Told you I did. Smack him I said. Muqtada Al Sadr. He has been a pain in the ass of progress in Iraq since before we invaded, and he is a pain in the ass til this very day.
But did the US government do what should have been done to insure that the single most divisive, destabilizing force in Iraqi politics was sent to meet Allah? Nope. Didn't do it. Worried about what people would say. Worried about the reaction.
So, now that we are a few steps away from having a workable agreement with the Iraqi parliament that would include a timetable for withdrawal of US troops in an orderly fashion, who is jumping up and down, stomping his feet and holding his breath until he turns blue? Who is threatening to trash the agreement, rip it up and throw it away? Good Ol' Mookie, that's who.
Our troops, when they were allowed to take the gloves off and do their job without overbearing oversight from the Judge Advocate's office and sleazeball Congressmen, did exactly what they are trained to do, did it well and have done it successfully. Victory in Iraq is at hand and many of my friends in the veterans' community believe we should be preparing a huge welcome home parade for our victorious troops.
Today, the bulk of Iraq is free of terrorism, the Iraqi Parliament is functioning as it should in a free society, and the local economy is enjoying a major comeback.
The Marines are shutting down Camp Fallujah, once the symbol of all that was wrong and violent in Iraq. Local markets, where car bombs kept the populace shut up inside only a year ago, now are thriving, the infrastructure has a long way to go but is being rebuilt, and victory is at hand.
Typical of career Marines, there even have been reports that they are bored with their peacekeeping duties and are asking for assignment to Afghanistan where there still is some action and a war to be won.
(Frankly, I never could stand garrison duty either. I shine my boots when they need it and I can create a spit-and-polish look with the best of them. But I thrived in the combat environment where attention to detail meant whacking bad guys instead of looking for loose threads on my uniform. What I'm saying here is I understand the mindset of the Marines who want to move on.)
But right in the middle of what should be joyous celebrations over our victory, and the emergence of a stable American ally in the most unstable section of the world, we have Muqtada Al Sadr. As usual, he is threatening to unleash his militia forces, depleted though they may be after taking the brunt of The Surge, and spending the last 18 months getting whacked.
That doesn't stop the wannabe blowhard from making threats though. And of course the American Terrorist Media jumps all over them and gives them credence they don't deserve. But thanks to his shadow buildup in the media, Al Sadr is given a status that is far beyond his capabilities and far beyond what he deserves.
The US had the opportunity to blow him to smithereens back in 2003, but the politically correct manipulators of the American military built an impenetrable shield around The Rotund One, and prevented US troops from doing their jobs. Thus, he was able to build an army of a few hundred disaffected anti-Saddam locals into a a force of ten thousand plus, supplementing it with terrorist extremists who wanted the US out of Iraq so they could plunder the populace unhindered.
When his militia went head to head with US forces and found out that good public relations doesn't translate into effective tactics and strategies, Al Sadr lit out for Iran where he conspired with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to find new ways to kill Americans.
Did we take him out when Al Sadr snuck back into Iraq to try to rally his defeated forces? Nope. We let him go. Did we work with the Iranian resistance forces to whack him in his Tehran sanctuary? Nope. We let him go.
So now, when the bulk of Iraqi people and their duly elected representatives in the Iraqi Parliament are finding ways to cooperate and move Iraq forward as a united country, who is running his mouth once again, saber rattling once again, and threatening to derail the entire process once again? You guessed it.
I have been watching the media tiptoe around the issue of the George W. Bush legacy for several months now. What will Americans think of his presidency, what will historians say?
Well, if you listen to the Democrat National Committee and its propaganda machine, the American media, it is all negative. "Eight years of failed Bush policies."
But when you ask the talking airheads on the news shows exactly what policies they are talking about, and debate them with facts instead of soundbites and talking points, they start sounding like robots stuck on replay. Meaning these ignoramuses can't think independently and they really don't have anything of substance to talk about.
George Bush actually has many good things he accomplished and history will reflect that. But if the Iraqi government unravels in the years after US forces leave, and the Iraqi countryside reverts to factionalism and terrorism, you can bet that Muqtada Al Sadr will be a major cause.
In that case, the George Bush presidency will be held up as the sole reason that the perpetrator of the destability was allowed to live, thrive and conspire to create chaos out of order. If you have looked up Al Sadr you will see that everything he does is done for his own greater glory, not for his religion and certainly not for his country.
If he is allowed to survive, and continues to be a destabilizing force in Iraq, there is only one person who will be held up to blame - the President of the United States who had myriad opportunities to neutralize Al Sadr, and screwed it up every single time.
Monday, November 24, 2008