H&I* Fires, 14 JUL 2007

Open post for those with something to share, updated through the day. New, complete posts come in below this one. Note: If trackbacking, please acknowledge this post in your post. That's only polite.

You're advertising here, we should get an ad at your place...

***************************

Yesterday found the Armorer standing at the rear of an 18-wheeler, parked in the center turn lane of one of Leavenworth's major streets, schlepping fencing panels one at a time, dancing and weaving to avoid being a windshield bug, as we unladed SWWBO's 60ft round pen. The truck couldn't get out to the new Castle, as there is no place out there to turn an 18 wheeler around.

So I get to handle the danged thing multiple times. Unload from the big truck, now, load onto the little truck (in two lifts), unload from the truck into the cradle... and one more time to wherever SWWBO decides the round pen is gonna be. Feh. I may have to shoot something today, just on GP.

Anyway, while I'm doing that and SWWBO is getting (koff, koff) her massage... Boquisucio submits this picture as needing some captioning.

-the Armorer

********************************
As seen elsewhere, from the New Anatolian, US lays down the law with the Kurds regarding the PKK(a.k.a. the trouble makers who are souring Turkish-US-Kurdish relations). This is mostly a good thing.

The United States has also reportedly informed the Iraqi Kurds that it cannot prevent a Turkish military incursion into northern Iraq, Kurdish sources said.

I wonder if that’s being relayed accurately by either the reporter or the Kurdish source. Is it that we cannot or is it that we will not? Last time I checked the AF and USN aviation was still around and aviation interdiction of armored columns moving in restrictive terrain in the Balkans worked wonders(or so the story goes). There is a Grand Canyon of difference between can’t and won’t.
--
A good rebuttal to the ‘Books not Bombs’ crowd---data and actual facts, don’t you just love data and facts in your rebuttals?---comes from Sir Lex.
-- ry
*********************************

President Bush on Iraq.

President Bush: "The Best Way To Begin Bringing [Troops] Home Is To Make Sure Our New Strategy Succeeds"

President Bush Discusses Interim Report To Congress On Progress Toward Iraq Benchmarks

"…[W]e need to ensure that when U.S. forces do pull back, the terrorists and extremists cannot take control. The strategy that General Petraeus and the troops he commands are now carrying out is the best opportunity to bring us to this point. So I ask Congress to provide them with the time and resources they need. The men and women of the United States military have made enormous sacrifices in Iraq. They have achieved great things, and the best way to begin bringing them home is to make sure our new strategy succeeds."

– President George W. Bush, 7/12/07

President Bush: "Today, my administration has submitted to Congress an interim report that requires us to assess … whether satisfactory progress toward meeting these benchmarks [in Iraq] is or is not being achieved." "Those who believe that the battle in Iraq is lost will likely point to the unsatisfactory performance on some of the political benchmarks. Those of us who believe the battle in Iraq can and must be won see the satisfactory performance on several of the security benchmarks as a cause for optimism." (President George W. Bush, Press Conference, The White House, 7/12/07)

· "Of the 18 benchmarks Congress asked us to measure, we can report that satisfactory progress is being made in eight areas." "For example, Iraqis have provided the three brigades they promised for operations in and around Baghdad. And the Iraqi government is spending nearly $7.3 billion from its own funds this year to train, equip and modernize its forces."

· "In eight other areas, the Iraqis have much more work to do." "For example, they've not done enough to prepare for local elections or pass a law to share oil revenues."

· "And in two remaining areas, progress is too mixed to be characterized one way or the other."

"It's Not Surprising That Political Progress Is Lagging Behind … Security Gains"

President Bush: "Our strategy is built on the premise that progress on security will pave the way for political progress. So it's not surprising that political progress is lagging behind the security gains we are seeing."

· "Economic development funds are critical to helping Iraq make this political progress." "Today I'm exercising the waiver authority granted me by Congress to release a substantial portion of those funds."

"This Is A Preliminary Report – And It Comes Less Than A Month After The Final Reinforcements Arrived In Iraq"

President Bush: "In September, as Congress has required, General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker will return to Washington to provide a more comprehensive assessment." "By that time, we hope to see further improvement in the positive areas and the beginning of improvement in the negative areas."

· "We'll also have a clearer picture of how the new strategy is unfolding, and be in a better position to judge where we need to make any adjustments."

· "I will rely on General Petraeus to give me his recommendations for the appropriate troop levels in Iraq." "…[W]e owe it to our troops to support our commanders – smart, capable people who are devising a strategy that will enable us to succeed... "

"The Strategy I Announced In January Is Designed To … Make Possible A More Limited Role In Iraq For The United States"

President Bush: "I believe we can succeed, and I believe we are making security progress that will enable the political track to succeed as well." "By doing this, we'll create the conditions that will allow our troops to begin coming home, while securing our long-term national interests in Iraq and in the region."

