AmeriCAN-DO Attitude

Are you an AmeriCAN or an AmeriCAN'T?

After Four Years in Iraq, What Have We Gained?

The following excellent article expresses values, principles and an outlook that Modern Liberals, Leftists, so-called “Progressives”, Democrats and Democrat-voters just cannot understand. They only see the negative in everything. They only can be pessimistic. They only see wrong and evil and negative in everything about America.

Via Curt at Flopping Aces: The Committment to Build a Democracy

Excellent article in the Army Times today by a Navy lieutenant named Jason Nichols and Dave Thul, a staff sergeant. Both currently serving in Iraq:

It takes commitment to build democracy

After four years in Iraq, what have we gained?

As we enter the fifth year of this conflict, much of the talk is of loss, but it is important to understand what we’ve reaped from our efforts. We should honor the price paid by acknowledging the accomplishments and opportunities created by those who have sacrificed and suffered. These insights will encourage us to complete what was begun.

First, we have prevented a second Sept. 11-style attack. As 9/11 becomes history rather than memory for many people, they forget that nearly every terrorism and foreign policy analyst predicted another attack within a few years as a near certainty, and thought a nuclear attack very likely. Few predict that now, and it is because of our actions in Iraq. By bringing the fight to the Middle East, we’ve occupied not only al-Qaida but the funds and manpower of other extremist financiers and planners. It is much easier, and more militarily sound, to defend your country by taking the fight to the enemy than it is to turn your own society into an armed camp. Both the military and the American public can be justifiably proud of this accomplishment.

Second, and far more importantly, we’ve enacted a strategy to defeat the source of the threat. That source is Islamic fascists and their oppression of their own people through dictatorial governments. Had we stopped after Afghanistan, that source would have been untouched. Lack of freedom brings poverty, and poverty brings desperation and hate. Dictators use the West as a scapegoat, blaming us for their people’s poverty to help keep their citizens from rebelling. They warp religious teachings and combine them with this desperation to create weapons out of naive young men with no opportunities for a happy life. Iraq offers a way out for the entire region.

Democracy in Iraq will bring freedom and, in time, wealth and opportunity. Iraq’s location is strategically ideal, bordering nearly all other Middle East countries with varying degrees of dictatorship. The young people in those countries have seen the Iraqis voting, and in time they will begin to ask, “Why not us?” As Iraq’s prosperity grows, neighboring citizens will demand equal freedoms.

The extremists know this, and they fear it. They fear their own people learning that there is an alternative to poverty and dogma. Make no mistake: They have made Iraq a front line in this war because they are afraid. That is a real gain we should acknowledge and celebrate at the same time we honor any losses. Finally, while we are bringing fear to those who would use it against civilians, we are freeing our own civilians from fear. Most Americans do not feel threatened by the fascists that send young men to die here in Iraq, and that is a good thing. We should be glad that our own countrymen are so unaffected by this war that they question its necessity, because it means we’re doing the job they pay us to do on the front line.

Those of us currently serving have a duty to inform the public on what we are doing, the importance of staying until the mission is complete, and the disastrous consequences if they withdraw us prematurely. One means at our disposal is the Appeal for Courage at We would ask all of you to sign it to communicate our desire to stay in Iraq until the Iraqi military and police are capable of defending their own country. At that time, there will be a free country where none has ever existed. We will be able to look at that new democracy and proudly say, “See that? Those people are free because of us. We helped create that.”

This anniversary is a time when we should recognize that we have gained much. By remaining steadfast, we will gain much more.

