All Fall Down

Start talking about Mexico the same way we talk about Pakistan.

As we send more troops to the end of the world, we could need a whole lot right here in our own continent (tip to Instapundit):

Mexico is one of two countries that "bear consideration for a rapid and sudden collapse," according to a report by the U.S. Joint Forces Command on worldwide security threats.

The command's "Joint Operating Environment (JOE 2008)" report, which contains projections of global threats and potential next wars, puts Pakistan on the same level as Mexico. "In terms of worse-case scenarios for the Joint Force and indeed the world, two large and important states bear consideration for a rapid and sudden collapse: Pakistan and Mexico.

The JOE is available here.

I worry a lot about how a collapse of Pakistan or just upheaval would affect our war in Afghanistan.

I worry that we'll need to worry about Mexico.

Well, at least Mexico doesn't have nukes.

UPDATE: Strategypage rightly notes that the JOE is a document not so much about making predictions as it is pointing out potential problems that we should think about just in case:

Mexico is not Pakistan. It is not collapsing. It is not a "near failed state." Mexico is a threatened state, but the country has political will to confront the threats posed by violent drug cartels and its own legacy of corrupt politics. Even accounting for Chiapas (Maya land) and numerous wannabe separatists, Mexico also has money, education, and a comparative political-social coherence the entirety of South and Central Asia should envy.

Meanwhile, there are economic issues. From the Mexican perspective, NAFTA has been a means of "modernizing" the Mexican economy by evolution rather than revolution. The government, albeit slowly, has used NAFTA as a tool for streamlining the economy and reducing corruption. The government is directing a complex war that includes judicial and legal reformation – dead serious counter-corruption drives that have put senior officials in jail. No, bliss is not around the corner, but this is a real path to real change.

If collapse should take place, it would be very bad. But it really isn't likely at this point. But our aid is meant to help Mexico avoid what would be a very bad situation for both of us.

I've probably worried a little too much about Mexican stability than is justified, it seems.

Threatening Bloody Defeat

North Korea is being all North Koreany:

South Korea said its army remained on alert Sunday, a day after North Korea threatened military action in response to Seoul's hard-line stance against its communist regime.

The latest harsh rhetoric from the isolated regime appeared aimed at heightening tensions on the divided peninsula and could be a test for Barack Obama days before he is sworn in as the new U.S. president.

The North's Korean People's Army called South Korean President Lee Myung-bak a "traitor" and accused him of preparing a military provocation, according to a statement carried Saturday by the North's state-run Korean Central News Agency.

Pyongyang said it was adopting "an all-out confrontational posture" and warned of a "strong military retaliatory step." South Korea immediately put its forces on alert.

This is all useful in showing that the regime in the north is dangerous and should be encouraged to collapse, but North Korea's rhetoric surpasses their military reach.

North Korea's military power has deteriorated massively since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Our efforts have contained North Korea with minimal aid while negotiations dragged on during the Bush administration.

North Korea probably does not have a nuclear weapon--even if you want to count their fizzle of a nuclear test as a success. So threatening Seoul with nuclear attack is out.

And North Korea's army is a shadow of its former self and probably would have a hard time holding the DMZ let alone attacking south with any chance of success.

North Korea's only real threat is using massed conventional artillery (tube and rocket) placed in range of Seoul to bombard the city. Luckily for us, we no longer have troops on the front line who can be attacked in such a manner by Pyongyang, so North Korea can't try to blackmail us that way.

Still, the North Koreans know that even Pyongyang's threats to inflict carnage on South Korea--even carnage that unleashes forces that could destroy North Korea's regime--has an effect because South Korea doesn't want to win at that price.

That doesn't mean we have to play along, of course. We should continue the slow strangulation that makes North Korean threats less meaningful every day.

Or maybe I'm being cynical, and the soothing balms of hope and change are just what the Pillsbury Nuke Boy needs to mend his ways and become a dear leader in more than just a title.

