Airborne angels minister to wounded troops in Afghanistan

Michael Yon's latest dispatch from the war in Afghanistan reports on an "angel flight" he made with U.S. Air Force personnel aboard an air evacuation C-17 with wounded troops in the war in Afghanistan. The photo above was picked up by Fox News a week or two ago showing an Air Force nurse whispering to a wounded Canadian soldier.

The medical staff never stopped working. I didn’t even get a chance to talk with Major Lucy Lehker because she was so focused on the Canadian soldier, who was the only truly critical patient. When the Canadian soldier began to wake up, Lucy caressed his head, and whispered to him where he was, how he got there, who she is, and what his injuries were.

Yon calls this dispatch "Whispers." Read the whole report and pray for our troops at war as well as all the nations fighting with us in the international war on terror.

While Obama dithers, soldiers keep fighting the good fight

The story today on military.com is worth linking just for the photo alone, a 4th Infantry Division G.I. caught in mid-air leaping into a muddy canal ditch to escape fire from the Taliban in the hills above an Afghan village.

The G.I.'s built a clinic in the nearby village. The Taliban blew it up. The G.I's return, knowing they will start another fire fight with the Taliban.

But that's what soldiers do, hunt and kill the enemy.

The atmosphere was tense. An attack was expected. Back at the ruined clinic, the squad's Afghan translator had asked if this journalist had a mobile phone. "You should call your loved ones now to say that you care about them. I'm telling you, the walk home from here is not a joke," he said with a nervous smile.

As they left Qatar Kala, with U.S. helicopters buzzing overhead, Goodman split his men into two squads, one along the riverbed and one in an irrigation canal on higher ground.

About 500 yards outside the village gunfire whistled down from the eastern mountainside.

Soldiers dived stomach-down. The rushing canal water soaked boots and uniforms and jammed at least one weapon as Soldiers got up to shoot back...

Gradually the Soldiers made it to safety. The firefight had lasted about four hours. The entire operation, from dawn until the return to base, went on for about seven hours.

The Soldiers were met in front of the bazaar of a friendly village by troops in military vehicles who gave them bottled water. They were caked in drying mud but with no casualties except for two sprained ankles.

Then they headed back to their outpost, which is named Honaker Miracle after two U.S. infantrymen, Sgt. 1st Class Christopher Honaker and Pfc. Joseph Miracle, killed in Afghanistan in 2007.

The platoon was later told by its company command that reports suggested up to five Taliban were killed in Tuesday's fighting.

Just another day on the job for our soldiers. Say a prayer for all the men and women in harm's way, defending our freedom daily around the world.

The World's Longest Dither seeks a 'Compromise' war plan

Bill Kristol at The Weekly Standard Blog gives us an update on the world's longest dither as President Obama and his "military experts" continue "developing a new strategy" for the war in Aghanistan. Meanwhile, Gen. McChrystal and the troops continue the fight short-handed.

The McChrystal review was done by August 1st. It is now the end of October.

According to today's Washington Post ("Obama seeking options on forces; President looks to send fewer additional troops"), we'll get a decision by the end of November. That's four months. And it's evident that the review at this point is being driven entirely by White House political concerns. 148 American soldiers have died while the president holds seminars.

It's really outrageous.

There are, though, comical aspects to the Post story.

One is that Army chief of staff George Casey, a stubborn opponent of the Iraq surge at the end of 2006, is using this excuse to oppose an Afghanistan surge: "The Army is particularly concerned that soldiers who spend less than 18 months at home between combat tours do not have enough time to train for high-intensity tank warfare."

Just where are we going to fight that kind of war in the very near future?

Another is this: "But opinion among members of Obama's national security team is divided, and he now appears to be seeking a compromise solution that would satisfy both his military and civilian advisers."

Huh? Who are those "civilian advisers?" Secretary of Defense Gates is with Generals McChrystal and Petraeus, and (I gather) so too are Secretary of State Clinton and Special Envoy Richard Holbrooke -- all the "civilian advisers" who have real responsibility for the situation. But Joe Biden and Rahm Emanuel have political concerns -- so Obama is trying to find a "compromise" that would "satisfy" them too.

Sometimes, in political and public policy, compromise is a good thing. But it's not a way to win a war. Especially when the "compromise" is between what your own military commander judges, based on an extensive review, he needs, and what your political hacks want.

You didn't think Obama was going to interrupt his golf game to make a decision, did you?

You might be 'dithering' over Afghanistan if the WaPo is more decisive

You might be a redneck if your mama can cuss out a cop without taking the cigarette outa her mouth ... and you might be a President dithering endlessly about whether to send needed troops to fight the war in Aghanistan if even a Washington Post columnist says we need more troops there.

David Ignatius says exactly that following his recent trip to Afghanistan, which I might point out President Obama not only hasn't done lately, much less consult with the general in charge there.

So what should Obama do? I think he should add enough troops to continue the mission he endorsed in March to "reverse the Taliban's gains" and improve security in Afghanistan's population centers. I don't know whether the right number is the roughly 40,000 that Gen. Stanley McChrystal has recommended, but it should be the minimum number necessary. The additional troops will come at a steep political price, at home and abroad.

Sir Charles Krauthammer shares an old Soviet joke to characterize Obama's dithering strategy.

WASHINGTON -- Old Soviet joke:

Moscow, 1953. Stalin calls in Khrushchev.

"Niki, I'm dying. Don't have much to leave you. Just three envelopes. Open them, one at a time, when you get into big trouble."

A few years later, first crisis. Khrushchev opens envelope 1: "Blame everything on me. Uncle Joe."

A few years later, a really big crisis. Opens envelope 2: "Blame everything on me. Again. Good luck, Uncle Joe."