· "When we start drawing down our forces in Iraq, it will [be] because our military commanders say the conditions on the ground are right, not because pollsters say it'll be good politics."

· "…[I]f our troops thought that I was taking a poll to decide how to conduct this war, they would be very concerned about the mission." "In other words, if our troops said, … here we are in combat and we've got a Commander-in-Chief who is … running a focus group – in other words, politics … is more important to him than our safety and/or our strategy. That would dispirit our troops."

· "To begin withdrawing before our commanders tell us we're ready would be dangerous for Iraq, for the region and for the United States. It would mean surrendering the future of Iraq to Al Qaida."

"The Way To Defeat … Radicals And Extremists Is To Offer Alternative Ways Of Life"

President Bush: "Now the fundamental question facing America is will we stand with this young democracy? … Will we help them become an ally in this war against extremists and radicals…?" "This is a difficult war, and it's a tough war. But as I have consistently stated … it is a necessary war to secure our peace."

· "I firmly believe that you'll see the democracy movement continue to advance throughout the Middle East if the United States doesn't become isolationist." "That's why I told you that I'm making sure that we continue to stay diplomatically involved in the region. Condi Rice and Bob Gates will be traveling there in early August to continue to remind our friends and allies that ... one, we view them as strategic partners, and secondly, that we want them to work toward … a freer society, and to help this Iraqi government survive."

Grump.

My representative wasn't as representative of my views on this issue as she has been on others.

Not that I didn't try.

Jul 12, 2007 - Bill Action
Passed House: H.R. 2956: Responsible Redeployment from Iraq Act
Passed House 223-201, 8 not voting with 95% of Democrats supporting, 98% of Republicans opposing.

Roll Call
Rep. Boyda [D-KS]: Aye

H&I* Fires, 13 JUL 2007

Open post for those with something to share, updated through the day. New, complete posts come in below this one. Note: If trackbacking, please acknowledge this post in your post. That's only polite.

You're advertising here, we should get an ad at your place...

***************************

From MNF-I:

Iraqi people, Coalition join against al-Qaeda

Model neighborhood, active government keeps Qadisiyah thriving

Police recruiting drive a major attraction

Karkh holds first-ever job fair

********************************

Damian Brooks, writing at the Canadian milblog, The Torch:

Pincer movement

Richard Johnson, in his latest blog entry at the National Post's "A Kandahar Journal," lays out two threats to our Afghan mission in an emotionally wrenching way.

One gets the sense from this passage that Johnson was simply too exhausted couch his thoughts in more diplomatic language, and I'm glad:

The remaining journalists had been pretty much stuck here at KAF after the six soldiers were killed. Trapped here partly by the logistics of finding space on a convoy as we near the handover to the Quebec Regiment, but mostly held here by a media monster back in Canada. A monster with a gaping maw for bad news, waiting to be fed every detail on the tragedy. Who, when, what, where and why? Then, how did this happen? Then, who is to blame? Then, the panel of experts, and the death toll statistics. The story fills the papers and news segments for days before finally waning after the ramp ceremony when the bodies of the fallen arrive home to their families. The repetitive sameness of the formula irks me, and yet it is right and fitting that we should pay homage to the fallen as the nation they represent. I just feel as a nation we should pay them a little more homage when they are alive. [Damian added the emphasis to the original - I would have started at "The repetitive sameness" were it me!]

As always, sketches litter his posts; after all, that's why he embedded with the CF in the first place. But in this post, Johnson visits the base hospital, and discovers Aziz, a six-year-old boy, lying in a bed there:

Go here to read the rest. H/t to CAPT H.

*********************************

Sometimes, it's a crime we get *paid* to do things like this:

JOLO, Philippines (July 11, 2007) - Landing Craft Air Cushion (LCAC) 14, assigned to the "Swift Intruders" of Assault Craft Unit (ACU) 5, comes ashore to pick up Seabees with Naval Mobile Construction Battalion (NMCB) 7 and Amphibious Construction Battalion (ACB) 1 at the completion of their mission in the Philippines. Members of NMCB-7 and ACB-1, with medical support from the Third Medical Battalion, worked together with Filipino Seabees from the First Construction Battalion in support of Pacific Partnership 2007. The mission, a four-month humanitarian assistance mission to Southeast Asia and Oceania includes specialized medical care and various construction and engineering projects. U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Paul D. Williams

********************************
Sign me up for this view on ethanol. Let's slow down this rush! -the Armorer

*******************************

Letters from the Front: Update from LTC Turner

The House having voted...

...to require the start of redeployment, let's take a look round the 'net on that subject...

