The American Combat Mission In Iraq Is Over

Hey, Obama said it, so it must be true, right?

So, what’s the difference between an old fashioned combat brigade and a newfangled “advise and assist” brigade? Apparently, not much, besides the tortured semantics spewing from Obama’s enormous piehole.

U.S. soldiers help repel deadly attack on Iraq army headquarters

American soldiers helped Iraqi troops battle insurgents in downtown Baghdad on Sunday, repelling a major attack in the heart of the capital five days after President Obama declared an end to U.S. combat operations.

At least 18 people were killed and 39 injured in the midday attack in which a group of suicide bombers and gunmen attempted to storm the Iraqi army’s east Baghdad headquarters, located in a former Ministry of Defense building in a busy market district alongside the Tigris River.

2 U.S. soldiers killed in Iraq

Two American soldiers were killed and nine were injured Tuesday when a man wearing an Iraqi army uniform opened fire on them in an Iraqi commando compound in the province of Salahuddin, an attack that highlighted the danger U.S. troops continue to face in Iraq despite the formal end of combat operations announced by President Obama last week.

The soldiers were members of a security detail guarding a U.S. company commander who was meeting with Iraqi security forces, according to a statement issued by the U.S. military. The military said it wasn’t clear whether the assailant was an Iraqi soldier, but Iraqi and Kurdish officials said the shooting occurred after an altercation between the American soldiers and a Kurdish Iraqi soldier.

See also:
US Forces engage in response to Iraq attack
Al-Qaida group claims attack killing 12 in Baghdad
Gunmen attack Iraq army base, kill 12
Attack Shows Lasting Threat to U.S. in Iraq
First U.S. troops killed in Iraq after Obama declared U.S. combat mission over
Iraqi soldier kills 2 U.S. soldiers
Iraqi Kills 2 U.S. Soldiers, Wounds 9
US soldiers killed in Iraq
U.S. troops in Iraq go from shock and awe to ‘advise and assist’
First U.S. Advise and Assist Brigade Arrives In Iraq Under New Dawn
Five myths about the Iraq troop withdrawal
Journalists face challenge: Is it really ‘end of combat’ in Iraq?
A Rose by Any Other Name (Make that A Combat Brigade by any Other Name…)

Now, does all this sound like U.S. combat operations ii Iraq are over? Simply renaming combat brigades as “advise and assist” brigades so that Obama can claim that the American combat mission in Iraq is over is nothing more than a cheap political stunt that does nothing to change the literal ground truth. For the 50,000 U.S. troops left in Iraq, combat is certainly not over, no matter what lies Obama tells.

/then again, it’s hardly surprising, this is the same Clown Car Club of an Obama administration that insists on pretending there is no war on terror and no terrorism by euphemistically relabeling these concrete, real world concepts as “overseas contingency operations” and “man caused disasters”

Obama Plans To Invade Pakistan

Mister Nobel Peace Prize winner is apparently preparing to keep one of his campaign promises and launch “overseas contingency operations” on Pakistani soil.

Options studied for a possible Pakistan strike

The U.S. military is reviewing options for a unilateral strike in Pakistan in the event that a successful attack on American soil is traced to the country’s tribal areas, according to senior military officials.

Ties between the alleged Times Square bomber, Faisal Shahzad, and elements of the Pakistani Taliban have sharpened the Obama administration’s need for retaliatory options, the officials said. They stressed that a U.S. reprisal would be contemplated only under extreme circumstances, such as a catastrophic attack that leaves President Obama convinced that the ongoing campaign of CIA drone strikes is insufficient.

“Planning has been reinvigorated in the wake of Times Square,” one of the officials said.

At the same time, the administration is trying to deepen ties to Pakistan’s intelligence officials in a bid to head off any attack by militant groups. The United States and Pakistan have recently established a joint military intelligence center on the outskirts of the northwestern city of Peshawar, and are in negotiations to set up another one near Quetta, the Pakistani city where the Afghan Taliban is based, according to the U.S. military officials. They and other officials spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity surrounding U.S. military and intelligence activities in Pakistan.

The “fusion centers” are meant to bolster Pakistani military operations by providing direct access to U.S. intelligence, including real-time video surveillance from drones controlled by the U.S. Special Operations Command, the officials said. But in an acknowledgment of the continuing mistrust between the two governments, the officials added that both sides also see the centers as a way to keep a closer eye on one another, as well as to monitor military operations and intelligence activities in insurgent areas.

Obama said during his campaign for the presidency that he would be willing to order strikes in Pakistan, and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said in a television interview after the Times Square attempt that “if, heaven forbid, an attack like this that we can trace back to Pakistan were to have been successful, there would be very severe consequences.”

