MAF Takes to Airwaves Defending Marines

1/17/2012

Move America Forward representatives defended Marines in local media.

Video of the inverviews with CBS 13 and Fox 40 can be found by clicking the links below

Iranians Sentence American former Marine to Death

1/11/2012

Source

FLINT (WJRT) -

(01/09/11) - A Mid-Michigan man has been sentenced to death, accused of being a spy in Iran. Amir Hekmati, 28, was convicted and sentenced to death by Iranian court on Monday.

The White House, Michigan U.S. Senators and Hekmati's family are speaking out. Hekmati's family says he's innocent, and the U.S. Government denies he is a CIA spy, but the Iranian government is showing no mercy.

American officials are calling his conviction part of an Iranian pattern of arresting innocent people for political reasons. "We've maintained from the beginning that the charges against him were a fabrication, and we call on the Iranian government to release him immediately," said Victoria Nuland with the State Department.

The conviction has sparked outrage from a national pro-troop organization called Move America Forward. The group's spokesperson, Denny Gonzalez, is calling on the White House to do more for Hekmati's release. Hekmati, a former Marine, was captured in August, but the story broke just last month.

"This is the first time we've really seen this story kind of exploding, here in the last couple of weeks, but you know the administration had to of known that he was in their captivity and for them to basically not have a response is just not acceptable."

Michigan lawmakers are also speaking out. Monday, Senator Debbie Stabenow released a statement via email. "Iran has a history of falsely accusing Americans of being spies, and this new action by the Iranian government only further escalates tensions and isolates them from other countries."

Senator Carl Levin and Congressman Dale Kildee have also released statements to ABC 12 condemning Iran's conviction. A spokesperson for Kildee says that the congressman has been communicating with the State Department and The White House to help free Hekmati.

Meantime, Gonzalez is hoping Monday's conviction sparks a public movement here in Mid-Michigan. "There should be a huge public outcry of people; some from the Muslim community, some from the military community, and others who are just concerned Americans," Gonzalez said.

According to Iranian law, Hekmati has 20 days to appeal the conviction and sentence. For more from Hekmati's family, click HERE.

Taliban Responsible for More Deaths in Afghanistan

3/10/2011

Source

Taliban Responsible for Huge Numbers of Civilians Deaths

By Justin Fishel

Published March 10, 2011 | FoxNews.com

Despite public outrage in Afghanistan over a spate of civilian deaths at the hands of American and NATO forces, two new reports on the war show the Taliban is responsible for a huge percentage of civilian deaths in Afghanistan.

On Wednesday, the United Nations released a report showing 2,777 Afghan civilians were killed in the conflict there in 2010, 15 percent higher than the previous year. Seventy-five percent of those deaths, the report says, were attributable to the Taliban.

On Thursday, Science magazine released a report based on data supplied by American-led allied forces that show far fewer Afghan civilian causalities – 2,537 in 2009 and 2010 combined -- and attributed 80 percent of deaths to the Taliban.

But both civilian casualty counts showed that while Afghanistan has become more deadly for civilians in the last year, it hasn’t been the result of coalition forces. While civilian deaths were up 19 percent from 2009 according to the military numbers and 15 percent according to the U.N. study, “there are signs that ISAF has become a safer fighting force, treading more lightly on local populations,” said the magazine article. “Although the overall death toll in Afghanistan has risen, the increase was not wrought by soldiers.”

According to the military’s statistics, more than 90 percent of last year’s spike in civilian deaths was the fault of insurgents. At the same time, U.N. data show a 26 percent drop in the number of civilians killed by soldiers, Science magazine reported.

But the United Nations did find a much higher civilian death rate, which military officials said was attributable to the U.N. reporting civilian deaths in all 34 provinces as opposed to the military, which only counts deaths in areas where it can make firsthand observations about its actions. Officials also note that survivors and family members often claim those killed were innocent civilians while the military maintains they were insurgents.

Gen. David Petraeus, the top American commander in Afghanistan, told Fox News in an exclusive interview this week that despite the mishaps, the U.S. has done an impressive job reducing unintentional deaths.

"The fact is that our troopers and our Afghan partners have reduced ... in 2010 ... civilian casualties during the course of our operations by some 20 or 21 percent," Petraeus said. "That is a very significant accomplishment given that our combined forces expanded by 100,000 during that period and, of course, went on the offensive in a very big way."

As the number of military-related civilian deaths drop, Afghan citizens are starting to take a more critical eye to the Taliban’s actions. Three weeks ago, a team of Taliban fighters and suicide bombers robbed a bank in Jalalabad, killing more than 40 Afghans in the process. When the bank's security tape hit the airwaves, Afghans were shaken by images of the brutal attack.

In one portion of the video a Taliban fighter is seen shooting two innocent men at point-blank range with a Kalashnikov rifle, a fatal mistake for its cause, said the governor of Wardak province, Halim Fidai.

"They are gradually losing the support of the people," Fidai told Fox News. "I can tell you that 95 percent of the people never want Taliban-type government to return at all, that's very clear."

But even as the Taliban deliberately targets innocents, U.S. forces are still facing resentment among the Afghan population for civilian casualties.

Just days after the bank shooting, the U.S. acknowledged killing nine Afghan boys in a botched effort to hit insurgents.

In the days following, President Hamid Karzai rejected an apology from Gen. David Petraeus. On Monday, Defense Secretary Bill Gates made a surprise visit to the region and apologized again during a televised press briefing from Kabul.

But just a day after Gates departed, one of Karzai’s own relatives was mistakenly shot by allied troops searching for insurgents.

Al Qaeda Calls for Prison Breaks in Egypt

2/9/2011

Source

Iraqi al Qaeda calls for prison breaks in Egypt

DUBAI (Reuters) - Al Qaeda's Iraq-based arm called on Egyptian Muslims to free all prisoners from their nation's jails, issuing an appeal for holy war as Cairo said Islamist militants had already escaped during anti-government turmoil.

The Islamic State of Iraq (ISI) attacked the Egyptian government for failing to implement strict Islamic law, and said it was better for Muslims to die fighting their government rather than live under its rule.

Egyptian Vice President Omar Suleiman said on Tuesday that militants linked to al Qaeda were among the thousands of prisoners who escaped from jails last month during the unrest triggered by a popular uprising.

The ISI's "War Ministry" called on Egyptians to free more prisoners. "Don't rest until you have rescued them all, then destroy them (the prisons) with the aid of God, so that not a single stone remains standing," it said in a statement which was posted on Islamist websites on Tuesday.

The ISI's links to Egyptian militants and the strength of its influence are unclear, but some analysts said the group may have inspired a deadly attack on an Egyptian church last month.

The Muslim Brotherhood, an Islamist organisation seen as Egypt's largest opposition group, renounced violence decades ago and has warned that government efforts to stamp out its influence could push some towards more radical ideas.