The Christian Science Monitor: President Bush Says "Progress On Security Will Pave The Way For Political Progress" In Iraq. "In unveiling the report, Bush said at a press conference Thursday that the military progress is laying the groundwork for the necessary political advances. 'Progress on security will pave the way for political progress,' he said, acknowledging that his report paints a brighter picture on the military front. Adding that security is the prerequisite for political progress, the president added, 'It is not surprising that political progress is lagging behind' military achievements. He also acknowledged the US public's dim view of the US presence in Iraq, but called for Americans to reconsider 'the consequences for America if we fail in Iraq.' He repeated his long-held view that a failure to confront Al Qaeda and related groups in Iraq would risk for emboldening extremists to extend their actions to American soil." (Howard LaFranchi, "Bush Report Sharpens Iraq Debate," The Christian Science Monitor, 7/13/07)

Multi-National Force – Iraq Commander General Petraeus Warns Against Hasty U.S. Pullout From Iraq. "Progress, says Petraeus, is not limited to this area south of Baghdad, but throughout neighboring provinces. 'The dynamic out there that is very surprising in the past several months is the increasing rejection by the Sunni population of Al Qaeda ideology,' he says. The prospect of any hasty removal of US troops has him concerned. 'If we pull out there will be greatly increased sectarian violence, humanitarian concerns. ... You don't know what could happen in terms of dangerous conflicts, what could happen along the Kurdish/Shiite/Sunni fault lines, or how [Iraq's] neighbors will react.' He says that 'there are all kinds of dynamics to consider: Iran, Syria, and others have distinct interests. There are a number of different concerns hanging on the security situation.'" (Leslie Sabbagh, "Gen. Petraeus Warns Of A Hasty US Pullout From Iraq," The Christian Science Monitor, 7/13/07)

Fox News: Secretary Of State Condoleezza Rice Sees "Signs Of Hope" For An "Improving" Environment In Which Political Matters Can Go Forward. SEC. RICE: "Well, I certainly do see signs of hope that the improved security environment – and I don't want to overstate the improvements of the security environment, but the fact that sectarian violence is down, the fact that the security forces are showing up in the numbers that they're supposed to, the bottom-up ... efforts that are being made with the Sunni sheikhs ... against the al Qaeda – that that is improving the environment in which these political matters can go forward. But ... ultimately it is true that the Iraqis are going to have to press ahead. One good sign is that their legislature... [has] said that if the business of the nation is there to do, they're going to stay in session and do the business of the nation." (FOX News' "Special Report," 7/12/07)

National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley in USA Today: Abandoning Progress In Iraq "Would Have Devastating Consequences For Iraq" And "For The Security Of The United States." "Our new strategy is already showing some encouraging signs of progress. ... Abandoning this progress and embracing failure would have devastating consequences for Iraq, for the region and for the security of the United States. ... Congress should give Gen. Petraeus the chance to come back in September to give his assessment of the strategy he is pursuing. At that time, we will be in a better position to judge the impact our new strategy is having in Iraq and determine what adjustments need to be made." (Stephen J. Hadley, Op-Ed, "Strategy Shows Progress," USA Today, 7/13/07)

White House Press Secretary Tony Snow on MSNBC: "There Has Been Considerable Success On The Security Side" In Iraq. SNOW: "What the President outlined today was really the beginning of a fully operational surge. We got the last forces in about three weeks ago. … I think what the President did today is tell Americans something maybe they hadn't have heard a lot of, which is, since we have gone in with the surge, there has been considerable success on the security side. And let's face it; you're not going to have political progress if politicians are worried about their very existence, if they're worried about their survival, and furthermore, if they're worried about sectarian violence. ... The casualty counts are down. There is now a little bit of breathing space." (MSNBC's "Hardball," 7/12/07)

Charles Krauthammer in the Washington Post urges Congress to give General Petraeus the time he needs in Iraq. "Just this week, Petraeus said that the one thing he needs more than anything else is time. To cut off Petraeus's plan just as it is beginning – the last surge troops arrived only last month – on the assumption that we cannot succeed is to declare Petraeus either deluded or dishonorable. ... In the long run, agreements on oil, federalism and de-Baathification are crucial for stabilizing Iraq. But their absence at this moment is not a reason to give up in despair, now that we finally have a counterinsurgency strategy in place that is showing success against the one enemy – al-Qaeda – that both critics and supporters of the war maintain must be fought everywhere and at all cost." (Charles Krauthammer, Op-Ed, "Deserting Petraeus," The Washington Post, 7/13/07)

On CNN's "Situation Room" Deputy Secretary Of State John Negroponte Says We Must Give The Surge "A Chance To Show Results." NEGROPONTE: "I think that this is work in progress. It's not easy. I think it's not only up to Prime Minister Maliki but all of the different elements of the Iraqi body politick. ... And I think they are making their best efforts. And we have seen some progress, although not perhaps as much as we would have liked on all fronts. ..[T]he interim report ... that was issued today indicates the results are mixed. ... But again, I just want to stress this is an interim report. It's work in progress. And I think we have to give the Baghdad surge and the other elements of the policy at work a chance to show results. ...[W]e have, of course, kept the pressure on both the government and on the Counsel of Representatives to deal with the urgent issues that are before them." (CNN's "The Situation Room," 7/12/07)