More Speed Bumps

The Chinese carrier plans seem to be taking shape:

In Shanghai, China, shipyard employees report that the Chinese Navy has ordered two 60,000 ton aircraft carriers, and preparations are under way to begin construction this year, with completion scheduled for 2015. Fifty Russian Su-33 jet fighters would be imported to serve on the new carriers. Chinese naval aviators would use the former Russian carrier Varyag as a training ship, to learn how to operate the Su-33s off carriers. ...

A year ago, the Russian aircraft carrier Varyag was renamed the Shi Lang (after the Chinese general who took possession of Taiwan in 1681, the first time China ever paid any attention to the island) and given the pennant number 83. The Chinese have been refurbishing the Varyag, one of the Kuznetsov class that Russia began building in the 1980s, for several years now. It is expected to be ready for sea trials any day now.

So China will have a pair of carriers by 2015 and a training carrier perhaps this year to prepare for those carriers. This is taking longer than reports just four years ago made it seem.

I guess my thoughts that China might want the Varyag as a Mobile Offshore Base are wrong, too, it seems.

You may think that this is unimportant. In six years, China will have two smaller carriers (and a third that can be pressed into service as a fighting ship) each less capable than our eleven large carriers--and less capable when you consider training, doctrine, and experience.

But the Chinese don't have to match us in total naval power. Consider that we have but one large carrier forward deployed in Japan, with another base at Guam capable of berthing a carrier. Even if we have two superior carriers forward deployed in the western Pacific, we will face two or three Chinese carriers. Surely, if those PLAN carriers sortie and challenge us, we will defeat them. I have little doubt on that score.

But if the duel between our 7th Fleet and the PLAN is in the context of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan, how long will it take to sink the Chinese carriers and clear the air and sea corridors to Taiwan? We already have to overcome Chinese subs pushed in our path. And land-based ballistic missiles for that matter. Will we win the tactical battles at sea even as Taiwan is crushed because we can't risk rushing our forces through the temporary screen that China's expendible carriers provide? Don't be confused, China certainly is not able to overcome our fully deployed military power, but China is making huge gains against Taiwan. All China needs to do is isolate the Taiwan battle area to win.

In the near term, all China has to do is slow us down. Never forget that reality when you weigh the balance of forces between America and China.

Once More, With Feeling

It looks like Syria is going to play America for a sucker once again:

Syria is ready to cooperate with U.S. President-elect Barack Obama and wants him to get seriously involved in the Middle East peace process, President Bashar al-Assad told a German magazine.

In an interview with Der Spiegel released on Saturday, Assad also expressed some caution about future relations and said he preferred to talk about hopes rather than expectations.

Syria will use talk of hopes to avoid meeting any expectations, but convince America to ease the pressure on Assad's Syria enough to buy more time for the regime. But Syria will not separate from Iran. Syria began its alliance with Iran nearly thirty years ago during the Iran-Iraq War and isn't about to abandon them.

We'll fall for Assad's ploy, believing the the Age of Obama means something to a ruthless thug dictator.

Israel Won This One

Well, the Gaza Winter War (hey, I'm trying out different names here) may be over:

Israel declared a unilateral cease-fire Saturday in its 22-day offensive that turned Gaza neighborhoods into battlegrounds and dealt a stinging blow to the Islamic militants of Hamas. But Israeli troops will stay in the Palestinian territory for now and Hamas threatened to keep fighting until they leave.

In announcing the cease-fire, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said Israel had achieved its goals, and more.

"Hamas was hit hard, in its military arms and in its government institutions," Olmert said.

If I had to guess, I'd say Hamas won't be able to keep themselves quiet while Israelis are inside Gaza. Hamas will do something to violate the ceasefire. And to be fair, it is a unilateral ceasefire so is Hamas violating it if they shoot?

Still, it will be a stupid move for Hamas to start shooting after Israel says they'll stop. The Israelis will be able to move about inside Gaza acting on new intelligence to further gut Hamas whenever Hamas opens fire.

And Israel won't pull out until the tunnels to Gaza are knocked out. And maybe until Fatah sends security forces in.

It's a sad day when Fatah is your preferred governing force, but there you go.

The war probably isn't over.

