Duh: Violence in Iraq up after US Exit

Like this wasn't predictable. Obama's decision to pull our troops out of Iraq in the days before Christmas was a direct appeal to his far left base for 2012. It was also made more politically palatable because of the exploding national debt, for which he is largely responsible. The consequence of his decision, however, has been increased violence in Iraq.

Via Washington Post:

Violence appears to have increased sharply since U.S. troops left Iraq a month ago, as insurgents have unleashed a wave of furious bombings targeting Baghdad neighborhoods, Shiite pilgrims and police facilities in Sunni areas.

The deadly attacks have roots not only in the troops’ departure but also in a domestic political crisis that erupted in its wake. Shiite and Sunni leaders have squared off in a power struggle, one that analysts say insurgents are trying to turn into a full-scale civil war. How the politicians handle their own mess, and the attacks, will determine Iraq’s ability to hold itself together.

There are multiple indications that Iraq's Shiite government is closely aligned with Iran. Iraq's Transportation Minister, Hadi al-Ameri, has a long history of allegiance to Iran. Here he is bowing to and kissing the hand of the Ayatollah:



Back to the Post article:

U.S. officials never promised the transition would be easy. At a ceremony in Baghdad two days before the last troops left, Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta sounded a note of caution.

“Let me be clear, Iraq will be tested in the days ahead — by terrorism, by those who would seek to divide, by economic and social issues, by the demands of democracy itself,” he said.


Even as Panetta was speaking, security forces loyal to Maliki, a Shiite, were moving to arrest Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi, a Sunni, on charges that he used his bodyguards to run a terrorism squad. Hashimi fled to a semiautonomous region of Kurdistan, where leaders provided refuge even as Maliki demanded his return to Baghdad to face trial. At the same time, Sunni leaders walked out of parliament and boycotted cabinet positions to protest what they said was Maliki’s move to create a Shiite-controlled dictatorship.

Making this more noteworthy is that Shiite al-Ameri is a confirmed terrorist, yet he is in Iraq's cabinet while the Sunni Vice President had to flee to avoid arrest.

Such things make the words of US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta one month before the Iraq pullout quite puzzling; they should prompt some major head-scratching:

"My view is that the region largely rejects Iran and its intentions. And I think Iraq is at the top of that list."

Again, in light of al-Ameri's prominence in the Iraqi government (he was given the red carpet treatment by the Oval Office on December 12th) and the arrest warrant of the Sunni Vice President, Panetta's statements to Senate Armed Services Committee one month before the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq are belied by the facts.

h/t Hapblog

Video: Did Sarah Palin Endorse Newt?

Todd Palin endorsed Newt Gingrich last week, which gives people even more reason to think Sarah Palin did the same thing while appearing on Hannity's television show last night. So, did she endorse Newt?

Not really. If you listen to what she's saying here, it has more to do with wanting to keep Romney from pulling away than it does supporting Gingrich. Pundits far and wide are making the claim that if Romney wins in South Carolina, the nomination is his. If that's true, he can start tacking toward the left, which is where he's most comfortable.

What Palin is saying here is that South Carolinians who are undecided should vote for Gingrich, not because he's necessarily the best candidate but because it will buy the nation more time to shop.

There are a couple of things we CAN glean from Palin's comments here, though. First, I think it's safe to say that she's not much of a Romney fan. Second, she probably sees Newt as being more electable than Santorum. Then again, Newt is polling ahead of Santorum in South Carolina, so her motives may be 100% tactical in nature - keep the primaries going.

If you extrapolate this strategy to Virginia, where Paul and Romney will be the only two on the ballot, supporters of Gingrich and Santorum would be best served by voting for Paul in that state. It would keep Romney in check while keeping the not-Romney candidates in the race.

There are three factions in the Republican race right now - the establishment candidate (Romney), the libertarian candidate (Paul), and the anti-establishment candidate (Gingrich, Santorum, Perry).

Palin actually makes a good argument for South Carolinians who support Santorum or Perry to vote for Gingrich. If Romney wins this Saturday's primary, all three men could essentially be gone. If Gingrich wins, Santorum may still be alive (Perry will likely exit on Sunday either way).

Via Daily Caller:

Is 'Gradualism' the Biggest Islamic Threat to the West?

Call it the Islamic version of progressivism, incremental nudges that change a culture and society until the point of no return is reached. Yet another example that shows the left has much in common with Islam. Consider the tactics of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and those of al-Qaeda. Both are essentially Muslim Brotherhood groups who share the same goal - an Islamic caliphate. However, CAIR has been far more effective because it works within the framework of a political system while al-Qaeda uses bombings and terrorism.

Via Ryan Mauro at FSM:

One of the mistakes that the West makes is that it doesn’t listen to what the Islamists are saying. If only we listened, we could hear their strategy. On November 20, Sheikh Yousef al-Qaradawi, the top Muslim Brotherhood theologian and arguably the most influential Sunni cleric in the world, called on Muslims to embrace “gradualism.”

The doctrine of gradualism is successful because we fail to appreciate the ability of the Islamists to be skillful political strategists. Gradualism is an intelligent form of jihad based on pragmatism, patience, long-term planning and self-evaluation. The Islamists evaluate their performance and recalibrate their strategy accordingly. The West misinterprets this as being “moderate,” when in reality, not all Islamists are as reckless as Al-Qaeda.

“Gradualism in applying the Sharia is a wise requirement to follow,” Qaradawi declared, stating that Mohammed followed it. 

The Islamists, especially the Muslim Brotherhood, have always worked in stages. In December, the Brotherhood’s Supreme Guide, Mohamed Badi, outlined six phases: Sharia over the individual; Sharia over the family; Sharia over the society; Sharia over the government; the resurrection of the Caliphate and finally, “mastership of the world.” The Muslim Brotherhood is in the process of completing the fourth phase in Egypt.

When will we wake up?

h/t Free Republic