Omar Fadhil, of IraqTheModel, says in the Wall Street Journal: "Backing Off Now Is Not An Option" In Iraq. "While al Qaeda and Sadr are by no means finished off militarily, what has changed is that both of them are fighting their former public base of support. That course can't lead them to success in fomenting the sectarian war they had bet their money on. ... First things first. Let's allow our troops to finish their job. And when that is done nation-building will follow, and that's where diplomats and politicians will have to do the fighting in their own way while American soldiers can finally enjoy a well-deserved rest. Backing off now is not an option. The light at the end of the tunnel faded for a whole dark year, but we can see it again now and it's getting brighter. It's our duty to keep walking towards it." (Omar Fadhil, Op-Ed, "The Surge Is Working," The Wall Street Journal, 7/12/07)

Now, having said what I said in the post below...

I'll get on my soapbox, and suggest to my Codel that they "jerk around some sub-group of society that now has more paperwork to do, reports to submit, checks to write, at the behest of some other sub-group of society."

In this case, Army/military bureaucrats, in support of certain servicemembers.

We've mentioned "The Curious Case of Specialist Town" before.

Trias sent me a note this morning with a link to this ABC News report, where Specialist Town is again in the news.

My fundamental opinion on the subject hasn't really changed - vice Russel Terry's hinting at conspiracies to force people out of the service to save money, I see it more as a train wreck of the application of a peacetime force management tool to expedite a heavy workload, in other words benignly malign, rather than truly malevolent.

But all the pressures that make using this pressure relief valve the path of least resistance still exist, and, absent external pressure, the Army is going to by nature prefer to deal with the eaches by exception through the appeals process, which really won't produce much action on changing the process front. And certainly not any time soon.

So I've been doing the letter writing and phone calling stuff (along with many others who have far more influence than I, make no mistake) which has resulted in some action in the Senate, with Senate bill S.1271: To provide for a comprehensive national research effort on the physical and mental health and other readjustment needs of the members of the Armed Forces and veterans who served in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom and their families. and the amendment attached to the Defense authorization bill directing the Army to quit using the Chapter 13 discharge until the process has been reviewed.

Lemme be clear - I'm just one of the many voices, *not* a mover and shaker like IAVA, on this issue.

But I think that this should be a bi-partisan issue, and while I think Congress is a blunt instrument - they are responsible for raising and maintaining the Army, and this *is* an appropriate area for them to insert themselves.

And I'd like to see some Kansas names, Republican and Democrat, involved in this process. The soldiers at Forts Riley and Leavenworth, and their families, deserve it. We've already seen Missouri's senators, Bond and McCaskill, involved.

Friday the 13th...

Friday the 13th... heh. Wonder what mischief the political class will be up to now...

I use a website called GovTrack to keep an eye on my congressional codel and what they're up to. The site owner has a blog, too, and put this bit up:

Does it seem like Congress is getting less done than usual this year? Well, it’s true. Congress has enacted fewer bills in the last six months than in any first-six-months period after an election going back at least to 1993. I don’t have bill data going further back than that, so I don’t know just how “do-nothing” our Congress is. We’ve had 42 enacted bills so far this year, compared to the average of 94 for the similar time periods in the previous seven Congresses — so about half as much.

His whole post, with some more data, is here.

After 50 years of US-style governance, I must freely admit that I find, on aggregate, doing less is generally more, in terms of politicians and their impacts. Gimme that divided government. The fact that Congress has been wrapped up over Iraq and Immigration, and thus able to do little more than name Post Offices, doesn't really bother me that much, in aggregate - because it has kept them from much mischief in other areas.

Don't get me wrong - there are some issues that can really only be addressed via the political process - and Iraq and Immigration are certainly topics that fit that bill. But too often we find things being done because the political class is driven to "do something" - and to be seen doing something... even if it doesn't really need doing, or won't truly have much effect on things, except to jerk around some sub-group of society that now has more paperwork to do, reports to submit, checks to write, at the behest of some other sub-group of society.

Just random synaptic activity of a Friday morning.

Update: I love it when a Congressman simply confirms what I said... via K-Lo at The Corner...

Well, At Least He's Honest [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

Via Boehner's office:

Even Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) admitted that the Democrats’ bill was a political charade, telling reporters yesterday that Democrats had to bring the bill to the floor to pacify antiwar groups: “If we don't do anything, these groups will feel like we haven't done anything.”

07/13 08:55 AM

H&I* Fires, 12 JUL 2007

Open post for those with something to share, updated through the day. New, complete posts come in below this one. Note: If trackbacking, please acknowledge this post in your post. That's only polite.

You're advertising here, we should get an ad at your place...

***************************

From MNF-I:

Humanitarian aid decreases violence in Baghdad neighborhood

Spear Academy brings Coalition Forces closer to ultimate goal

Soldiers spread word on rewards program

Soldiers work to build trust in Rashid

*********************************

A discussion of war and lawyering, from Glenn Sulmasy, who teaches law at the US Coast Guard Academy...