UPDATE: Strategypage notes the dramatic improvement in Israeli ground combat proficiency displayed in this war:

The new Israeli combat tactics in Gaza were a great success. Between January 3rd, when Israeli ground forces first entered Gaza, until Israel declared a unilateral ceasefire on January 18th, Hamas fighters were useless against Israeli ground troops. So far, 13 Israelis and 1300 Palestinians have died in the fighting. Hamas combat units tended to be quickly wiped out. The Israelis were much more aggressive than they were two years ago in southern Lebanon, and this was largely the result of a training course all Israeli troops had to go through before entering Gaza, and growing anger at the ceaseless Hamas rocket attacks on Israel.

I figured the Israelis would learn from Lebanon. They proved they did. All the talk of Hamas sucking Israel into a killing field was way off--Hamas was the one knocked apart.

Peace in His Time?

This Taipei Times article (by a Pennsylvania author) is certainly cheery (Tip to 1913intel):

Under the Ma Ying-jeou government’s policy of rapid economic, cultural and political integration with China, the nation could be annexed by China within the next few years through the signing of a “peace accord,” internal subversion orchestrated by Beijing, or a Chinese invasion of Taiwan to which the Ma government will acquiesce.

That's grim, although the author believes that Taiwan's absorption into China would lead to China's destruction, apparently by leading to war with the United States and Japan eventually (though moments later, the author says Japan could become a Chinese client state rather than being a war-time ally of America, so I'm not sure what the real worry is supposed to be).

I still find it hard to believe that someone who is elected to rule a free people would deliberately try to give away that freedom. Ma is surely naive, but could he really be that devious? A Manchurian Candidate of his own free will for China on Taiwan?

The author's "bright spot" that in the long run, China would be wrecked by taking Taiwan, isn't much to make the Taiwanese feel better. Even if Taiwan is a poison pill for China, the pill still gets dissolved in the process ...

This article has a better overview of Taiwanese politics, and even quotes the blogger Michael Turton. Things aren't quite as dire as the first article makes it. Yes, Taiwan under the KMT has some anti-democratic tendencies, but the KMT is likely fissured:

In an editorial in the Taipei Times last fall, Jacobs noted that "the KMT still remains unreformed, but party reform has become even more urgent".

In the editorial, Jacobs said, "The KMT center, and not the Democratic Progressive Party, has become the most important opposition to the Ma government." Jacobs cites open rebellion from KMT legislators, as well as harsh criticism of Ma appearing in pro-KMT newspapers - as well as on the KMT's own news website, KNN.

It seems to me that in the long run, the KMT will evolve more toward the DPP's positions (going native, so to speak) on maintaining de facto if not legal independence from China--assuming the KMT doesn't fatally weaken Taiwan's ability to defend itself in the short run. Right now the main problem is that the judiciary is politicized and pro-KMT. Hence, prosecutions of DPP politicians is suspiciously political.

Still, I don't think that events are running in China's favor in the long run--which is why I don't believe for one moment that China's communist rulers have decided to abandon the option of force and wait for Taiwan to voluntarily join the mainland.

True Colors

The anti-war side is rapidly showing that it is against the "good" war in Afghanistan, effectively admitting that their professed support for the "real war" against terrorism in Afghanistan was just a defensive ploy while they tried to lose the "bad" war in Iraq.

Having failed in the latter "bad" war effort, they've turned on the former "good" war.

I've long figured this was the case, as I wrote in August 2006:

I've long suspected that the anti-Iraq War side here has to mute its general anti-war attitudes to avoid alienating the many Americans who support defending ourselves with force where necessary. As a nation, we aren't eager for war but we aren't pacifists. So when the American anti-Iraq War side condemns Iraq, they must couch it as a specific objection. Note how they have since 2002 claimed that Iraq is somehow a "distraction" from more important threats like hunting Osama, or confronting Iran, or figuring out what to do about North Korea, perhaps Darfur, or responding to a hurricane. Or "solving" the Palestinian issue first. Remember that objection? When pressed for specifics they can never explain how they'd use those freed up military forces, but our press corps won't insist on an answer so they get away with it.