Calling for a holy war against Egypt's government, the ISI said: "If the people of Islam die trying to reach this goal, it is better for them than having a tyrant who rules them with laws other than God's Sharia law."

"Here is the market of jihad, and all the reasons to facilitate it in your home. The doors of martyrdom have opened."

Hundreds of thousands of Egyptian protesters of various political and religious backgrounds have taken to the streets over the past two weeks to demand President Hosni Mubarak end his three-decade rule.

ISI has been blamed for releasing statements to inspire church bombings after it attacked a Baghdad church last year.

Egyptian officials have said "foreign elements" orchestrated a suspected suicide bombing on a Coptic church in Alexandria on January 1, killing 21 people, and linked the bomber to al Qaeda.

Obama SOTU Lacked Vision for Afghanistan, says ISW

1/28/2011

Source

The lack of a vision for Afghanistan in the State of the Union

By Jeffrey Dressler - 01/26/11

President Obama’s State of the Union speech was insightful both for what was said, but also, what was not. Despite massive illiteracy, poor communications infrastructure, and limited media, news travels fast in Afghanistan. Today’s New York Times headline story is tomorrow’s bazaar gossip. What Afghans (and Pakistanis, Iranians, and Indians for that matter) will be talking about is the President’s plan to begin bringing our troops home in July 2011.

Reaffirming July 2011 is, once again, a step backwards for the President’s blueprint for success in Afghanistan. The decision to begin drawing down forces in July 2011 was unveiled by the President just over two years ago but was also paired with the announcement of additional “surge” forces being sent to Afghanistan to undertake a major offensive against the Taliban. The President noted that July 2011 was the “beginning” of a drawdown that would take into account “conditions on the ground.” In the State of the Union, the President’s “conditions-based” caveat was nowhere to be found.

But something else was missing from the president’s address to the nation—any mention of this past November’s NATO Lisbon Summit and the conscious refocusing of the world’s attention on 2014. The US and its international partners’ decision at Lisbon to downplay July 2011 in favor of emphasizing the US’s commitment of forces to the Afghan theater until at least the end of 2014, was a watershed event. Secretaries Gates and Clinton and Admiral Mike Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, all echoed the summit’s message that the US would be fighting in Afghanistan for at least four more years—perhaps the first public acknowledgment that the possibility of success in Afghanistan would require significant effort beyond 2011.

According to a White House official, this was not a shift in policy; rather, 2014 “brought clarity to the policy of our future in Afghanistan,” helping to “get past that July 2011 obsession so that people can see what the president’s strategy really entails.” Re-focusing the U.S., the international community, Afghans and their all-too-interested neighbors on 2014 rather than harping on July 2011 helped convey that President Obama and our international allies fighting in Afghanistan really were committed to success in Afghanistan—preventing the country from serving as a safe haven for transnational terrorist groups. This requires several years of aggressive counterinsurgency operations while simultaneously working with the Afghan government and security forces so that they can take over responsibility for their country.

All who were party to the Lisbon Summit, including President Obama, NATO member states, and President Karzai seemed to acknowledge this with the universal decision to refocus on 2014. This was a wise decision primarily because it helped Afghans understand they weren’t going to be abandoned after deciding to turn against the enemy. General James Conway, Commandant of the Marine Corps, remarked recently that the July 2011 deadline “was probably giving our enemy sustenance.”

Unfortunately, President Obama passed up a golden opportunity to explain to America and the world that U.S. forces will be committed to success in Afghanistan well beyond July 2011. In the prosecution of a counterinsurgency strategy aimed at winning “hearts and minds,” convincing the population to turn against a vicious and brutal insurgency is the key ingredient for success. Working to dispel the misperception that the US is withdrawing in 2011 is relatively simple, yet essential.

Now, in addition to battling a brutal insurgency while protecting the Afghan populace, our brave men and women in Afghanistan must work to assure a skeptical population that this time, they won’t be abandoned.

Jeffrey Dressler is a research analyst and Afghanistan expert at the Institute for the Study of War. He studies the security dynamics in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Moscow Airport Bombed! At least 35 Dead in Apparent Terrorist Strike

1/24/2011

Suicide bomber kills 35 at Russia's biggest airport
12:34pm EST
By Alexei Anishchuk (Reuters)



MOSCOW (Reuters) - A suicide bomber killed at least 35 people at Russia's biggest airport on Monday in an attack that bore the hallmarks of militants fighting for an Islamist state in the north Caucasus region.

President Dmitry Medvedev vowed to track down and punish those behind the bombing, which also injured about 130 people, including foreigners, during the busy late afternoon at Moscow's Domodedovo airport. Dense smoke filled the hall and a fire burned along one wall.

"The explosion was right near me, I was not hit but I felt the shock wave -- people were falling," said Yekaterina Alexandrova, a translator who was waiting in the crowded arrivals area to meet a client flying in from abroad.

Thick drops of blood were scattered across the snow-covered tarmac outside the arrivals hall, where traces of shrapnel were found.

"I heard a loud boom... we thought someone had just dropped something. But then I saw casualties being carried away," a check-in attendant who gave her name as Elena told Reuters at Domodedovo, which is some 22 km (14 miles) southeast of Moscow.

The Kremlin said Medvedev, who has called the insurgency in the north Caucasus the biggest threat to Russia's security, delayed his departure for the Davos international business forum in Switzerland.

The rebels have vowed to take their bombing campaign from the violence-wracked north Caucasus to the Russian heartland, hitting transport and economic targets. They have also leveled threats at the 2014 Winter Olympics, scheduled for Sochi, a region they claim as part of their "emirate."

"Security will be strengthened at large transport hubs," Medvedev wrote on Twitter. "We mourn the victims of the terrorist attack at Domodedovo airport. The organizers will be tracked down and punished."

No group has yet taken responsibility for the attack, but dozens of Internet surfers, writing in Russian, praised the suicide bomber on unofficial Islamist site kavkazcenter.com.

Russia's ruble-denominated stock market MICEX fell by nearly two percent following the blast, which ripped through the arrivals hall, but traders said they expected little long-term impact.

"It (the blast) is moving the market in the short term, but there is no fundamental reason for the market to fall. If you remember, the market didn't react strongly to (previous blasts)," said trader Alexei Bachurin from Renaissance Capital.

SPREADING INSURRECTION

Twitter users posted mobile video phone footage of dozens of people lying on the floor as thick smoke filled the hall and a fire burned along one wall.

Airport staff were shown using flash lights to pick their way through the chaotic scene taped off immediately after the blast. Later videos showed emergency workers wheeling injured people out of the terminal on stretchers.

Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, who shares power in a 'tandem' arrangement with the less influential Medvedev, has staked his political reputation on quelling rebellion in the north Caucasus.

He launched a war in late 1999 in Chechnya to topple a secessionist government. That campaign achieved its immediate aim and helped him to the presidency months later; but since then insurgency has spread to neighbouring Ingushetia and Dagestan.