NEW LONDON -- LAW AND WAR have never mixed comfortably. This seems all the more true in the wars of the 21st Century. The recent military hearings on the conduct of Marines in the battle for Haditha, Iraq, exemplifies the ambiguities that U.S. forces now face when confronting the faceless enemy of al-Qaida...

Clearly the law now affects operational combat decision-making more than ever before.

It sometimes seems as if current debates over warfare anticipate that no civilian casualties will occur in wartime. Such expectations are unrealistic and endanger the pursuit of legitimate military objectives for the U.S. now and in the future.

Mr. Sulmasy's article is a worthy read at the Providence Journal. -the Armorer

*********************************

I haven't had much to say about the Scooter Libby thing. Ben Johnson over at Front Page Magazine about sums up my bemusement on the subject.

One thing about politics and politicians - they seem to live every day in the here and now, sometimes almost completely disconnected from the day before. Unless there is political hay to be made. It's one thing that kills them about the Internet - the past is there, available to anyone who can leverage Google. Even Lexis/Nexis didn't bother them as much as Google does - because the people who could afford access to Lexis/Nexis were more often than not fellow-travelers of the process. Google, the great leveler. Or the great amasser and nanny. -the Armorer

*********************************

I've not had time to read it yet - but the Initial Benchmark Assessment is available here. -the Armorer

*********************************

Check out And Rightly So for a fascinating look at the prostitution scandal of Senator Vitter, from a blogger who would know. She also has some interesting things to say about men, marriage and fidelity. - FbL.

*********************************

Having done studies on Army networks... I can tell you this story lays out plainly the greatest single threat to .mil networks and data - ourselves. OPSEC matters. Think before you post/upload. -the Armorer

*********************************

General news for Denizens of the Castle: Our friend the Flutterby has been located in the Sandbox. She misses her Castle buds, and wanted to let everyone know that she is doing well, and sends her regards. Also that she misses gardening. - the Adjutant

*********************************

Now that is one fine piece...

...of Brit- or Canadian-built pulchritude.

Yes, of course I mean that Bren Mark 1 sitting on the table. Geez, remember where you are, people! The home of the Armorer!

Given my expectations of the LA Times and Washington Post...

...and *especially* the New York Times, there has been some almost surprising reporting and editorializing of late. Clearly, there are people who are thinking through what may happen if we just pull up our stakes and leave Iraq, vice trying to better set conditions that might give the admittedly weak and seemingly floundering Iraqi government a chance.

The Washington Post: The Washington Post Says Congress Should Give Generals In Iraq Time To See "Whether Their Strategy Can Offer Some New Hope." "If American men and women were dying in July in a clearly futile cause, it would indeed be immoral to wait until September to order their retreat. But given the risks of withdrawal, the calculus cannot be so simple. The generals who have devised a new strategy believe they are making fitful progress in calming Baghdad, training the Iraqi army and encouraging anti-al-Qaeda coalitions. Before Congress begins managing rotation schedules and ordering withdrawals, it should at least give those generals the months they asked for to see whether their strategy can offer some new hope."

The LA Times: U.S. Military Spokesman Brig. Gen. Kevin Bergner Says Collective Efforts Against Al Qaeda Have "Begun To Disrupt Their Networks And Safe Havens" In Iraq. "He said U.S. forces killed or captured 26 Al Qaeda in Iraq leaders during May and June. Bergner said U.S. forces were better able to attack Al Qaeda in Iraq because of an additional 28,500 troops ordered into the country this year by President Bush, new alliances with local groups such as the Anbar Salvation Council and new support from average Iraqis. He said the U.S. military had received 23,000 tips so far this year from Iraqis, about five times the number received by this time last year. 'Over the past two months, our collective efforts against the Al Qaeda leadership have begun to disrupt their networks and safe havens,' Bergner said at an afternoon news conference in the fortified Green Zone."

The Wall Street Journal Says "The Insurgency Can Be Defeated" But Not Under "The Timetable Now Contemplated By Congress." (subscription required for the whole article) "Nobody claims the Iraqi government is a model of democratic perfection, or that Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is the second coming of Lincoln. ... But Mr. Maliki's government is democratic and more inclusive than most reporting suggests, and it is fighting for its life against an enemy that uses car bombs and suicide bombers as its policy instruments. ... To suggest that Iraqis aren't willing to fight for their freedom is an insult to their families. General Petraeus also noted that 'the level of sectarian deaths in Baghdad in June was the lowest in about a year,' evidence that in this key battlefield the surge is making progress. ... More U.S. troops and the revolt of Sunni tribal leaders against al Qaeda are the most hopeful indicators in many months that the insurgency can be defeated. But that isn't going to happen under the timetable now contemplated by Congress."

