are told again and again that speaking out against the jihadis is the same as speaking out against all Moslems. Why shouldn't the logical conclusion be that jihadis must really speak for all Moslems?

So if there is ever a war of civilizations between Islam and the West, it won't be because George Bush wages war on jihadis. It will be because "tolerant" Westerners refuse to admit we can fight jihadis without including average Moslems in the "enemy" column.

The Thin Green Ratline

Our surge against the jihadis entrenched in Baghdad and the belts around the city were tremendously assisted by the cutting of the ratlines back to Syria that traversed Anbar province. Once the Awakening flipped the Anbar tribes, the jihadis in Baghdad and the surrounding region were on their own to face our offensive.

The jihadis in Mosul are greatly weakened and under tremendous pressure from Iraqi forces with our troops in support:

Mosul, 225 miles northwest of Baghdad, has been the most prominent al-Qaida in Iraq urban stronghold since the group lost control of cities in the western province of Anbar over the past year. Al-Qaida militants and other Sunni Arab insurgents have used the city to carry out major attacks in northern and central Iraq in recent months.

U.S.-backed Iraqi forces have been carrying out targeted raids on suspected militants in the city — and so far the sweep has seen almost no clashes, a sign insurgents are seeking to lay low or escape. The Defense Ministry reported the first death in the crackdown, saying raids Monday left one militant dead, along with 78 people arrested. The ministry statement gave no details on how the death occurred.

The enemy is weak enough to be in self-preservation mode rather than fighting.

Mosul is not cut off completely, however, making it more difficult to roll them up more quickly:

On Sunday, U.S-Iraqi forces increased a parallel operation in regions between Mosul and the Syrian border aimed at intercepting fleeing al-Qaida figures, an official in the Iraqi security forces' Ninevah command center said. He spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to talk to the press.

While the article speaks of some jihadis running west to escape Mosul, support from the west is undoubtedly flowing to Mosul. Al Qaeda in Iraq is going down, but Syria will extend the agony of Iraqis as long as the jihadis are willing to kill Iraqis. Fortunately, fewer and fewer jihadis are willing to fight and the ones who are willing face a shorter life span as our side chases them down.

Road Warriors

One brigade of the 82nd Airborne Division is slotted to come home 3 months earlier than planned when it first deployed for fifteen months:

Maj. Tom Earnhardt, a spokesman for the 82nd, told The Associated Press on Friday that the 1st Brigade will leave Iraq in mid-July and be replaced by the 4th Brigade of the 1st Cavalry Division, based at Fort Hood, Texas.

The unit -- nicknamed "Devils in Baggy Pants" by a German officer in World War II -- is based at Talill Air Base in southern Iraq but operates all over the country protecting convoys along the roads from Kuwait and Jordan into Baghdad.

It is interesting that this unit is involved in convoy security. While we still need troops in the neighborhoods for now to cement the gains of the surge, the road network seems secure enough to draw down a brigade early. Or at least secure enough to transfer the responsibility to Iraqi units.

The Few, The Cowed, the Mahdi Army

Our press always seems to peg the Mahdi Army at 60,000 fighters when they write stories about Sadr. I've often commented that I think this number is pure fantasy. Perhaps, this refers to total supporters, but it always seemed ludicrous to me to speak of 60,000 fighters as if there were 60,000 in the streets ready to do battle.

Strategypage pegs these guys at a more reasonable number:

Eight weeks of fighting have caused the Mahdi Army over 4,000 casualties (dead, wounded, captured, deserted). For an outfit estimated to have a peak strength of 6,000, that's some pretty serious losses. The Mahdi Army can quickly recruit new gunmen. Nearly every family has at least one firearm. But the new recruits are green, and die easily in combat, if they don't run and hide when the shooting starts. So the Mahdi Army has a manpower shortage.

Having 54,000 supporters would make it easier to replace losses, of course, as any force will do. But the losses no doubt make recruiting tougher and make the recruits who do show up both less effective and less eager to die in lopsided fights with Iraqi and American troops. This mighty horde has run away in both Basra and Baghdad's Sadr City as well as points in between when confronted with Iraqi and American forces determined to win.

But as long as the Mahdi Army press spokesman can talk a mean game of jihad, with suitable eye-bulging threats and an AK-47 in hand, our press will continue to write about the mighty Mahdi "Army" even when they can't field enough men for a soccer league.

I Solve a Math Problem

Mister is good at math. I can still check his math homework, so I feel pretty good about that. But some math problems are more challenging than others.

Yesterday, Mister had weekend math homework and he did it Sunday morning. When he finished it, I checked it and returned it to Mister. Mister placed it on an end table. And there it sat all day. When I was getting Mister and Lamb ready to go back to their mom's house last night, Mister scrambled for his homework. It wasn't by other school material I set by the door. Mister went back looking for it while Lamb and I waited with our shoes and jacket on.

Mister found his homework. Unfortunately, it was welded solid to the table top. I can only guess that Mister must have spilled something sticky on the table in the morning. Perhaps some strawberries he ate there. Maybe some juice. Hard to say.