— Jason Nichols and Dave Thul

Nichols is a Navy lieutenant serving as an information professional with Multi-National Forces-Iraq in Baghdad. His e-mail address is Thul is a staff sergeant with the Minnesota National Guard; he is serving with the 34th Infantry Division, conducting convoy operations from Asad, Iraq. His e-mail address is

The cut n run Democrats and Republicans see none of this. Instead they see a situation that they just want to be over. It’s been six years since 9/11 and it’s now a distant memory, no more attacks against our country so why should we worry? None of these yahoo’s can see past the next day, let alone years from now. Having a friend smack dab in the middle of the enemies region is a priceless commodity. Not to mention that once a whole region understands that Democracy can work in their country then the people inside those countries will slowly demand freedom, which encourages prosperity, which will take the hatred and bomb vest off of that middle eastern young man and put a suit on him instead.

Why is it that our leaders (50 of them anyways) cannot see long term? Cannot see the good we have done. Cannot see the accomplishments we have accomplished with a lower casualty rate then I nor anyone else could of dreamed of before we invaded.

It’s all politics baby…. the security and welfare of this great country be damned.

March 29, 2007 , 3:08AM Posted by | Afghanistan, American History, Anti-War Groups, Appeal for Courage, Democrats, Dhimmitude, Iraq, Islam, Jihad, Leftist Groups, Military, Military History, Terrorism, War Effort in Iraq | Comments Off on After Four Years in Iraq, What Have We Gained?

Soldiers Express Their Disgust with the Democrats

Army Veteran Matt Burden at Blackfive solicited feedback from military members in Iraq as well as their families to find out what they thought about the Democrats’ working to push through their Surrender Bill. The results were not suprising. The Democrats have succeeded in completely emboldening our enemies and completely demoralizing our military. But of course, we shouldn’t question their patriotism, and they, of course, “support the troops!”

Uh huh.

Via Matt at Blackfive: Troop Reaction to the Democrats

Previously, I had asked for and received a lot of email from troops around the world (but mostly in Iraq and Afghanistan) about the Democrat resolutions for retreat…especially, in the face of the surge and a new Commanding General that the Democrats unamimously approved of…

I haven’t received one troop email that supports the Democrat position of cut and run.

From a soldier just returned to Ft. Hood from Iraq:

A lot of the guys in my unit can’t stand the weak, whiny, nonsense that is comming from Congress. I know it makes me sick to think these people get… to run our great country into the ground.

And from Camp Victory, anger:

I am in Camp Victory… I was in Tallil, and Balad in ’03/’04… I am sickened by the treasonous actions of the Democrats. I believe that they should consider themselves lucky that the Armed Forces, that they so readily give up for sacrifice, don’t turn their weapons on the most dangerous of our enemies in this conflict.

From Kuwait:

As a sailor in Kuwait (it sounds weird to me too), I just want to tell you that those cowardly, greedy, short-sighted, spineless pieces of you know what that voted for this abortion of bill, should all be forced to come here for tour, just for a reality check. How can they complain about the Iraqi government not STEPPING UP, when the Congress is all but falling down! Talk about factions and greed! I can’t believe the pork in that bill. If such an arbitrary date is not harmful, and we are leaving regardless of conditions, WHY NOT cut off funding for the Iraq campaign, and have us home tomorrow? Oh, right, they would look bad. The election news wouldn’t hide it. Oh, yeah, election…….. They believe that THEY will be in charge in November….. God forbid that there are any messy international problems, especially ones that they VOTED FOR AND AUTHORIZED!

What’s worse, however, is the reaction of their parents. I’ve received a lot of email from parents who describe heart-breaking phone calls with their sons and daughters in Iraq. They are counseling these young Americans who are now questioning why they are fighting for a group of people that are duplicitous, spineless, and certainly not worthy of them. IMHO, if you want to talk about damaging morale, this could be the final straw.

Be sure to visit Victory Caucus every day over the next week. We’re working on some things and we’ll need your help to get them done.

March 29, 2007 , 3:06AM Posted by | Democrats, Dhimmitude, Iraq, Islam, Jihad, Leftist Groups, Media Bias, Military, Terrorism, War Effort in Iraq | Comments Off on Soldiers Express Their Disgust with the Democrats

The Media Lied, People Died!

I originally posted this on November 17, 2005.