Even the New York Times strays a bit from it's editorial proclivities in an article that is not unremittingly hostile... White House To Release Interim Assessment Measuring Progress Toward Benchmarks In Iraq. "The Bush administration will assert in the next few days that progress in carrying out the new American strategy in Iraq has been satisfactory on nearly half of the 18 benchmarks set by Congress, according to several administration officials. ... The White House report says the most progress has been achieved in the military realm. The American command’s latest unpublished monthly figures, prepared for the White House report, show a substantial decline in two major categories of violence, the number of Iraqi civilians killed in sectarian violence and casualties from car and truck bomb explosions. ... The report will 'not conclude, as it has been characterized, that this is a colossal failure,' one of the officials said. 'It is a mixed bag, with some areas that are too early to pass judgment on.'"

The hot breath of war blows by some Denizens.

Not all the fatalities in the war are directly combat-related. There have been two recent deaths due to non-combat causes that have touched the Castle family. There are hazards in the service, in combat or no. And sometimes just living life is dangerous.

As ever, the notifications are simple...

DoD Identifies Army Casualty

The Department of Defense announced today the death of a soldier who was supporting Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Col. Jon M. Lockey, 44, of Fredericksburg, Va., died July 6 in Baghdad, Iraq, of injuries
sustained from a non-combat related incident.

The incident is under investigation.

Lockey was assigned to Headquarters, Department of the Army, Washington, D.C.For more information related to this release the media may contact the Department of the Army public affairs office at (703) 692-2000.

Jon Lockey was a fellow artilleryman, and we served together at Fort Sill, and again at Fort Leavenworth.

Called to duty in the service of our lord, on Friday, July 6, 2007, Colonel Jon Michael Lockey reported to heaven to serve and stand watch over the family and nation he so loved.

Born on April 28, 1963, to Harold and Patricia Lockey in Hollywood, Calif., he was also big brother to sister, Susan.

Jon attended USMA West Point '85 and received his commission in the Army as a Field Artillery officer. He also attended Monterey Language Institute to study Italian, where he met his wife, Dorothea Jean Lockey. In August of 1987, they were married. Jon was the loving father of two sons, Steven R. Lockey and Christopher J. Lockey.

After receiving a Master's Degree from NMSU, he established residence in Fredericksburg, Va. Jon attended CGSC in Ft. Leavenworth, Kan. and then War College in Carlisle, Pa. He was a devoted father who enjoyed spending his free time with his sons. He was loving husband and wonderful father. He was a respected officer, having attained the rank of colonel. Jon served his country with honor and passed away while stationed in Iraq.

He leaves behind his wife of 20 years, Jeannie; his two sons, Steven and CJ of Fredericksburg; his mother, Pat Lockey, and father, Hal Lockey; sister, Susan Lockey of Bakersfield, Calif. He also leaves behind many family and friends who loved him dearly.

Jon will be laid to rest in Arlington National Cemetery under the direction of Covenant Funeral Service in Fredericksburg. The family will hold a private memorial in Fredericksburg and a public memorial will follow, held at Ft. Meyer Chapel with full military honors. Online guest book may be signed at covenantfuneralservice.com.

In lieu of flowers, our family asks that you thank a soldier and send donations to charities that support our troops.

We love and miss you, Jon. Your day is done.

Close station, march order, Redleg. Your seat at Fiddler's Green awaits.

The second casualty is the son of a co-worker of long time reader and commenter Mike L.

DoD Identifies Army Casualty

The Department of Defense announced today the death of a soldier who was supporting Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Chief Warrant Officer Scott A.M. Oswell, 33, of Washington, died July 4 in Mosul, Iraq, of wounds suffered when his helicopter struck a power line. He was assigned to the 4th Squadron, 6th U.S. Air Cavalry, Fort Lewis, Wash.

For more information related to this release the media may contact the Fort Lewis public affairs office at (253) 967-0152, (253) 967-0148, or after hours at (253) 967-0015 (ask for the Public Affairs Officer on call).

In Iraq, low-level powerlines pop up all over the place, due to the rather chaotic nature of electrical power provision in the region - not just Iraq. Wire strikes with low-flying aircraft are a common hazard, in addition to bad guys trying to shoot you.

The aviation section at the 'Green has one more rowdy raising a mug.

Now is the time at Castle Argghhh! when we dance. In Memoriam.

H&I* Fires, 11 JUL 2007

Open post for those with something to share, updated through the day. New, complete posts come in below this one. Note: If trackbacking, please acknowledge this post in your post. That's only polite.

You're advertising here, we should get an ad at your place...

***************************

Heh. As Neffi points out - Okay for me, but not for thee. Wonder if his position on the subject has changed?

Banter in Atlanter points out another former Marine giving a crook grief.

JTG points us to an interesting discussion at Brad Hicks' place of fireworks and culture (the comments are worth the read, too.)