"It does not ... bode well for Russian ties to the North Caucasus and is yet another sign that what Putin started in 1999 by invading the rebellious republic of Chechnya has come home to roost again in the Russian capital," said Glen Howard, president of the U.S. Jamestown Foundation research institution.

"The bomb blast at Domodedevo will further strengthen the view among the Russian elite that Putin is losing control over security in the capital, which plays into the hands of his enemies."

Moscow recently saw riots involving thousands of Russian nationalists who attacked passersby of non-Slavic appearance, many of whom were from the north Caucasus.

Analysts say rebels are planning to increase violence in the run up to 2012 presidential elections, that may well see Putin returning to the presidency.

Security has been tightened at Moscow's other two airports, which will also receive diverted passengers who were flying toward Domodedovo, media reported.

Moscow suffered its worst attack in six years in March 2010 when two female suicide bombers from Dagestan set off explosives in the metro, killing 40 people.

The worst incident involving north Caucasus rebels took place in 2004 when militants seized control of a school in Beslan. When Russian troops stormed the building in an attempt to end a siege, 331 hostages, half of them children, were killed.

British Intelligence Suspect Terror Plot

1/9/2011

Source

British brace for possible terror attack
Jim Kouri - Examiner

The British domestic intelligence agency MI5 has alerted aviation and police officials that al-Qaeda may be planning a terrorist attack against a U. K. airport or other British target in a threat described as credible,according to sources at the New Scotland Yard and the British Home Office.

The intelligence officials added that no changes to security will be made and the planned method of attack is still unclear. According to the Scotland Yard source, British counterterrorism officials immediately warned their U.S. counterparts of a possible terror threat to planes flying through the U.K.

There are currently several U.S. counterterrorism teams posted in London and other parts of the U.K., including a team of New York City police detectives from the NYPD's intelligence division.

The NYPD officers assigned in London would not give details, but indicated that British authorities have said they were following the mandated protocols in the U.K. The heightened alert came as a result of increased "chatter" among suspects under surveillance by British counterterrorists, but there is no imminent threat that no threat.

The Metropolitan Police public information officer stated that the overall threat level from international terrorism remains at "severe" — the second-highest level, meaning an attack is highly likely. The level has not changed since January 2010.

The Home Office stated that any imminent, serious threat to public safety would prompt a change in the overall threat level — and would see it raised to "critical," the highest point on the system's five point scale.

According to MI5, a significant number of British nationals and foreign citizens who reside in the UK are known to be linked to or sympathetic with Al Qaeda.

TERRORIST SYMPATHIZERS

Sympathizers are supporting the activities of terrorist groups in a range of ways. For example, they are:

* providing resources for terrorist networks engaged in conflicts overseas;

* fundraising for terrorist networks overseas and in the UK;

* acquiring and disseminating false documents for use by terrorists in the UK and overseas; and

* facilitating training in the UK and overseas in extremist ideology and terrorist techniques.

In some cases they have also been engaged in directly planning, or attempting to carry out, terrorist attacks. Some British citizens and residents have received terrorist training in camps overseas. Relationships forged in these training camps have formed the basis of loose networks of terrorists who can operate outside structured organizations. Others have formed groups within the UK in which members reinforce each others' adherence to extremist ideologies.

A number of British residents have traveled to Iraq and Afghanistan to join the insurgencies against those countries' governments and international forces. Some have returned to the UK and are believed to be involved in supporting and planning terrorist activities here.

More than 40 terrorists have been convicted under the Terrorism Act and another 183 have been convicted of terrorist-related offenses, including murder, illegal possession of firearms and explosives offences. 1,165 people have been arrested under the Terrorism Act and 114 are awaiting trial.

"International terrorism is a nationwide problem. Those involved in international terrorism are not associated with any single area of the UK; individuals convicted of terrorist offences have lived throughout the country. Likewise, terrorists have sought to target a variety of different places. Attacks related to international terrorism have occurred in London and Glasgow, and thwarted terrorist plots have been aimed at targets outside the capital," according to a statement from London's Metropolitan Police

Homeowners Assoc. tells Marine to Take Down Flag

1/7/2011

Source

A (too) high-flying flag?
Marine vet's 20-foot flagpole has homeowners association filing suit over a display of patriotism that stands taller than allowed



A Marine Corps veteran is being sued by his Cypress-area homeowners association because the flagpole on which he flies the United States and Marine Corps flags does not meet his subdivision's design guidelines.

Mike Merola and his lawyer, Lee Thweatt, say this is a classic case of overreach by a nitpicking homeowners association. Lakeland Village Community Association says it is seeking to enforce its rules evenly on all residents.

Standing in his backyard in a black T-shirt bearing an eagle and the American flag, the 60-year-old Merola called that argument "a lame excuse." After his application to erect a 20-foot flagpole in his backyard was denied, he protested in a series of letters and, ultimately, erected the pole anyway.

"They just don't understand, unless they've been in the military, to feel the pride that I feel in flying that flag high and proud," said Merola, who served in the Marines from 1969 to 1977. "The excuses and things that they came up with for me not being able to fly that flagpole, I just didn't buy. That's why I bucked the system and put it up."

The association's lawyer, Nina Tran, said her clients encourage residents who wish to fly the flag to do so — as long as that flag is attached to a 6-foot pole mounted on a resident's home, as the bylaws stipulate.

Such an approach is "in keeping with the residential nature of the community," the board wrote in a statement. The suit alleges the pole is "a detriment to Lakeland Village and … (causes) imminent harm and irreparable injury to (the association)." The suit seeks a $10 fine for every day the pole stays standing, a court order to remove it and payment of attorneys' fees.

"The problem with a flagpole of that height and that significance is that it flaps in the wind and causes noise to other homeowners," Tran said. "If we allow the mounting of a 20-foot freestanding flagpole in the backyard, who's to say that the next person isn't going to mount it to the top of their roof? We have to have standards."

But Merola, who moved into the neighborhood in March 2009, bringing the flagpole from his former residence, said he's received only compliments from neighbors about the pole, whether from kids skateboarding by on the walking path behind his back fence or from neighbors who've stopped to investigate the source of all the gossip.
Neighbors don't mind

"I don't understand why the homeowners association overreacted like this," said Thweatt, Merola's lawyer, and a Marine himself. "I understand they have to protect the property values of the people in that subdivision, but they've had no complaints. It's not like the guy painted his house neon orange."

Merola's next-door neighbors, Satish and Ann Kalra, said the pole does not bother them.

"The homeowners association should look at the rules again," Satish Kalra said. "If the rules need to be modified, they should be modified. … That would be the logical thing to do."

Tran said even if Merola has not received complaints, another neighbor with a similar flagpole might.

Thweatt, who took the case pro bono, said he believes the suit violates the Freedom to Display the American Flag Act of 2005, which says, in part, that a homeowners association "may not adopt or enforce any policy … that would restrict or prevent a member of the association from displaying the flag."

No court date has been scheduled in the case.