In this light, our campaign in Afghanistan is a blessing to the American anti-Iraq War side. While they condemn Iraq for its reasons, conduct, and cost in lives and money, they shield themselves from being identified as simply pacifists by insisting they support the far less visible Afghan War. Afghanistan is the "good war" because this is the country that was complicit in 9/11.

How long before these anti-Afghan War types accuse President Obama of being a chicken hawk?

Never forget, the peace sign is just the footprint of the American chicken.

Drug Resistant Strain

Sadly, the Europeans seem immune to the soothing balms of hope and change soon to enrich our foreign policy:

Britain's defense chief yesterday sharply criticized NATO's other European members for failing to do their part in Afghanistan, saying some of them had "limited appetites" for the operation and preferred "freeloading on the back of U.S. military security."

The assessment by British Defense Secretary John Hutton followed what one Pentagon official called a "disappointing" response this week to a request from NATO headquarters for additional troops and other resources to provide security for Afghanistan's elections this fall.

Gosh, who'd have thought that Old Europeans of all people would recoil from a fight? I guess they've built up an immunity to shame, hope, and change over the last six decades.

We can be grateful for Britain, the Dutch, the Canadians, the Danes, and even little Estonia for their willingness to man-up and fight with us in Afghanistan. Australia, too, does work befitting a great nation. France is wavering between being a real country and just being a real pain. But the rest of the European war tourists in Afghanistan are just a burden on our fragile supply lines through Pakistan.

Or maybe Secretary of State Clinton will convey President Obama's deep wishes that Europeans get a pair and prompt the non-fighting Europeans to contribute to the war.

Not Their Finest Hour

Well this is encouraging.



As I've written, once you start running, when do you stop?

Sigh. Maybe they'll start fighting them on the beaches. The British sure aren't fighting them in the streets, that's for sure.

Even More Tales of the Newly Discovered Reality!

The exciting new series for 2009, Tales of the Newly Discovered Reality! (pilots here and here) has been picked up for the entire 2009-2012 season!

Newsweek -- Obama acolyte and scourge of everything Bush/Cheney -- has on the eve of the Democratic restoration miraculously discovered the arguments for warrantless wiretaps, enhanced interrogation and detention without trial. Indeed, Newsweek's neck-snapping cover declares, "Why Obama May Soon Find Virtue in Cheney's Vision of Power

Obama will be loath to throw away the tools that have kept the homeland safe. Just as he will be loath to jeopardize the remarkable turnaround in American fortunes in Iraq."

What was once a crime is now a valid tool. What was once cowboyish and un-American is now both hope and change! One can almost anticipate the thrill up reporters' legs when it is discovered that dissent really isn't the highest form of patriotism--and Jefferson never said that!

Yes indeed, President Bush leaves office with his head held high for doing his job (this link will do) in the face of rabid and insane denunciations from the newly silent minions who would surely nominate Obama for a Nobel Peace Prize for nuking Tehran. For you see, much of the hope we will have in the next four years will come from a lack of change from Bush's policies:

He leaves behind the sinews of war, for the creation of which he has been so vilified but which will serve his successor -- and his country -- well over the coming years. The very continuation by Democrats of Bush's policies will be grudging, if silent, acknowledgment of how much he got right.

Amazingly, with the Age of Hope and Change still days ahead of us, already we find that rather than shredding the constitution with "domestic" wiretapping, President Bush legally eavesdropped on overseas calls that went to suspected or known terrorists!

A special federal appeals court yesterday released a rare declassified opinion that backed the government's authority to intercept international phone conversations and e-mails from U.S. soil without a judicial warrant, even those involving Americans, if a significant purpose is to collect foreign intelligence.

Constitutional issue resolved! Whew. Not a moment too soon! You can almost feel the relief coming from Newsweek that they won't have to condemn Obama for doing what Bush has done on this issue. Hope and No Change! See the Weekly Standard for more on this travesty of a non-issue that is finally a non-issue. Maybe now it will be OK to revile the New York Times for revealing a tool that President Obama will use! Yes we can!