Lastly - Masked Menace® provides this option for the Castle Flag - I would change Victoria to Vincit, per CAPT H's observation. SWWBO wants one more color in there. Whattaya all think?

No, MajMike, I *don't* think white, over the red, would be a good choice, thenkewverramuch!~ -the Armorer

**********************************

Good news for Manhattan. The "Little Apple" that is - Manhattan Kansas, from Congresswoman Boyda's office today:

MANHATTAN MAKES FINAL CUT FOR NATIONAL BIO- AND AGRO-DEFENSE FACILITY

AS DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY NARROWS POTENTIAL NBAF SITES FROM 16 TO 5, KANSAS REMAINS A STRONG CONTENDER

WASHINGTON, D.C. -The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) today announced that a site in Manhattan , Kansas , is on a list of five finalist locations to host the new National Bio- and Agro-Defense Facility (NBAF), a $500-million, state-of-the-art laboratory devoted to researching human and animal health in the interest of America 's national security.

DHS previously announced a list of 18 potential sites for NBAF in August of 2006. Today's down-selection narrows the field down to five, dramatically increasing the odds that Manhattan will ultimately serve as NBAF's home.

Congresswoman Nancy Boyda (Kansas Second District), who represents Manhattan in Congress, said, "I'm thrilled that Kansas remains a strong contender to host the NBAF facility. Not only would Manhattan 's scientific resources prove invaluable to NBAF, but the facility would tremendously benefit Kansas . Its construction would pump half a billion dollars into our local economy, enhance our state's reputation for excellence in bioscience research, and most importantly, allow Kansans to lead the way in modernizing America's biodefense capabilities."

Boyda added, " Manhattan 's strong research mission and agricultural background makes it a uniquely suitable home for the new laboratory. I'll continue to do everything I can in Congress to bring this cutting-edge facility to our state."

Good for Manhattan, bad for Leavenworth - we were trying to land that puppy, too. Ah, the work potentials in *that* facility! -the Armorer

********************************

Snerk! My buddy Kevin G, who lives in another city that was a candidate site for the bio-terror facility is also very happy with the decision made today:

Oh thank Gawd!

Kansas site makes cut for federal bioterror lab

Columbia was pushing for this, against I might add, a fair amount of opposition. I sure as hell didn't want this facility here. If isolated Plum Island was not considered sufficient for a Cat 2, why the hell would a Cat 4 be fine for suburbia?

Their choices of location suxed ass too. Anyhow, call me a nimby, but no thank you and KS is more than welcome to it.

Heh. There were sighs of relief around here, too. Though I freely admit I wouldn't have minded getting some HLD work out of that facility. Who knows, we still might, though I don't particularly want to live in Manhattan (fine place, lived there twice before - I just like the KC area better). -the Armorer

********************************

Speaking of Churchill today... as I do elsewhere...

Two quotes come to mind for the Prime Minister of HM Government:

"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last."

Victor Hanson on NRO's "The Corner..."

Gordon Brown’s uncoupling of terrorism from Islam and the relegation of the ‘war against terror’ in Britain to the rubbish heap of history is all predicated on a simple hunch: that an attrited al Qaeda cannot muster the money, savvy, and contacts to repeat a 9/11-style attack in Britain.

Hence the leisure of political-correctness that results in demonization of those who use wire-taps, detention facilities—and war—to stop jihadism.

So we know the script to come, but, like Oedipus, can’t stop it: more uncovered plots, an occasional terrorist near miss, and then finally a big bomb that kills hundreds.

And at that point, it gets Orwellian — what will a UK do if the perpetrators were suspected of residence at one time in Pakistan, Iran, or Syria? Or had financing and sanctuary provided by an Arab state? Surely not send in the gunboats or rely on the mayor of London for a stiff upper-lip.

Instead, elites will probably shrug and say these are the wages of doing business in today’s “have/have not world,” a sort of acceptance that a few British must periodically be harvested for the greater good of keeping “the British way of life”—best summer up like the Athenians, in the days before Theseus, who sent their annual tribute of 14 youths to the Minotaur’s labyrinth to pacify angry King Minos.

Mr. Brown's pronouncements thus far call to mind this quote from Mr. Churchill:

I cannot pretend to feel impartial about colours. I rejoice with the brilliant ones and am genuinely sorry for the poor browns.

Surge and fight it out, or withdraw. There is no middle any more.

Looking about the shell-pocked landscape of politics and the war of late... I am struck by a lack of perspective beyond the next political event horizon, which I suppose is inevitable in our political system - for which I have no suggested improvement, just noting Churchill's dicta: "It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried."