Well, I have found the reason why most teenie-boppers today are ignorant of the TRUTH about the connections between Saddam Hussein/Iraq and Osama bin Laden/al Qaeda: they were between the ages of 7 and 12 when the media was actually reporting on these connections. And considering most get indoctrinated with liberal garbage in today’s public schools, whose teachers have probably been brainwashing them with liberal, hate-Bush garbage for the past 6 years, I suppose I should take off the label of traitor I apply to them and simply consider them ignorant fools. Ignorant because they simply do not know the truth, but fools because they seem to claim to be highly intelligent know-it-alls whenever they go around spouting off about how “Bush Lied!” and “everyone knows the Bush Administration was full of sh*t”, when in fact all they are doing is regurgitating lies spewed by the hate-Bush crowd. I guess being hateful and looking foolish is popular among the nation’s youth these days. Who knows.

All I know is that if these people were to simply go to this website, they would see that the media was reporting, with full confidence and assurance, that there was a working relationship between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda. Don’t believe me? Check it out for yourself. The same media outlets now all regurtitating the “Bush Lied’ mantra spewing out of the lying mouths of the Democrats, Liberals and idiot little teenie boppers, were all reporting the threat of the alliance between bin Laden and Saddam Hussein:

Unmentioned by ABC, how maybe the Bush administration believed there was a bin Laden-Saddam connection because they believed ABC News. In a story aired in a prime time news magazine show on Thursday, January 14, 1999, then-ABC News correspondent Sheila MacVicar reported how a few months after the embassy bombings in Africa and U.S. retaliation against Sudan, bin Laden “reaches out to his friends in Iraq and Sudan.” MacVicar trumpeted how “ABC News has learned that in December, an Iraqi intelligence chief, named Farouk Hijazi, now Iraq’s ambassador to Turkey, made a secret trip to Afghanistan to meet with bin Laden. Three intelligence agencies tell ABC News they cannot be certain what was discussed, but almost certainly, they say, bin Laden has been told he would be welcome in Baghdad.”

I tracked down that ABC News story after seeing it referred to in an excerpt from a new book by Stephen Hayes, “The Connection: How al Qaeda’s Collaboration with Saddam Hussein has Endangered America,” published in the June 7 Weekly Standard. Hayes cited similar news stories in Newsweek, the AP and NPR, in the 1998-99 range, which assumed bin Laden and Saddam Hussein were cooperative.

The Weekly Standard titled its excerpt, “The Connection: Not so long ago, the ties between Iraq and al Qaeda were conventional wisdom. The conventional wisdom was right.” In the book, Hayes recited numerous pieces of evidence of how Iraq and al-Qaeda had a mutually beneficial relationship. Here’s an excerpt from the Weekly Standard’s book excerpt in which Hayes recounted how the media assumed such a relationship, based on information provided by Clinton administration officials:

There was a time not long ago when the conventional wisdom skewed heavily toward a Saddam-al Qaeda links. In 1998 and early 1999, the Iraq-al Qaeda connection was widely reported in the American and international media. Former intelligence officers and government officials speculated about the relationship and its dangerous implications for the world. The information in the news reports came from foreign and domestic intelligence services. It was featured in mainstream media outlets including international wire services, prominent newsweeklies, and network radio and television broadcasts.

Newsweek magazine ran an article in its January 11, 1999, issue headed “Saddam Bin Laden?” “Here’s what is known so far,” it read:

“Saddam Hussein, who has a long record of supporting terrorism, is trying to rebuild his intelligence network overseas — assets that would allow him to establish a terrorism network. U.S. sources say he is reaching out to Islamic terrorists, including some who may be linked to Osama bin Laden, the wealthy Saudi exile accused of masterminding the bombing of two U.S. embassies in Africa last summer.”