Obama dispatched his national security adviser, James L. Jones, and CIA Director Leon Panetta to Islamabad this month to deliver a similar message to Pakistani officials, including President Asif Ali Zardari and the military chief, Gen. Ashfaq Kiyani.

Jones and Panetta also presented evidence gathered by U.S. law enforcement and intelligence agencies that Shahzad received significant support from the Pakistani Taliban.

The U.S. options for potential retaliatory action rely mainly on air and missile strikes, but could also employ small teams of U.S. Special Operations troops already positioned along the border with Afghanistan. One of the senior military officials said plans for military strikes in Pakistan have been revised significantly over the past several years, moving away from a “large, punitive response” to more measured plans meant to deliver retaliatory blows against specific militant groups.

See also:
Report: US Preparing for Retaliatory Strike if Terror Attack Traced to Pakistan
US mulls unilateral Pakistan raids
U.S. studies options for possible Pakistan attack: report
US Army reviewing options for ‘unilateral’ strike on Pakistan
US develops plans for unilateral strike on Pakistan
US Preps a Retaliatory Hit on Pakistan
Airstrike on civilians blamed on mistakes…Pakistani Taliban could face retaliation if they strike the US

If you’re willing to put American boots on Pakistani ground in response to an attack on the United States you should also be willing to do the same as part of the war in Afghanistan.

/you can’t beat the Taliban unless you ultimately take the fight to where they live, in their Pakistani sanctuaries

National Security Policy In Wonderland

Jihad, what jihad?

EDITORIAL: Obama’s jihad on ‘jihad’

President Obama’s latest strategic innovation in the war on terrorism is to ignore jihad and maybe it will go away.

The Obama administration is removing terms such as “jihad” and “Islamic extremism” from the U.S. National Security Strategy in an attempt to convince Muslim countries that America doesn’t view them solely through the lens of counterterrorism. It’s reasonable to look beyond terrorism in developing relationships with Islamic states. Our assistance programs are based on humanitarian motives, for example, so they need not explicitly draw links between promoting good will and hopefully making it less likely that people will fly aircraft into our buildings.

But the National Security Strategy is not some kind of outreach initiative, it is the framing document for America’s global safety. The United States cannot effectively combat the root causes of Islamic extremism by ignoring them. The war on terror – rather, the “overseas contingency operation,” in O Force terminology – won’t be effective if this country overlooks the nature of the enemy and his motives. The U.S. strategic blueprint is not the proper place for a public-relations stunt.

Even the Muslim majority states in question understand the religious component of terrorism as a motivator, recruiting tool and strategic road map. They are threatened by Islamic extremism even more than the United States and have no problem describing the threat by its true nature, which must be understood if it is to be defeated.

The most troubling signal is the one being sent through the bureaucracy that any thoughtful discussion of Islamic radicalism and the global threat it poses will be hazardous to one’s career. Analyses of the extremist Muslim threat will be increasingly deleted from briefing papers, assessments and planning documents. Those who continue to spread the alarm will be marginalized and ignored. Such sanitizing may please the White House, but it’s likely to put the United States in more danger as threats that should have been detected in advance slip by because officials have been trained not to look for them.

See also:
Obama administration removing terms like ‘Islamic extremism’ from national security document
World must not ignore terrorism’s religious aspect
Will White House Tone Down Terror Terminology?
Obama moves to de-link terrorism from Islam
Obama talks less of terror in outreach to Muslims
Mush From the Wimp: Obama, Orwell and National-Security Psychobabble
War By Euphemism
Obama Administration Declares Victory In War On Semantics

Yeah, just ignore reality and it’ll just go away. We’re through the looking glass on national defense here people.

/gee, what could Obama possibly do to make America any more vulnerable to a catastrophic attack?

Man Caused Disaster Calling

/Michael Ramirez

Domestic Contingency Operation

Remember when the Obama administration replaced the phrase “global war on terror” with the ridiculously politically correct euphemism “overseas contingency operation”? Well, here’s a counterterrorism operation that could have occurred anywhere in Afghanistan or Iraq, but it didn’t, this counterterrorism operation (but don’t dare call it that) took place today in Dearborn, Michigan, USA.

Detroit mosque leader killed in FBI raids

The leader of a Detroit mosque who allegedly espoused violence and separatism was shot and killed Wednesday in an FBI gun battle at a Dearborn warehouse.

Luqman Ameen Abdullah, imam of the Masjid Al-Haqq mosque in Detroit, was being arrested on a raft of federal charges including conspiracy, receipt of stolen goods, and firearms offenses.

Charges were also filed against 11 of Abdullah’s followers. Eight were in custody Wednesday night awaiting detention hearings today; three remained at large.