Hard to remove, actually.

So I popped off my shoes, with Lamb following to see the source of the commotion and anguish from Mister over the state of his homework.

Pulling up on the paper I could see that a good 4" x 6" part of the paper was stuck solid. I pulled and some paper started to come off from the back. So already I had some very thin spot with the ink barely surviving in a translucent segment of near-paper. Anguish levels went up.

But not mine. I worked the problem. With a spatula. In retrospect perhaps a damp towel applied gently could have loosened the paper. But we had to get moving to get two children ready for bed. So I scraped up the homework, leaving strips of paper stuck to the table surface and only a couple small holes in the paper. But the homework was free and still retained that rectangular paper shape. Luckily, this was a one-sided homework assignment. The anguish level was no longer rising but the homework was looking shabby.

So it was off to the table. I slapped the paper down with the blank side up, grabbed a blank sheet of paper, cut a patch to cover the thin spot, and taped it in place. After flipping it over, I told Mister to fill in the gaps of his answers on the blank spots formed by the paper patch.

Lamb thought this was a hoot. While Mister and I worked at the table, Lamb started going after the paper remnants on the table with the spatula. Hey? Dad was doing it! This was an opportunity to do something ordinarily verboten, without a doubt. Meanwhile, Mister was able to do this very quickly and I then applied tape across the holes in the front.

This was good. Since Mister answered questions that had not been covered in class about the number of sides and vertices on 3-D polygons, I really hated to lose this homework. Mister used a dictionary and Google to get those answers, after I prodded him that not having been taught the answers in class should be no obstacle in this day and age. Even my dial-up service could handle this!

So I can still solve fifth grade math problems.

Hearts and Minds

The Long War requires us to transform the Arab Moslem world in order to end the recruiting pool that the current society fosters.

We can turn back the current wave of jihad as past waves have been blunted without this transformation. But this means that another wave will hit our shores again one day, as this wave is yet another wave in a long history of jihadi surges directed at the West. But the next wave of jihadis might have weapons of mass destruction as part of the attacks. We would be wise to make this the last jihad.

President Bush warns the Arab autocrats that business as usual is no way to run their countries:

"Too often in the Middle East, politics has consisted of one leader in power and the opposition in jail," Bush said in a speech to 1,500 global policymakers and business leaders at this Red Sea beach resort. That was a clear reference to host Egypt, where main secular opposition figure Ayman Nour has been jailed and President Hosni Mubarak has led an authoritarian government since 1981.

"America is deeply concerned about the plight of political prisoners in this region, as well as democratic activists who are intimidated or repressed, newspapers and civil society organizations that are shut down and dissidents whose voices are stifled," Bush said.

"I call on all nations in this region to release their prisoners of conscience, open up their political debate and trust their people to chart their future," Bush said.

I know that many here just want us to deal with the autocrats as long as they can provide stability. But with the jihadi impulse still strong enough to inspire recruits for bin Laden, that option is gone. That option is gone because bin Laden won't let the autocrats carry on with business as usual:

Bin Laden said Muslims should ignore the Islamic prohibition against raising arms against fellow Muslims, claiming it was legitimate to rise up against leaders who are not governing according to Islamic law. Those leaders, he said, came to power "either by a military coup or with backing from foreign forces."

American critics of our foreign policy are 180 degrees wrong when they charge that President Bush insists that countries are either with us or against us. In truth, it is bin Laden who insists Arab people must be either with him and his jihad or against him. He kills Sunni Arabs who fail to enlist enthusiastically as readily as he kills Westerners. Arab rulers are happy to work with this logic, arguing that they will keep the jihadis at bay but at the price of total control of the societies and governments of the Arab world.

We, by contrast, accept help freely given against the terrorists, and offer Arab people an alternative to a constant fight with jihadis battling over the allegiance of these citizens unhappy with their leaders and the societies they live in that keep them in poverty while much of the rest of the world marches forward.

Given this battle going on, explain to me again how unimportant it is to plant democracy in Iraq and provide the Arab people with an example of how to escape the poor choices that the autocrats and bin Laden give them. And if we can break the grip of despair that these choices inspire, maybe we can end the cycles of jihad before nuclear weapons become simple enough for private entities to build and use--on us.

UPDATE: Wretchard writes about the waves of jihad and how fashion decisions may demonstrate our coming victory over the current wave. This is good. But this doesn't mean the war is over.

Strategypage writes about the problems in the Arab Moslem world that show why we can't just rest our laurels on a mere tactical victory over the current wave. Given time, these problems left unsolved will generate a new wave. And what tools will our forward-looking society and economy provide another generation of jihadis that will be used to kill us in large numbers?

We are not doomed to meeting another more dangerous wave of jihadis in a couple generations once the current wave is defeated. The success of Moslems and Arabs in American society shows how the Arab Moslem world can thrive if we can break the stifling hold that Middle Eastern Moslem society has on the talented individuals who emerge despite the handicaps.