"I hope we can come to some kind of agreement that will let me continue to fly the flag loud and proud for as long as I live," Merola said.

Obama gives terror suspects access to frozen assets

12/28/2010

Source

The likes of the ACLU and CAIR can now get funds directly from the terrorists they defend. From Judicial Watch:

Caving in to the demands of liberal civil rights groups, the Obama Administration has quietly amended a counterterrorism sanction so that accused terrorists can pay for their defense with assets frozen by the U.S. government.

The exemption to the government’s Global Terrorism Sanctions was made official this week by the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), which is responsible for enforcing economic and trade sanctions based on U.S. foreign policy and national security threats. The office operates under presidential national emergency powers and acts largely on international mandates.

Among its duties is to freeze the assets of individuals or groups engaged in terrorist activities. Under executive orders signed by both Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, the OFAC can confiscate the assets of suspected terrorists identified by the Treasury Secretary if the funds are in control of institutions regulated by the U.S.

That means that individuals charged with terrorism can’t access money to pay for attorneys, something that has long bothered the left. This week the Treasury Department gave in, making it possible for terrorism suspects whose assets have been frozen by Uncle Sam to use the money to pay for legal representation. Suspects must apply for a special license from the OFAC, which will make the cash disbursements.

Terrorist, ACLU, Frozen Asset

Al Qaeda Planning Holiday Attacks

12/15/2010

Source

Iraq: Al Qaeda Planning Holiday Attacks in West
Iraqi Authorities Say Two Captured Insurgents Admit to Planned Suicide Attacks in U.S., Europe during Christmas Season



Iraqi authorities have obtained confessions from captured insurgents who claim al Qaeda is planning suicide attacks in the United States and Europe during the Christmas season, two senior officials said Wednesday.

Iraqi Interior Minister Jawad al-Bolani told The Associated Press that the botched bombing in central Stockholm last weekend was among the alleged plots the insurgents revealed. Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, in a telephone interview from New York, called the claims "a critical threat."

Both al-Bolani and Zebari said Iraq has informed Interpol of the alleged plots, and alerted authorities in the U.S. and European countries of the possible danger. Neither official specified which country or countries in Europe are alleged targets.

There was no way to verify the insurgents' claims. But Western counterterrorism officials generally are on high alert during the holiday season, especially since last year's failed attack by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the so-called underwear bomber, who tried to blow up a Detroit-bound airliner on Christmas Day.

Al-Bolani said several insurgents claimed to be part of a cell that took its orders directly from al Qaeda's central leadership. He said at least one of the captured suspects was a foreign fighter from Tunisia.

The confessions were the result of recent operations by Iraqi security forces that have netted at least 73 suspected operatives in the last two weeks, al-Bolani said.

Links between al Qaeda's central leadership, which is believed to be hiding in Pakistan, and the terror organization's front group in Iraq are tenuous as the local branch in recent years has been run by local insurgents.

But al-Bolani said the claims; if true; show al Qaeda remains a presence in Iraq.

"Several members of this terrorist group have direct links with the central leaders of the al Qaeda organization," al-Bolani said. "Those captured represent the main structure of the al Qaeda organization in Iraq."

Zebari, who is in New York for a meeting of the U.S. Security Council, said he informed "the countries concerned." He mentioned the U.S, but would not specify which countries in Europe.

Al-Bolani said the suspects claimed that last Saturday's suicide bombing in Stockholm - carried out by an Iraqi-born Swede on Saturday - was among the plots. He said the suspects made the claim after the bombing happened.

AG Holder criticizes proposed Gitmo transfers ban

12/9/2010

Source

AG Holder criticizes proposed Gitmo transfers ban
By PETE YOST, Associated Press Pete Yost, Associated Press 2 hrs 44 mins ago


WASHINGTON – Attorney General Eric Holder said Thursday that Congress would be setting a dangerous precedent if it prohibited the transfer of detainees from Guantanamo Bay to the United States where they could stand trial.

At a news conference, the attorney general criticized the proposed ban which is contained in a broad measure to freeze the budgets of most Cabinet departments and fund the war in Afghanistan for another year.

The congressional proposal would take away the administration's ability to hold accountable those "who have committed mass murder," the attorney general told the news conference.

Holder declined to address whether the president would veto the appropriations measure over the Guantanamo provision if the legislation cleared Capitol Hill.

The executive branch "must have every lawful instrument of national power to ensure that terrorists are brought to justice," Holder said in a letter sent Thursday to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell.

"My job is to decide these matters based on what is best for the country, not based on politics," Holder told a reporter minutes after the end of the news conference, which focused on international cooperation between the European Union and the United States.

A year ago, Holder announced that professed Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and co-conspirators would be tried in federal civilian court in New York City, not far from the site of the destroyed World Trade Center. Holder said there was public support for his decision at the time, but that the issue became enmeshed in election-year politics.

Faced with opposition in New York and from Republicans in Congress, the administration decided to review its trial plans for detainees. The original Holder idea has been viewed as all-but-dead, but the administration has yet to propose an alternative.

Berkely City Council Says Traitor Soldier is a Hero

12/8/2010

Source

California Town Mulls Resolution to Honor Army Private Accused of Passing Secret Info to WikiLeaks

By Joshua Rhett Miller

Published December 08, 2010 | FoxNews.com

advertisement

Amid calls from some politicians to press treason charges -- which could carry the death penalty -- against whoever leaked secret cables to WikiLeaks, the Berkeley, Calif., City Council is entertaining a resolution to declare that an Army private accused of leaking some classified information to the website is an American hero.

City Peace and Justice Commissioner Bob Meola, who authored the resolution, told the San Francisco Chronicle that Pfc. Bradley Manning, 22, is a patriot who deserves a medal.

"If he did what he's accused of doing, he's a patriot and should get a medal," Meola told the newspaper. "I think the war criminals should be the ones prosecuted, not the whistle-blowers."

Manning -- accused of leaking a video that depicted an Army helicopter attack that left 11 people dead in Baghdad and widely suspected of leaking hundreds of thousands of secret cables to WikiLeaks -- is currently being held in a Virginia military brig.

And that's where he belongs, say members of a national veterans group, who call the Berkeley resolution "appalling."

Ryan Gallucci, a spokesman for AMVETS, which represents roughly 180,000 U.S. veterans, said the City Council "would be wise" to vote down the resolution in support of Manning. A city commission has already approved the measure, and the Berkeley City Council will vote on it on Tuesday.

"AMVETS believes it would be appalling to commend someone like Bradley Manning, who has betrayed his country and disgraced the uniform," Gallucci wrote in a statement to FoxNews.com. "Manning not only compromised American interests across the globe, but he has blood on his hands for our Afghan allies sought out by the Taliban from the first leak."

Gallucci said Berkeley lawmakers should be "ashamed" that the proposal ever surfaced.