A federal complaint filed Wednesday identified Abdullah, 53, also known as Christopher Thomas, as “a highly placed leader of a nationwide radical fundamentalist Sunni group.” His black Muslim group calls itself “Ummah,” or the brotherhood, and wants to establish a separate state within the United States governed by Sharia law, Interim U.S. Attorney Terrence Berg and Andrew Arena, FBI special agent in charge in Detroit, said in a joint statement.

“He regularly preaches anti-government and anti-law enforcement rhetoric,” an FBI agent wrote in an affidavit. “Abdullah and his followers have trained regularly in the use of firearms, and continue to train in martial arts and sword fighting.”

The Ummah is headed nationally by Jamil Abdullah Al-Amin, formerly known as H. Rap Brown, who is serving a state sentence for the murder of two police officers in Georgia.

Early Wednesday afternoon, FBI agents and local police from the Joint Terrorism Task Force surrounded a warehouse and trucking firm on Miller Road near Michigan Avenue where Abdullah and four of his followers were hiding, said Special Agent Sandra Berchtold, a spokeswoman for the FBI in Detroit.

When agents entered the warehouse, four of the men obeyed orders to surrender but Abdullah opened fire and was shot to death, Berchtold said. An FBI dog was also shot and killed, she said.

Through a 45-page complaint filed in the case alleges Abdullah “calls his followers to an offensive jihad” and preaches that every Muslim should “have a weapon and should not be scared to use their weapon when needed,” charges in the case to not include terrorism or national security crimes.

So, Abdullah and his nationwide group Ummah advocate violent “offensive jihad” against the United States to establish a separate state governed by Sharia law, they engage in active weapons acquisition and training and encourage every Muslim to have a weapon and be prepared to use it in furtherance of the jihad, and today he kills an FBI dog while shooting at law enforcement. Phew, I’m sure relieved that there was no no need to file terrorism or national security crime charges against anyone in this case. That might look like we’re acknowledging that we have some type of larger problem with Muslim jihadis within our own borders.

See also:
Detroit Imam Killed, Six Arrested in an FBI Raid
Feds: Radical Islam group leader killed in raid
F.B.I. Raid Kills Islamic Group Leader in Michigan
Feds: Leader of radical Islam group killed in raid
Leader Of Islamic Group Killed In Raid
Leader of Detroit mosque killed in FBI raid
Radical Islamic leader killed in FBI raid in Detroit
FBI kills Islamist preacher during shootout in latest terror raid
Feds: Leader of radical Islam group killed in raid
Photographer attacked at mosque whose imam killed
Photographer from the News assaulted
Building Islam in Detroit :: Masjid al Haqq
H. Rap Brown

/the global Muslim Ummah and Jihad doesn’t recognize national borders or governments, the war overseas is the same as the war at home

War By Euphemism

I [expletive deleted] you not.

‘Global War On Terror’ Is Given New Name

The Obama administration appears to be backing away from the phrase “global war on terror,” a signature rhetorical legacy of its predecessor.

In a memo e-mailed this week to Pentagon staff members, the Defense Department’s office of security review noted that “this administration prefers to avoid using the term ‘Long War’ or ‘Global War on Terror’ [GWOT.] Please use ‘Overseas Contingency Operation.’ ”

The memo said the direction came from the Office of Management and Budget, the executive-branch agency that reviews the public testimony of administration officials before it is delivered.

Not so, said Kenneth Baer, an OMB spokesman.

“There was no memo, no guidance,” Baer said yesterday. “This is the opinion of a career civil servant.”

Coincidentally or not, senior administration officials had been publicly using the phrase “overseas contingency operations” in a war context for roughly a month before the e-mail was sent.

Peter Orszag, the OMB director, turned to it Feb. 26 when discussing Obama’s budget proposal at a news conference: “The budget shows the combined cost of operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and any other overseas contingency operations that may be necessary.”

And in congressional testimony last week, Craig W. Duehring, assistant secretary of the Air Force for manpower, said, “Key battlefield monetary incentives has allowed the Air Force to meet the demands of overseas contingency operations even as requirements continue to grow.”

Monday’s Pentagon e-mail was prompted by congressional testimony that Lt. Gen. John W. Bergman, head of the Marine Forces Reserve, intends to give today. The memo advised Pentagon personnel to “please pass this onto your speechwriters and try to catch this change before statements make it to OMB.”

See also:
The war on terror, RIP
Obama Renames the War on Terror
The ‘War on Terror’ is Over! Well, Sorta…
It’s not a War On Terror, it’s an “Overseas Contingency Operation”
Overseas Contingency Operation Is The New Global War on Terror
Children In Charge

What a novel war strategy, winning by redefining the conflict and recasting it as something benign. WTF?

/henceforth, al Qaeda and the Taliban shall be known as overly playful Jihad kittens