….NPR reporter Mike Shuster interviewed Vincent Cannistraro, former head of the CIA’s counterterrorism center, and offered this report:

“Iraq’s contacts with bin Laden go back some years, to at least 1994, when, according to one U.S. government source, Hijazi met him when bin Laden lived in Sudan. According to Cannistraro, Iraq invited bin Laden to live in Baghdad to be nearer to potential targets of terrorist attack in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait….Some experts believe bin Laden might be tempted to live in Iraq because of his reported desire to obtain chemical or biological weapons. CIA Director George Tenet referred to that in recent testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee when he said bin Laden was planning additional attacks on American targets.”

By mid-February 1999, journalists did not even feel the need to qualify these claims of an Iraq-al Qaeda relationship. An Associated Press dispatch that ran in the Washington Post ended this way: “The Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has offered asylum to bin Laden, who openly supports Iraq against Western powers.”

Where did journalists get the idea that Saddam and bin Laden might be coordinating efforts? Among other places, from high-ranking Clinton administration officials.

In the spring of 1998 — well before the U.S. embassy bombings in East Africa — the Clinton administration indicted Osama bin Laden. The indictment, unsealed a few months later, prominently cited al Qaeda’s agreement to collaborate with Iraq on weapons of mass destruction. The Clinton Justice Department had been concerned about negative public reaction to its potentially capturing bin Laden without “a vehicle for extradition,” official paperwork charging him with a crime. It was “not an afterthought” to include the al Qaeda-Iraq connection in the indictment, says an official familiar with the deliberations. “It couldn’t have gotten into the indictment unless someone was willing to testify to it under oath.” The Clinton administration’s indictment read unequivocally:

“Al Qaeda reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the Government of Iraq.”

Hayes also cited a January 1999 ABC story and, utilizing the MRC video archive, I tracked it down. The above-quoted MacVicar piece aired Thursday, January 14, 1999 on the short-lived ABC prime time magazine program, Crime and Justice. This one-topic edition, which featured John Miller’s interview in Afghanistan with Osama bin Laden, carried the title, “Target America: The Terrorist War.” Anchor Cynthia McFadden’s plug for the hour predicted the danger ahead: “Tonight, an exclusive ABC News interview with the man who declared war on the United States: Terrorist leader Osama bin Laden. His loyal foot soldiers are even here in the U.S., hidden among us, awaiting his call to deadly action.”

Sheila MacVicar, who a short time later jumped to CNN, and I believe she has recently departed from CNN, provided an overview of the bin Laden-Hussein relationship:

“Saddam Hussein has a long history of harboring terrorists. Carlos the Jackal, Abu Nidal, Abu Abbas, the most notorious terrorists of their era, all found shelter and support at one time in Baghdad. Intelligence sources say bin Laden’s long relationship with the Iraqis began as he helped Sudan’s fundamentalist government in their efforts to acquire weapons of mass destruction.

“Three weeks after the bombing [by the U.S. in Sudan], on August 31, bin Laden reaches out to his friends in Iraq and Sudan. [over video of Iraqi man cheek to cheek with Sudanese men] Iraq’s Vice President arrives in Khartoum to show his support for the Sudanese after the U.S. attack. ABC News has learned that during these meetings, senior Sudanese officials, acting on behalf of bin Laden, ask if Saddam Hussein would grant him asylum.

“Iraq was, indeed, interested. ABC News has learned that in December, an Iraqi intelligence chief, named Farouk Hijazi, now Iraq’s ambassador to Turkey, made a secret trip to Afghanistan to meet with bin Laden. Three intelligence agencies tell ABC News they cannot be certain what was discussed, but almost certainly, they say, bin Laden has been told he would be welcome in Baghdad.”

March 29, 2007 , 2:59AM Posted by | Abu Nidal, American History, Carlos the Jackal, CNN, Democrats, Dhimmitude, Iraq, Islam, Jihad, Media Bias, Military History, Muslims, Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, Salman Pac, Terrorism, War Effort in Iraq, WMDs | Comments Off on The Media Lied, People Died!