Manning, who has not commented publicly on his case, faces up to 52 years in prison if convicted of leaking the video. Though widely suspected, he has not been charged in connection with the release of hundreds of thousands of classified military documents to WikiLeaks, many of which have been released in the last couple of weeks.

His civilian attorney, David Coombs, did not return a call seeking comment. Army officials also did not immediately comment when reached by FoxNews.com.

But Jeff Paterson, an organizer for the Bradley Manning Support Network, said he's "hopeful" the Berkeley resolution will pass.

"I believe he's a hero," Paterson said. "There's an international witch hunt against WikiLeaks and if Bradley Manning is the source of the material, he needs all of our support."

Paterson, who will attend Tuesday's vote along with Meola, says he considers the resolution's chances of passing to be "50-50."

James Carafano, national security expert at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank based in Washington, said he considered the resolution to be jumping the gun.

"First of all, someone is innocent until proven guilty," Carafano said. "And the investigation is not done. They're kind of pre-judging the judicial system -- at least wait and see what evidence and charges are presented. They have no evidence to base this judgment on."

If Manning is ultimately charged and proven guilty of leaking the sensitive documents, Carafano said, the resolution could be construed as encouraging millions of U.S. military officials with access to sensitive information to disseminate that material.

"I'm a great lover of democracy and I'm a great lover of federalism," he said. "But if people of that city want to earn the disdain of other Americans, that's their right. If these people want to vote against the crowd, have at it.

"The most kind and generous thing you could say is that it's completely irresponsible."

The Associated Press contributed to this report.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/12/08/veterans-group-blasts-resolution-honor-army-private-accused-leaks/#ixzz17ZT803B9

For a few, Pearl Harbor still a vivid memory

12/7/2010

Source

From USA TODAY

Jim Morgan was sleeping a little late on the morning of Dec. 7, 1941.

His mother, Beryl, had tried to wake him up at about 7:30, but the 9-year-old, whose family lived at the Navy base at Pearl Harbor, didn't stir until she came back about 25 minutes later.

He got up just in time to witness history out his bedroom window.

"I said, 'Look, Ma! There's a fire at the submarine base.' "

At that same moment, Russell Meyne was sitting down to a plate of pancakes, bacon and eggs in the mess hall at Pearl Harbor's Hickam Air Base, 2 miles away. He was hoping to revitalize himself after a night of drinking beer with his buddies, celebrating their selection to a group that would be heading to the mainland for flight training.

Suddenly, everything changed.

"The table almost bounced up and down, and all the pots and pans in the kitchen started falling on the floor," said Meyne, an Army private at the time, now 91 and treasurer of the South Carolina branch of the Pearl Harbor Survivors Association.

"Then the bombing got really exciting."

Meyne and Morgan are among a dwindling number of people who can talk firsthand about the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7, 1941. As the 69th anniversary is marked today, it coincides with a week-long meeting of the national Pearl Harbor Survivors Association.

The group's numbers have dropped so low, the possibility of shuttering it was discussed at the Honolulu convention, which runs through Friday. Association President Art Herriford on Monday said about 100 members decided against disbanding. Instead, the association will have four district directors around the country instead of eight.

Out of 60,000 servicemembers on the island during the attack, the association estimates only about 3,000 survivors still participate in chapters scattered across the country.

"This convention is all-important for the Pearl Harbor survivors," U.S. Army Air Corps veteran Jim Donis, 91, of Palm Desert, Calif., said before Monday's meeting. "This is going to be the first time we talk about when we want to shut down the national organization."

Meyne, who lives in Irmo, S.C., plans to be in Charleston Harbor, at the USS Yorktown aircraft carrier today for a special day of remembrance.

Not that he needs reminding. He remembers every detail.

"We had a front-row seat," Meyne said.

He says he and a buddy loaded their rifles — it was all they could think to do at the time — and started shooting at a plane that was coming down smoking. He never knew whether he hit the plane, but he says it slammed into a building and killed four people.

None of the members of Meyne's company was among the 2,402 U.S. servicememembers who lost their lives that day, but he saw what happened to others who weren't as lucky.

"The guys in the harbor, when they tipped those battleships over and dumped all that oil on the water and the oil caught on fire — oh God, it was a mess," he said.

Meyne recalls the sight of soldiers running on the airfield, trying to move some of the airplanes as the Japanese planes peppered them with machine-gun fire.

"Man, they just got mowed down like wheat," he said.

At 78, Morgan, of Greenwood, S.C., is among the youngest of those eyewitnesses.

In the Navy apartments, Morgan — whose father, David Jay Morgan, was serving on the destroyer Ward and survived the attack — was in no less danger as he watched with his mom. Planes were flying directly overhead, and their building was right next to an oil tank farm. As planes flew low over their house, Morgan's mother decided to take action.

"She said, 'I don't know whose they are, but they're not ours. Let's get out of here.' "

Their car wouldn't start. So they all ran back into the house. Morgan and the neighbor kids hid in a closet under the stairs.

"All hell was breaking loose," he said.

Morgan's dad stayed in the Pacific for the whole war and made a career in the Navy, eventually becoming a commander of a transport ship in Korea and working for the State Department in Vietnam.

Meyne returned to Cleveland and spent 25 years in the insurance business before coming south in 1972.

Morgan and Meyne didn't know each other at the time, but met through the Pearl Harbor Survivors Association years later, after both moved to South Carolina.

As the years pass, Morgan hopes Americans never forget.

Fallen Marine Heroes from 3/5th Batt. Remembered at Pendleton

12/3/2010

Source

Camp Pendleton honors 14 troops killed in Afghanistan
Eleven Marines, two Navy corpsmen and a British soldier assigned to the 3rd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment are praised for their dedication to duty.

By Tony Perry, Los Angeles Times
December 4, 2010


When their convoy was ambushed by Taliban snipers and a fellow Marine was wounded, Cpl. Larry Harris Jr. did not hesitate.

He put the wounded Marine over his shoulders and began to carry him to safety. He had gone only a short distance when he stepped on a buried roadside bomb.

Harris was killed instantly but the other Marine survived. Harris had carried him far enough to be safely out of range of enemy gunfire.

On Friday, Harris and 10 other Marines, two Navy corpsmen and a British soldier — all assigned to the 3rd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment — were praised for their dedication to duty.

The 14 troops were killed during the battalion's recent seven-month deployment to southern Afghanistan's Helmand province, on the Pakistani border. The battalion, known as the Thundering Third, was assigned to wrest control of the Garmsir district from the Taliban.

"They were courageous, they were strong and they were beloved of their brothers," Lt. Col. Ben Watson, the battalion commander, told several hundred Marines, family members and guests at a tearful memorial service.

"Did their sacrifice make a difference?" Watson asked. "You're damn right it did."

Harris' mother, Lora Merriweather, told reporters that the pain of her son's death is eased somewhat by the fact he saved the lives of others.

"My son served with passion," she said. "He was a man of strength, a Christian. He did things with his whole heart."