Just wait. One good 9/11 replay on our soil, and our Justice Department will prepare a memo for President Obama that justifies fingernail pulling to extract information. And Daily Kos will cheer them on. Only Code Pink will remain pure in their Marzist views to oppose the Obama regime.

All this and more! Because anything is possible in exciting Tales of the Newly Discovered Reality.

See it on Fox, 24/7, beginning January 20th!

Yeah, That's Gonna Leave a Mark

Hamas thought they'd learned an important lesson from the 2006 Hezbollah War. But they were wrong:

Plus, this from a captured terrorist: “Hamas took a gamble. We thought, at worst Israel will come and do something from the air - something superficial. They’ll come in and go out. We never thought that we would reach the point where fear will swallow the heart and the feet will want to flee. You [Israel] are fighting like you fought in ‘48. What got into you all of a sudden?”

Like I always say, only ineffective military force is counter-productive.

Saddam and Osama assumed similar lackluster American aerial responses and they're either dead underground or alive underground. To be fair to Hamas, Hezbollah made the same gamble in 2006 and won.

This time, Israel is ripping apart Hamas. I have no way of knowing when a point of diminishing returns or even counter-productive force kicks in, but so far it seems like Israel has more room to gut Hamas. They should exploit this opportunity. Hamas--the new hand puppet of Iran--has few friends in the Arab world. So what if the streets in the Moslem world and Europe erupt in protests against Israel? Those seem to have been fairly weak, actually.

Remember, effective military force doesn't encourage terrorist recruiting--it kills lots of terrorists, which is always a good thing.

This Should be Over Every Diplomat's Desk

I really like this poster (tip to Weekly Standard):

I'd have amended it only slightly if I'd been in charge of production:

America

Just when you think you've beaten us down,

We will kill you in your sleep on Christmas.

I'm fairly sure this offends a lot of people.

All the more reason I like it. Heh.

Victory

The last Pentagon quarterly report on Iraq looks pretty good.

This is surely a sign of victory:

"The security environment in Iraq continues to improve as violence has dropped dramatically in the last 20 months and normal life is returning to the country," the report says. "Many residents now express greater hope for the future and are demanding a better standard of living."

While much work remains to be done to cement this accumulating victory, this caution is just idiotic:

"The underlying sources of instability in Iraq have yet to be resolved," the report says. "Iraq remains fragile because its major power brokers do not share a unified national vision."

Huh? By that definition, America is fragile. Explain to me the unified national vision shared by Republicans and Democrats, let alone factoring in the Code Pink and Green nutjobs out there.

It just doesn't matter if Iraqi factions have different objectives. It doesn't.

What matters is whether the factions settle their differences with ballots and rule of law rather than bullets and arbitrary decisions by those who have power. We manage to do that. Our system provides stability and it doesn't matter that different factions have different goals and strategies.

If the lack of unified visions is the main obstacle to declaring victory in Iraq, we're doing all right indeed.

A Surge of Idiocy

God help us all, but we can look forward to press idiocy about the Afghanistan war as journalistic veterans of the Iraq campaign prove they learned nothing in the land of the two rivers.

This "analysis" is just depressing:

With conditions on the ground worsening by nearly every yardstick last year -- including record levels of extremist attacks and U.S. casualties, and the expansion of the conflict across Pakistan and into India -- Obama's campaign pledge to "finish the job" in Afghanistan with more troops, money and diplomacy has encountered the daunting reality of a job that has barely begun.

I know every reporter says we are losing in Afghansitan, but this is the proof? Extremist attacks are up, but overall casualties are about the same. This is the result of al Qaeda refugees from Iraq coming to Afghanistan. This increase in attack statistics is also a function of more US troops hunting Taliban thugs. There are more opportunities for combat with more US troops in the field being used more aggressively. U.S casualties are also a function of more of our troops being used more aggressively, more than enemy advances. With triple the troop strength over what we had in the first several years, wouldn't you expect more American casualties?

The argument that a sign of defeat is that the conflict expanding into Pakistan and India is foolish. Those conflicts predated our war in Afghanistan.

As for a job barely begun, I think we're doing fine inside Afghanistan. The enemy is not using Afghan territory to plot assaults on the West and our enemies are in no position to take over the country.