The Retreat from Baghdad

Bin Laden has made it official, he's cutting his losses in Iraq and calling a retreat:

In his second audio message in three days focusing on the Palestinians, the al-Qaida leader said the only way to liberate Palestine is to fight the Arab regimes that are protecting Israel. And he called on Muslim militants in Egypt to help break the blockade of Gaza.

Back when driving America from Iraq was their prime mission, you didn't hear much from al Qaeda about the need to liberate Palestine. It was all about Iraq as the first step in the path to victory.

With jihadi morale suffering with losses in Afghanistan and Iraq, bin Laden is trying to rebuild morale by focusing on the traditional enemy, the Jews.

I don't imagine the remaining jihadis inside Iraq can be too happy to know that bin Laden doesn't really think they are accomplishing much in Iraq.

The Chartered Spearhead

I remain convinced that China will attempt a speedy conquest of Taiwan should they attempt to end Taiwanese independence. And further, the longer China waits, the more difficult it will be to reconcile people used to democracy and with a national consciousness that resists absorption as a Chinese province.

There may be good reasons to do this, but this decision will make it easier for the Chinese to invade Taiwan:

Taiwan plans to sign a pact with China next month on weekend charter flights, the first move towards dropping Taipei's five-decade ban on direct flights with China, according to a newspaper report Sunday. The Economic Daily News said Taiwan plans to send Chiang Ping-kun, KMT party's vice chairman and chairman of the Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF), to Beijing next month to sign the charter flight pact.

A surprise invasion would be led off by Chinese units unloading from civilian ships in Taiwanese ports and could now be supplemented by chartered flights of softball teams, and bowling teams, and chess teams from China that all seem to be made up of burly young men with short hair.

Don't be confused about a charm offensive by Peking exploiting their dead when the mainland Chinese believe they own Taiwan and the present status quo is just something to be changed.

And with this development on Taiwan, the clock is ticking for China to absorb the island democracy without too much resistance:

His wife may have been indicted for graft and his anti-China rage upset major ally the United States, but departing President Chen Shui-bian charted Taiwan's future by firming up its self-identity and cooling down Beijing.

Chen's local identity push and his pressure on China, which claims Taiwan as its own, are likely to endure, forcing incoming President Ma Ying-jeou to co-opt some of those issues if he wants to reach out to opponents, experts say.

That is, China was put on defense to ward off formal independence moves by Taiwan rather than pressing Taiwan for absorption talks; and the people on Taiwan feel more Taiwanese than Chinese now.

For the Taiwan question, time is not on China's side, I think. But should it come to an invasion, the Chinese will make up some of that time by using civilian assets to put the first wave on the ground before the Taiwanese defenses can be alerted.

Friendly Fire

The soldier who did this must be punished and removed from the area:

A soldier used a Quran, the Islamic holy book, for target practice in a predominantly Sunni area west of Baghdad, prompting an apology from the military, a spokesman said Sunday.

We may wish that we dealt with less excitable Moslems, but that is not the case. We can't just say this was performance art and that Moslems should get over it since it involves artistic freedom.

The effect of this stunt was such that he might as well have pointed his weapon at his platoon mates and opened fire on them.

UPDATE: The soldier was removed from Iraq:

An American sniper was removed from Iraq after he used a copy of the Quran for target practice, the military said Sunday, a day after a U.S. commander held a formal ceremony apologizing to Sunni tribal leaders.

I thought we might have gotten away with moving him to another area inside Iraq--for his own protection as much as removing a source of anger from the area he was in--but perhaps that would have been insufficient to protect him.

Ultimately, we will have finally won the Long War when incidents like this are met with anger but no beheadings.

How They Sleep at Night is Beyond Me

When your goal is to stick it to George Bush's America, a brave old lady is just an obstacle to be brushed aside:

Al Gore heroically gave speeches and made documentaries exaggerating the potential problems associated with global warming. Let's see, should the peace prize go to Al Gore, who spends his cushy life promoting a left wing environmental agenda, or Irena Sendler, who saved 2,500 Jewish children from the Nazis in a Warsaw ghetto, was tortured for her efforts (and here I mean actual torture, not the rough treatment that sends many into fits of hysteria today), and then returned to saving innocent children, thereby risking further torture and death? Tough call.

Sadly, for the sainted international community as represented by our Euro friends, it wasn't a close call at all.

Irena Sendler lost out to Al Gore and those scientists on the the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

I hope the people who have that award on their mantle remember this fact every day.

Hobby Spies

It just seems like we should be able to harvest this kind of private effort:

Google Earth strikes again, with the revelation of a major ballistic missile launching facility in Central China. The missiles appear aimed at targets in Russia and India, and are fired from roadside launching areas.

Mass access to commercial satellite photos has been a major annoyance for police states that restrict movement, and photography, around military bases. But you can't hide from the dozens of commercial photo satellites that circle the planet, and sell their images to a growing number of mass media outlets (like Google and Microsoft.) There, thousands of people scour the photos for interesting images. This, it has been found, is often more effective than the computer assisted analysis system the military uses for their higher resolution spy satellites.

Can't we recruit these users for more direct help? Or is it a stretch to think this can be organized? I just don't know.