Harris, 24, has been nominated for a Silver Star. He also served in Iraq.

It was a morning of remembrance and tears, and a promise by Watson and others that the 14 and their families will never be forgotten.

All 14 were from enlisted ranks. Their average age was 25. Their jobs reflect the growing casualty list in Helmand province: riflemen, medical corpsmen, a dog handler, a vehicle maintenance specialist, explosive ordnance specialists and road-clearance specialists.

"It's been five months, but it's as hard as the first day," said Staff Sgt. Joshua Caskey, 29, whose brother, Sgt. Joseph Caskey, 24, was killed June 26. The older brother served in Iraq and was wounded.

"We're a Christian family," Caskey said. "We're moving on. We know we'll see my brother again someday."

The family of Navy Corpsman William Ortega, 23, brought a photo album of his life to share with the Marines. A group listened intently as Ortega's mother, Maria, talked in Spanish — with English translation provided by another relative.

"He always wanted to save lives," said William's sister, Edna. "He was assigned to a hospital in Afghanistan, but he wanted to be out with the Marines where he could save people. He's our hero."

The 14 fatalities from the 3rd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment, are among the more than 50 Marines and sailors from Camp Pendleton killed in Afghanistan this year.

The memorial ceremony, held on a parade deck at the northern edge of the sprawling base, had the traditional elements: the inverted rifles display, the Final Roll Call, a chaplain's benediction, a Marine band, bagpipers playing "Amazing Grace" and the playing of Taps.

Through much of the ceremony, another sound could be heard reverberating off the green hills: automatic weapons fire as other Marines trained to deploy to Afghanistan.

tony.perry@latimes.com

Copyright © 2010, Los Angeles Times

Thwarted: Terrorist Van Bomb Targeting Annual Oregon Christmas Tree Lighting Ceremony

11/30/2010

Source

This Article posted earlier this week shows why we must remain vigilant and dedicated to fighting an ever moving target of terrorism. If we fall asleep at the wheel - we're defintely going to get hit. A key part of what needs to be done is being done here at home by the FBI. Another very key part of the fight is being waged overseas where the links to this would-be bomber were found. The Taliban and Alqueda links are well known as preying apon disturbed and generally unhappy young men who fantisize about carrying out attacks like the one thwarted last Friday.

In the article...

"Federal court documents show the sting operation began in June after an undercover agent learned that Mohamud had been in contact with an “unindicted associate” in Pakistan’s Northwest Frontier region."

A 19-year-old Somali-American was arrested Friday night in Portland, Oregon after trying to detonate a bomb built by the FBI. In a post that first appeared on Newsweek.com, Christopher Dickey, Newsweek's Mideast editor and Paris bureau chief, reports on why the incident tells us as much about the FBI as it does about al Qaeda.

Read more...

Mohamed Osman Mohamud, Oregon Tree Lighting, Al Qeada

North Korean Agression goes unchecked: WH releases statement.

11/23/2010

Source

SEOUL (AFP) – North Korea fired dozens of artillery shells onto a South Korean island on Tuesday, killing one person, setting homes ablaze and triggering an exchange of fire as the South's military went on top alert.

In what appeared to be one of the most serious border incidents since the 1950-53 war, South Korean troops fired back with cannon, the government convened in an underground war room and "multiple" air force jets scrambled.

The firing came after North Korea's disclosure of an apparently operational uranium enrichment programme -- a second potential way of building a nuclear bomb -- which is causing serious alarm for the United States and its allies.

Some 50 shells landed on the South Korean border island of Yeonpyeong near the tense Yellow Sea border, damaging dozens of houses and sending plumes of thick smoke into the air, YTN television reported.

North Korea, South Korea, Seoul, Korea

Bush says in memoir he approved waterboarding

11/9/2010

Source

Bush says in memoir he approved waterboarding
By R. Jeffrey Smith
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, November 4, 2010; A02

Human rights experts have long pressed the administration of former president George W. Bush for details of who bore ultimate responsibility for approving the simulated drownings of CIA detainees, a practice that many international legal experts say was illicit torture.

In a memoir due out Tuesday, Bush makes clear that he personally approved the use of that coercive technique against alleged Sept. 11 plotter Khalid Sheik Mohammed, an admission the human rights experts say could one day have legal consequences for him.

In his book, titled "Decision Points," Bush recounts being asked by the CIA whether it could proceed with waterboarding Mohammed, who Bush said was suspected of knowing about still-pending terrorist plots against the United States. Bush writes that his reply was "Damn right" and states that he would make the same decision again to save lives, according to a someone close to Bush who has read the book.

Bush previously had acknowledged endorsing what he described as the CIA's "enhanced" interrogation techniques - a term meant to encompass irregular, coercive methods - after Justice Department officials and other top aides assured him they were legal. "I was a big supporter of waterboarding," Vice President Richard B. Cheney acknowledged in a television interview in February.

The Justice Department later repudiated some of the underlying legal analysis for the CIA effort. But Bush told an interviewer a week before leaving the White House that "I firmly reject the word 'torture,' " and he reiterates that view in the book. Reuters and the New York Times first published accounts of the book's contents Tuesday evening.

Since the 2003 waterboarding of Mohammed and similar interrogations of two other CIA detainees in 2002 and 2003, the agency has forsworn the technique, which involves pouring water onto someone's face while strapped to a board, to convince them they will shortly drown.

President Obama and Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. have both said waterboarding is an act of torture proscribed by international law, a viewpoint supported by a handful of Republican lawmakers on Capitol Hill and opposed by other Republicans. But the Obama administration has not sought to punish former Bush administration officials for approving it.

The 26-year-old United Nations Convention Against Torture requires that all parties to it seek to enforce its provisions, even for acts committed elsewhere. That provision, known as universal jurisdiction, has been cited in the past by prosecutors in Spain and Belgium to justify investigations of acts by foreign officials. But no such trials have occurred in foreign courts.

Tom Malinowski, the Washington advocacy director for Human Rights Watch, said, "Waterboarding is broadly seen by legal experts around the world as torture, and it is universally prosecutable as a crime. The fact that none of us expect any serious consequences from this admission is what is most interesting."

M. Cherif Boussiani, an emeritus law professor at DePaul University who co-chaired the U.N. experts committee that drafted the torture convention, said that Bush's admission could theoretically expose him to prosecution. But he also said Bush must have presumed that he would have the government's backing in any confrontation with others' courts.

Georgetown University law professor David Cole, a long-standing critic of Bush's interrogation and detention policies, called prosecution unlikely. "The fact that he did admit it suggests he believes he is politically immune from being held accountable. . . . But politics can change."

US takes on violent Afghan valley that bled Brits

11/9/2010

Source

US takes on violent Afghan valley that bled Brits
By SEBASTIAN ABBOT
The Associated Press
Tuesday, November 9, 2010; 12:16 PM

SANGIN, Afghanistan -- U.S. Marines who recently inherited this lush river valley in southern Helmand province from British forces have tossed aside their predecessor's playbook in favor of a more aggressive strategy to tame one of the most violent places in Afghanistan.