Of course, this might account for some of the confusion:

A National Intelligence Estimate warned that a reconstituted al-Qaeda leadership, dug into the mountains along the Afghan-Pakistani border, continues to plan attacks against the United States and Europe.

Well you see, there's a source of confusion right there. If al Qaeda leadership was truly even partly in Afghanistan, we'd be on them like ugly on an ape. But that mythical place "along the Afghan-Pakistan border" does not exist. Al Qaeda is hiding inside Pakistan. Which is beyond even the most comprehensive plan for the war in Afghanistan that anybody in the Obama entourage can come up with. I don't care how nuanced they are, this is the basic problem we've faced.

The story correctly notes that we have to figure out what our objective is for Afghanistan. With more troops heading for the place, I want to make sure we have a real strategy. Unnamed sources think we never had one:

"We have no strategic plan. We never had one," a senior U.S. military commander said of the Bush years. Obama's first order of business, he said, will be to "explain to the American people what the mission is" in Afghanistan.

Let me provide a hint. While we focused on the main fight against al Qaeda in Iraq, all we wanted to do in Afghansitan was keep al Qaeda from launching an attack on us from Afghanistan. We've done that and even a little more.

Thankfully, Obama's big-brained nuanced strategists will save us by defining our mission:

The president-elect set out a "very limited" objective of ensuring that Afghanistan "cannot be used as a base to launch attacks against the United States."

Oh. Then never mind. I guess we have known our mission all along. That mission will continue.

But the real difference is that the new and improved American foreign policy will get allies to flock to our banner!

The parameters of a new strategy are unlikely to emerge before early April, when Afghanistan and Pakistan will top the agenda at a NATO summit in France. By presenting its NATO allies with a comprehensive plan and demonstrating the leadership to implement it, Obama hopes to capitalize on his overwhelming popularity in Europe with requests for increased military and financial contributions.

"What they've got to say is 'Okay, if you love Obama, show us how much,' " said another retired senior military officer.

So if we've been fighting for what Obama wants to achieve all along, how well will Obama's hope of getting NATO help go? I'm going to step out on a limb here and predict our allies won't be showing the love in any meaningful way. Remember, they don't think Afghanistan is the "good" war.

Brace for it people. The idiots who know nothing of history or war who reported from the Green Zone are instead going to be reporting from Kabul.

I'm feeling nauseous already.

Silver Lining

I drive a lot. So I like this news:

Oil prices flirted with five-year lows Thursday as unemployment benefit claims rose and OPEC cut demand expectations for 2009.

Any belief that energy prices had bottomed out were wiped away early in the day as crude plumbed new depths for the year and more government data suggested the economy may be worsening.

"The bull oil era is officially over," said Phil Flynn, an analyst at Alaron Trading Corp.

Light, sweet crude for February delivery fell 5 percent, or $1.88, to settle at $35.40 a barrel Thursday on the New York Mercantile Exchange. Prices fell as low as $33.20 Thursday and only gave up steep losses when the Dow Jones industrial average rebounded.

And lots of oil importing countries will benefit, including lots of poor countries.

It is unfortunate that worldwide economic problems have caused the decline in oil prices, but don't doubt that this will hurt Iran, Venezuela, and Russia.

Iran will have opportunities to skim money from this sweet gig with the sainted international community:

To chair the 2009 governing board of the U.N.'s flagship agency, the multibillion-dollar globe-girdling United Nations Development Program, dedicated to promoting good governance and ending poverty, the U.N. has now picked--wait for it--the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Ah, the United Nations. If Iran doesn't manage to pick the pockets of UNDP, I'll be shocked.

Venezuela is hoping private companies have short memories:

Squeezed by slumping crude prices, Venezuela is reaching out to the multinational oil companies it once demonized as imperialist profiteers.

Venezuela is soliciting bids from the world's major oil companies to extract heavy crude from vast deposits in its Orinoco River region. Despite President Hugo Chavez's criticism of U.S.-style capitalism, it has become clear that state-owned Petroleos de Venezuela SA needs both the cash and expertise of Big Oil.