The President looks beleaguered as he stands firm as senior members of his party jump ship to the "the Surge has failed" vessel now being piloted by the Dems (there are Reps on as crew, but make no mistake, Reid and Pelosi are the pilots). This even though, in fact, the Surge itself (the deployment) has just recently ended, and the operations made possible thereby are now in-progress. The quickness to pronounce failure I believe betrays the true intent of the anti-war party's reluctant agreement to continue. Not wanting to be tarred by a "Run Away" brush of Pythonesque quality, they "agreed" to the deployment with their fingers crossed, intending, all along, absent a huge crushing WWII-style victory early on, to do what they are doing now - cry failure, with hopefully no opprobrium sticking to them.

Feh.

Yet, absent a few long-time opponents of the war, none of these profiles in courage are willing to call for outright withdrawal, total and complete.

They search for a "just right" compromise, one that runs down the middle. Either out of genuine conviction that it's the right thing to do and will be successful - or, naked craven political calculation that by doing so, they will appear to be supportive of the overall intent while in fact setting the conditions for failure, again, with no opprobrium attaching to them, and all of it to Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld.

Then there is that group living in cloud-cuckoo-land that really believes that at this point, the ISG approach will work.

Heh.

The problem is that these politics do not fit the military reality of Iraq.

They suggest pulling the bulk of the combat troops out, save some elite units for al-Qaeda hunting, and perhaps some units for security work along the borders, yet leaving in place a moderately substantial logistic and training base for Iraqi security forces.

Heh.

Odd, how this war then becomes Vietnam in, oh, reverse, sorta. Major combat operations leading to the fall of the government, a pause of sorts in the violence, major operations against an externally supported insurgency, a period where logisitics and training are provided, trailing off to an ever-diminishing guerilla threat.

If only.

The politics may make sense in the bubble that is the District of Columbia, but the compromise leaves General Petraeus with an untenable military mission. Without significant U.S. combat units to keep the lid on the violence, the training effort would face challenges even bigger than those the troops face today.

And a ineffective training effort would leave many thousands of American trainers, advisers and supporting troops exposed to that rising spiral of violence in the meantime. The net result is likely to be continued U.S. casualties - with no concomitant effect on Iraq's ongoing civil war, as the Shia and Sunni fight it out, with Saddam's left-over thugs struggling to survive and not make the long drop. And al-Qaeda and Iran spicing it up for their own purposes - and deliberately targeting those lesser-defended juicy 'Murican targets.

The American combat presence in Iraq is probably insufficient to end the violence but does serve to keep something of a lid on it, creating that "bubble of stability" in which the Iraqi Army and security forces can be trained. Draw down that level of support, and the violence will rise accordingly. To be effective, the embedded training teams must live and operate with the Iraqi soldiers they are training -- they are not Ivory-tower professors safely ensconced in their safe classrooms unaffected by the realities of the world they inhabit, engaging in "distance learning." The greater the violence, the heavier their losses - quite possibly to little gain.

That will reduce their ability to succeed in their mission of creating a credible Iraqi Army and other security forces. Remember why President Johnson sent in the large combat units - because of the escalating violence in Vietnam, they were sent in to protect US personnel and assets, and to create a "bubble" in which the training of the ARVN could take place. We're trying to do this... backwards. At least that's how I see the alternative plan being offered.

The result will be a vicious cycle. The more we shift out of combat missions and into training, the harder we make the trainers' job and the more exposed they become. Just as it wasn't working in Vietnam, so Johnson sent in the troops, it strikes me as unrealistic to expect that we can pull back to some safe mode of training but not fighting.

Therefore - if the surge is unacceptable, the best option is to cut our losses and withdraw altogether. I would argue that the case for either extreme, the surge or a complete withdrawal, is stronger than for any "Third Way" Goldilocksian approach.

But mark my words - if this war (and long-time readers of this space know I was not keen on invading Iraq, but *am* keen on cleaning up the mess we created by so doing) if the mess that is this war is the Bush-Cheney Folly, the aftermath of a pull-out forced upon the President will make it, as Ralph Peters notes, the Reid-Pelosi Massacres.

And the "middle-ground" approach only serves to prolong the agony in an attempt, well meaning or venal, to provide an escape from responsibility.

Both the surge and withdrawal have strong downsides (to my mind, withdrawal is worse, long-term) but this "just right" political-survival/vengeance-taking middle-ground option leaves us with the worst of all situations - continuing casualties *and* a spiraling of the violence.

I'm a poster child for the Mushy Muddle of American politics. Compromise and a move to the center are normally my preferred way. I *like* divided government, it keeps the politicians busy with each other, reducing the amount of time available to muck about in my business. But what is a good instinct in our politics, isn't necessarily a good approach to a war.

Just sayin'

To no one in particular.

Update: I see that Paul over at Powerline is channeling me. With a more restrained verbosity, too.

This one made me look twice.

I'm not used to seeing that machine gun on a HMMWV!

A Polish Rosomak, or "wolverine" armored personnel carrier, and a Humvee scout an isolated area of the mountains in Andar District, Ghazni province, Afghanistan, June 23. Photographer: Pfc. Micah Clare 4th Brigade Combat Team, 82nd Airborne Division Public Affairs