U.S. commanders say success is critical in Sangin district - where British forces suffered nearly one-third of their deaths in the war - because it is the last remaining sanctuary in Helmand where the Taliban can freely process the opium and heroin that largely fund the insurgency.

The district also serves as a key crossroads to funnel drugs, weapons and fighters throughout Helmand and into neighboring Kandahar province, the spiritual heartland of the Taliban and the most important battleground for coalition forces. The U.S.-led coalition hopes its offensive in the south will kill or capture key Taliban commanders, rout militants from their strongholds and break the insurgency's back. That will allow the coalition and the Afghans to improve government services, bring new development and a sense of security.

"Sangin has been an area where drug lords, Taliban and people who don't want the government to come in and legitimize things have holed up," said Lt. Col. Jason Morris, commander of the 3rd Battalion, 5th Marine Regiment. The unit took over responsibility for Sangin in mid-October nearly a month after the British withdrew.

That withdrawal - after more than 100 deaths over four years of combat - has raised concerns among some in Britain about the perception of U.S. Marines finishing a job the British couldn't handle. Many claimed that happened in the Iraqi city of Basra in 2007.

U.S. commanders denied that's the case in Sangin and said the withdrawal was just the final step in consolidating British forces in central Helmand and leaving the north and south to the Americans. Sangin is located in the north of the province.

But one of the first things the Marines did when they took over Sangin was close roughly half the 22 patrol bases the British set up throughout the district - a clear rejection of the main pillar of Britain's strategy, which was based on neighborhood policing tactics used in Northern Ireland.

The bases were meant to improve security in Sangin, but the British ended up allocating a large percentage of their soldiers to protect them from being overrun by the Taliban. That gave the insurgents almost total freedom of movement in the district.

"The fact that a lot of those patrol bases were closed down frees up maneuver forces so that you can go out and take the fight to the enemy," Morris said during an interview at the battalion's main base in the district center, Forward Operating Base Jackson.

As Morris spoke, the sound of heavy machine gun fire and mortar explosions echoed in the background for nearly 30 minutes as Marines tried to kill insurgents who were firing at the base from a set of abandoned compounds about 500 feet away.

The Marines later called in an AC-130 gunship to launch a Hellfire missile, a 500-pound bomb and a precision-guided artillery round at the compounds, rocking the base with deafening explosions that shook dirt loose from the ceilings of the tents. Tribal elders later said the munitions killed seven Taliban fighters.

The battalion has been in more than 100 firefights since it arrived, and the proximity of many of them to FOB Jackson illustrates just how much freedom of movement the Taliban still have in Sangin.

The Marines have worked to improve security by significantly increasing the number of patrols compared to the British and by pushing into areas north and south of the district center where British forces rarely went. That process started when the 3rd Battalion, 7th Marine Regiment deployed to Sangin in July and fought beside the British until the current battalion took over.

Even though the battalion has slightly fewer forces than the 1,200-strong British Royal Marines unit that was here previously, commanders say they have been able to step up the number of patrols because they have far fewer Marines stuck guarding bases.

But some analysts have speculated that the coalition would need at least one more battalion in Sangin if it wanted to clear and hold the whole district. Some Marines said privately that more forces would be necessary, especially in the Upper Sangin Valley where coalition troops had not gone in years until recently.

The battalion's current area of operations is roughly 25 square miles and contains a mix of lush fields around the Helmand River, dense clusters of tall mud compounds and patches of barren desert. It contains some 25,000 people, but many of Sangin's residents live outside the area in which the Marines operate. The entire district is roughly 200 square miles, and district governor Mohammad Sharif said it houses about 100,000 people.

The battalion has gotten help from a pair of Marine reconnaissance companies operating in the Upper Sangin Valley and a company of Georgian soldiers based on the West side of the Helmand River. There are also several hundred Afghan army and police in Sangin, but they are fairly dependent on the Marines for supplies and logistics.

In addition to conducting more patrols, the Marine battalion has adopted a more aggressive posture than the British, according to Afghan army Lt. Mohammad Anwar, who has been in Sangin for two years.

"When the Taliban attacked, the British would retreat into their base, but the Marines fight back," said Anwar.

Insurgents fired at members of 1st Platoon, India Company, during a recent patrol near the battalion's main base, and the Marines responded with a deafening roar of machine gun fire, grenades, and mortars. They also tried to launch a rocket that turned out to be a dud.

"The Taliban like to engage us, and I like to make it an unfair fight," said India Company's commander, Capt. Chris Esrey of Havelock, North Carolina. "If you shoot at us with 7.62 (millimeter bullets), I'm going to respond with rockets."

But Taliban attacks have taken their toll. Thirteen Marines have been killed and 49 wounded since the battalion arrived. Most of those casualties have come from IEDs, or improvised explosive devices, that the insurgents hide in compounds, along trails and in dense fields where they are hard to detect.

The Marines believe their operations are beginning to improve security, and they say tips have started to trickle in from locals on the location of IEDs.

But some villagers have complained about the increased number of patrols since the Taliban often plant IEDs along the routes the Marines travel.

"You should open more bases and patrol less because when you patrol on foot, the Taliban bury IEDs that threaten children and other civilians," local landowner Tuma Khan told a Marine during a patrol.

Rules of Engagement frustrate our troops to the breaking point

10/19/2010

Source

Troops chafe at restrictive rules of engagement, talks with Taliban

By: Sara A. Carter

National Security Correspondent

October 19, 2010

A U.S. Army Chinook helicopter from the 101st Airborne Division transports U.S. infantrymen from one position to another in Zhari District, southern Afghanistan. (AP file photo)

KANDAHAR, AFGHANISTAN -- To the U.S. Army soldiers and Marines serving here, some things seem so obviously true that they are beyond debate. Among those perceived truths: Tthe restrictive rules of engagement that they have to fight under have made serving in combat far more dangerous for them, while allowing the Taliban to return to a position of strength.

"If they use rockets to hit the [forward operating base] we can't shoot back because they were within 500 meters of the village. If they shoot at us and drop their weapon in the process we can't shoot back," said Spc. Charles Brooks, 26, a U.S. Army medic with 1st Battalion, 4th Infantry Regiment, in Zabul province.

Word had come down the morning Brooks spoke to this reporter that watch towers surrounding the base were going to be dismantled because Afghan village elders, some sympathetic to the Taliban, complained they were invading their village privacy. "We have to take down our towers because it offends them and now the Taliban can set up mortars and we can't see them," Brooks added, with disgust.

In June, Gen. David Petraeus, who took command here after the self-inflicted demise of Gen. Stanley McChrystal, told Congress that he was weighing a major change with rules for engaging enemy fighters in Afghanistan. That has not yet happened, troops say. Soldiers and Marines continue to be held back by what they believe to be strict rules imposed by the government of President Hamid Karzai designed with one objective: limit Afghan civilian casualties.