These international oil companies have made windfall profits in recent years, but analysts doubt many will want to invest again given Chavez's history of seizing foreign stakes in Venezuela's oil.

Good luck with that plan, Hugo.

Russia, meanwhile, seems to figure that as long as energy prices are reducing income, why not try to intimidate Europe into passivity?

New efforts to break the deadlock between Russia and Ukraine and restore gas supplies to freezing European countries were planned on Friday, with the intervention in the dispute of a consortium of energy firms.

How much more is Russia losing with no sales as opposed to low-price sales?

So far, it looks like only Venezuela has little to look forward to in a depressed oil environment.

An Honor to Share a Continent With You

Canada has stood up for the West in a lonely vote (tip to Mark Steyn):

Canada stood alone before a United Nations human rights council yesterday, the only one among 47 nations to oppose a motion condemning the Israeli military offensive in Gaza.

The vote before the Geneva-based body shows the Stephen Harper government has abandoned a more even-handed approach to the Middle East in favour of unalloyed support of Israel, according to some long-time observers.

Thirty-three countries voted for the strongly worded motion, which called for an investigation into "grave" human rights violations by Israeli forces, while 13 nations, mostly European, abstained.

It is a sad day when people even think it is right to take an even-handed approach between Hamas killers and democratic Israel.

But it is understandable when you appreciate that "even-handedness" promotes the victory of Hamas over Israel.

Thanks Canada. You did the right thing. I'd like to think we'd have joined you if we were on that disgusting body, but who am I kidding? This week I'd give the odds at no better than 50:50. Next week? Lord knows.

Unfuckingreal

If this article's premise about the Army War College is even partially true, heads need to roll at the Army War College.

But if it isn't done in the next week, will it ever be done?

A Sound Basis for Victory

I'm worried about a surge of American troops to Afghanistan.

I worry about whether they'll be used correctly. I worry that too many troops reliant on rickity supply lines are vulnerable. I worry that our anti-Iraq War side will quickly turn on the Afghan War now that the Iraq War is dying down. I worry that the bulk of our Afghanistan problem is really in Pakistan and so not affected much by our Afghan surge.

But I keep getting stories that make me feel better. Strategypage indicates that our commanders understand what they are up against:

NATO, Afghan and U.S. commanders in Afghanistan agree on one thing, the key to victory is tribal politics. It is the tribes that control most of the territory in Afghanistan, and the areas of Pakistan that border Afghanistan.

Will my speculation on the course of the surge hold up to reality?

Full Dance Card

Bin Laden, beginning his seventh year living in Extended Stay Caves, has issued a call for jihad (surely that quest for personal self improvement vis-a-vis the Jews that we're assured by Nuanced Americans is what the term "jihad" really means) against Israel:

Bin Laden spoke in an audiotape posted Wednesday on Islamic militant Web sites where al-Qaida usually issues its messages. It was his first tape since May and came nearly three weeks after Israel started its campaign against Gaza's militant Hamas rulers.

Not that he's forgotten the other jihads! Oh no:

The al-Qaida leader also vowed that the terror network would open "new fronts" against the United States and its allies beyond Iraq and Afghanistan. He said President-elect Barack Obama has received a "heavy inheritance" from George W. Bush — two wars and "the collapse of the economy," which he said will render the United States unable to sustain a long fight against the mujahedeen, or holy warriors.

You want new fronts, too? Not tired of the ass-kickings you've endured so far, eh Osama? New fronts? What about the old fronts? Your minions discouraged by the one-way tickets to Jihadworld you want to keep issuing? You really think that a small drop in our GDP is going to slow down our war against you. Dream on, freak. We'll be killing your death cult followers for longer than you will live to see them die, rest assured. Just how long did you think you'd be "temporarily" hiding in a cave before the Moslem masses rose up and crowned you king of the caliphate? Not this long? Too bad for that miscalculation. Jews are smashing up Iranian-backed Hamas and the biggest angry "street" response has been by Hamas fans in the West.