"I don't think the military leaders, president or anybody really cares about what we're going through," said Spc. Matthew "Silver" Fuhrken, 25, from Watertown, N.Y. "I'm sick of people trying to cover up what's really going on over here. They won't let us do our job. I don't care if they try to kick me out for what I'm saying -- war is war and this is no war. I don't know what this is."

To the soldiers and Marines risking their lives in Afghanistan, restrictions on their ability to aggressively attack the Taliban have led to another enormous frustration stalking morale: the fear that the Karzai government, with the prodding of the administration of President Obama, will negotiate a peace with the Taliban that wastes all the sacrifices by the U.S. here. Those fears intensified when news reached the enlisted ranks that the Karzai government, with the backing of senior Obama officials, was entering a new round of negotiations with the Taliban.

"If we walk away, cut a deal with the Taliban, desert the people who needed us most, then this war was pointless," said Pvt. Jeffrey Ward, with 1st Battalion, 4th Infantry Regiment, who is stationed at Forward Operating Base Bullard in southern Afghanistan.

"Everyone dies for their own reasons but it's sad to think that our friends, the troops, have given their lives for something we're not going to see through."

Other soldiers agreed. They said they feared few officials in the Pentagon understand the reality on the ground.

From the front lines, the U.S. backing of the Karzai government, widely seen as riddled with corruption by the Afghans living in local villages, has given the Taliban a position of power in villages while undercutting U.S. moral authority.

Corrupt government officials have made "it impossible for us to trust anyone," said elder Sha Barar, from the village of Sha Joy. The people of that village and many others profess fear of the Taliban, and recount tales of brutality and wanton killings by the Taliban and their sympathizers. But they don't see the Karzai government as a positive force in their lives.

Karzai said that talks need to continue with the Taliban "at a fixed address and with a more open agenda to tell us how to bring peace to Afghanistan and Pakistan."

But U.S. troops and Marines interviewed during the past month in Afghanistan question what negotiations would really mean, to both them and the Afghan people. And they almost universally believe that negotiating would be a mistake before achieving decisive gains they believe are attainable once oppressive rules of engagement are relaxed.

"What does it mean if we give in to the Taliban? They are the enemy," Brooks said. "This place is going to be a safe haven for terrorists again. The government doesn't care about the sacrifices already made. As far as the mission goes, I want to see these kids go to school and have a future but not at the expense of my friends -- not anymore."

Obama

10/1/2010

Source

Obama and Petraeus: A wary relationship
Dan Balz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, October 1, 2010; 12:03 PM


Everyone believes the most important relationship in Washington next year will be between President Obama and House Republican Leader John Boehner. A case can be made that equally important will be the relationship between the president and his commander in Afghanistan, Army Gen. David H. Petraeus.

Bob Woodward's powerful new book, "Obama's Wars," underscores the delicacy of the relationship between Obama and Petraeus by highlighting the tensions that have long existed between the two ambitious and competitive men.

In Petraeus, Obama is dealing with perhaps the most recognized and acclaimed general of this generation, a skillful bureaucratic infighter who also has an almost unique ability among senior military officers to communicate outside normal channels through the media.

Woodward offers this example. At one point during the Afghan review, Petraeus awoke to a newspaper column critical of the counterinsurgency strategy. To counter the criticism, he phoned another columnist to make the case for it. "Obama and several of his staffers were furious," Woodward writes. "It angered Obama that Petraeus was publicly lobbying and prejudging a presidential decision."

Obama and Petraeus have dealt with one another warily since the president was a candidate. Obama was a vocal opponent of Iraq war, opposed Bush's troop surge policy and favored a fixed timetable for withdrawing troops. Petraeus was seen as Bush's favorite general and the architect of the strategy employed under the surge policy.

Their first meeting came in the July 2008 when Obama was visiting Iraq as a candidate. They were photographed together in a helicopter. Both were smiling, but their meeting was a standoff. Petraeus made the case for the surge and for flexibility on withdrawing troops. Obama said that, if he became president, he would deal with Iraq in a broader context, meaning he would listen to Petraeus's advice but not necessarily take it.

Both can claim they got their way on Iraq. The surge was judged a success, adding to Petraeus's prestige. Obama has been grudging about acknowledging that he misjudged its potential to reduce the violence. But Obama was able to announce in August that he had kept his campaign promise to remove all combat forces.

They are now comrades in arms in Afghanistan, looking toward a July 2011 deadline that is supposed to begin the drawdown of U.S. forces there. The coming year could bring a test of wills between a strong-minded president determined to avoid a lengthy commitment in a war that is already nine years old and a strong-minded general who does not want to be rushed by deadlines or timetables to accomplish what he has set out to do.

In Iraq, Petraeus was the face of the surge policy, in large part because no one else in the government at the time, especially Bush, had the public credibility to do so. It's doubtful Obama wants Petraeus to be so dominant a figure with regard to Afghanistan.

That Obama and Petraeus find themselves in this position is, of course, an accident of history. Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal was to have been the commander in Afghanistan, with Petraeus commander of the U.S. Central Command. But damaging comments by the general and his aides in a damaging Rolling Stone article forced Obama to relieve him of his command.

Obama turned to Petraeus to take over in Afghanistan, in essence asking the general to take a demotion for the good of the country. It was regarded as a brilliant choice at the time and quickly doused a potentially larger controversy over Obama's relationship with the military.

But the irony was not lost on some of the president's closest advisers that, while Petraeus was the ideal person to replace McChrystal he could present a more formidable obstacle to Obama in his desire to make next summer a genuine turning point in the U.S. mission n Afghanistan.

The damning portrait Woodward draws in his book is of a White House team constantly at odds with the military and a president repeatedly frustrated by what he and his advisers saw as the military's effort to thwart his requests.

Obama's ultimate decision called for a major escalation in the U.S. effort, sending 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan. At the time, the number of troops was close enough to the 40,000 originally requested that it looked like Obama had yielded to the generals. Woodward's book helps explain why, at the time, White House officials regarded the decision as the president resisting efforts at railroading by the generals.

The White House and the Pentagon have sent conflicting signals about the July 2011 deadline. Military officials, including Petraeus, have suggested there is considerable wiggle room. The president and Vice President Biden have tried repeatedly to suggest there will be big changes starting next July.

Obama and his team know that the Democratic base is already unhappy with the commitment to Afghanistan. What they need from Petraeus is both demonstrable success in a war that has not gone well and the assurance that he can vouch for the start of a genuine handoff to the Afghans. What is not known is what assurances Petraeus may have asked for in terms of making the decision as conditions-based as he likes.

Bush administration officials came to regard Petraeus not only as skilled inside player but ultimately a team player as well, despite his reputation for attracting attention to himself. That would suggest that come next summer he will find a way to satisfy his commander-in-chief - but perhaps not before another tense struggle with the White House.