Death to Americans. Death to the Jews. Death to the Hindus. Death to the Norwegians. Death to the Thais. Death to Christian Africans. Death to the Chinese. Death to Canadians. Death to Iraqis. Death to the Dutch. Death to Afghans. Death to Pakistanis. And death to even friendly Moslems when it is helpful, of course.

My, what a full list of people for the jihadis to hate. My apologies for the many people I left out. My editor would throw a fit with a Biblical "begats" list that long.

It's almost as if jihadi hatred against us isn't even our fault!

Something Will Be Decisive

Israeli ground forces are starting to push into Gaza City:

Israeli troops backed by tanks thrust deeper into the city and sought Hamas fighters in alleyways and cellars. ...

Israeli military officials say that depending on what happens with what they described as "decisive" talks in Cairo, Israel will move closer to a cease-fire or widen its offensive. They spoke on condition of anonymity because they were discussing sensitive policy matters.

Asked if Israel's war aims had been achieved, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak said: "Most of them, probably not all of them."

Israeli troops now have the coastal city of 400,000 virtually surrounded as part of an offensive launched Dec. 27 to end years of Palestinian rocket attacks on its southern towns.

I get the impression that the Israelis would halt the war if Hamas gives in now and accepts ceasefire terms that would lead to keeping rockets out of Gaza.

But the cost to the Israelis in lives lost has been low enough that Israel is willing to disarm Hamas the hard way if the Palestinians continue to be the stupidest and most self-destructive people on the planet by insisting that they will continue resisting to defend their ability to try to kill Jews with rockets.

Hamas has a dilemma. If they keep fighting, Israel will tear them a new one. And if Hamas agrees to stop fighting, the argument that Hamas was just about to pull out the can of whup ass on the Israelis but for the ceasefire will ring rather hollow.

Regardless, Israelis will remain in the Gaza Strip for weeks either ripping up the terrorist infrastructure or holding the ring until foreign troops (and not UN troops, for God's sake) arrive to supervise the ceasefire.

I wonder how eager Europeans will be to send their troops to Gaza City to save their pals in Hamas?

UPDATE: Is a ceasefire imminent?

Egypt's foreign minister, Ahmed Aboul Gheit, said details on the proposed cease-fire would be kept "under a lid of secrecy" until all parties agreed but said issues included an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, opening crossings into the blockaded territory and some kind of international monitors.

Israel showed no signs of slowing its bruising 19-day-old offensive against Gaza's Hamas rulers, striking some 60 targets. One airstrike hit an overcrowded cemetery, spreading body parts and rotting flesh over a wide area. The army said the airstrike targeted a weapons cache hidden near the graveyard.

Guerrillas in Lebanon sent rockets crashing into northern Israel on Wednesday for the second time in a week, drawing an Israeli artillery barrage and threatening to drag the Jewish state into a second front.

The rocket fire in the north caused no injuries, but sent residents scurrying to bomb shelters. There was no immediate claim of responsibility, and speculation focused on small Palestinian groups. Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed guerrilla group that fought a monthlong war with Israel in 2006, denied involvement in last week's attack.

Hamas friends seem determined to drag Lebanon and possibly their Syrian sponsors into the fight to save Hamas's bacon. And if Syria intervenes, Iranian help might be forthcoming.

But Hezbollah is not eager to join the fight right now. Israel's reputation may have been dented in 2006, but the current round of fighting in Gaza is restoring Israel's military and political reputation for dealing with enemies harshly.

And Israel is wisely not slowing down their offensive while the ceasefire talks continue. This will put pressure on Hamas to really make concessions--concessions that should be fatal to Hamas rule in Gaza. Too many people in the West think that talks must have a ceasefire first, failing to understand that a halt to fighting erases the pressure on the enemy to do more than go through the motions of talking. Or maybe those people in the West understand that fact of life all too well, I suppose.

I don't know what the point of a 10-day ceasefire would be, however. Hamas would love ten days to regroup and prepare to fight more. Why Israel would want a mere 10-day ceasefire is beyond me. Unless the ten days are to get European troops in place and unless Israel gets to move at will to find and destroy tunnels to Gaza, arms depots, and rocket production work shops.