Third crisis. Opens envelope 3: "Prepare three envelopes."

In the Barack Obama version, there are 50 or so such blame-Bush free passes before the gig is up. By my calculation, Obama has already burned through a good 49. Is there anything he hasn't blamed George W. Bush for? The economy, global warming, the credit crisis, Middle East stalemate, the deficit, anti-Americanism abroad -- everything but swine flu.

It's as if Obama's presidency hasn't really started. He's still taking inventory of the Bush years. Just this Monday, he referred to "long years of drift" in Afghanistan in order to, I suppose, explain away his own, well, yearlong drift on Afghanistan.

Krauthammer also sums up Obama's choices on Afghanistan as being remarkably similar to the right decision that his much-hated predecessor President George W. Bush made on Iraq.

In Iraq, the heavy footprint -- also known as the surge -- dramatically reversed the fortunes of war. In Afghanistan, where it took longer for the Taliban to regroup, the failure of the light footprint did not become evident until more recently when an uneasy stalemate began to deteriorate into steady Taliban advances.

That's where we are now in Afghanistan. The logic of a true counterinsurgency strategy there is that whatever resentment a troop surge might occasion pales in comparison with the continued demoralization of any potential anti-Taliban elements unless they receive serious and immediate protection from U.S.-NATO forces.

In other words, Obama is facing the same decision on Afghanistan that Bush faced in late 2006 in deciding to surge in Iraq.

In both places, the deterioration of the military situation was not the result of "drift," but of considered policies that seemed reasonable, cautious and culturally sensitive at the time, but ultimately turned out to be wrong.

Which is evidently what Obama now thinks of the policy choice he made on March 27.

He is to be commended for reconsidering. But it is time he acted like a president and decided. Afghanistan is his. He's used up his envelopes.

The "heavy footprint vs. light footprint" debate is essentially the Pentagon, the generals in charge of our troops and even Defense Sec. Bill Gates vs. "Generals" John Kerry and Joe Biden.

Rich Lowry at National Review calls it the City Mouse, Country Mouse Strategy.

Reading the tea leaves, it appears that defense, state, and the intelligence community has concluded that the Taliban is dangerous and it can't be fought effectively without something like McChrystal's 40,000 troops. The politicos, though, seem to want to turn the process on its head. The original idea was to come up with the strategy and ends first, then decide on what troop levels are necessary. The political aides seemingly want to come up with the most politically palatable troop number — say splitting the difference at 20,000 — and then ask what strategy can be supported with that number. The White House has given the impression of wanting to rig the process against McChrystal, but of failing as the facts — reflected in the positions of defense, et. al — lean the other way.

God save our nation and especially our troops in harm's way while Obama endlessly dithers.

You might be 'dithering' if the Europeans show more guts

Like Jeff Foxworthy's signs that you might be a redneck, you might be "dithering" while Afghanistan burns if even the Europeans are more committed to that war than Obama is. Jamie Fly at The Weekly Standard blog points out this absurdity in NATO Defense Ministers and UN Official Back McChrystal Before Obama

Now, just as the president is publicly agonizing over what the U.S. strategy in Afghanistan should be, some European leaders seem willing to consider making increased commitments to Afghanistan. In Germany, Chancellor Angela Merkel’s government is considering increasing the size of the German contingent in the country when the deployment’s mandate is renewed later this year, something that is nothing short of amazing given how publicly unpopular the German presence in Afghanistan is. British Prime Minister Gordon Brown announced last week that he was sending an additional 500 troops to the country.

These increased commitments appear to be based on a recognition that a properly resourced counterinsurgency effort is the only way to achieve success in Afghanistan. The New York Times reported yesterday that “NATO defense ministers gave their broad endorsement Friday to the counterinsurgency strategy for Afghanistan laid out by Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal.” Kai Eide, the UN special representative for Afghanistan attended the meeting and said “additional troops are required,” also telling the defense ministers that “this cannot be a U.S.-only enterprise.”

...The White House took offense at Vice President Cheney’s statement this week that the president was “dithering” on Afghanistan. Friday’s NATO defense ministerial should put this issue to rest -- even the Europeans have acted with more fortitude than our president.

Thank God for Dick Cheney and Fox News. They keep pointing out the obvious truths about our "dithering" President. Sooner or later, the voters will realize the emperor has no clothes. I'm just praying a miracle will happen and Obama will finally do the right thing and not leave our troops in Afghanistan twisting slowly in the winds of defeat.

Oh for the good 'ol days of LBJ and the Vietnam War

Never thought I'd look back fondly at the Presidential administration of Lyndon B. Johnson. The much-maligned LBJ was a crook who started stealing elections when he ran for class president of his junior college back in Texas and refined his technique over the years but never changed.

But at least he was a President who backed the troops while they were at war. LBJ did micro-manage the military to the point of actually picking out the bombing targets and setting ridiculous rules of engagement that virtually guaranteed we would lose that war. But at least he did provide the troops with the funding to fight, despite the ever-dropping polls back home on that unpopular war.

Now we have another war on which polls are being charted daily, as if popularity has something to do with whether our troops should be fighting terrorists who want to destroy our nation. And now we have a President in office who sniffs the wind on every issue to decide which way to go.

And President Obama also has a lapdog media with the sole exception of Fox News, which is solemnly reporting daily polls about the popularity/unpopularity of the war on terror. I almost choked when I read the lead of The Washington Post story this morning on that farce.

As President Obama and his war cabinet deliberate a new strategy for the war in Afghanistan, Americans are evenly and deeply divided over whether he should send 40,000 more troops there, and public approval of the president's handling of the situation has tumbled, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

Obama's "war cabinet"? What a crock. You have a grand total of one cabinet member, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who has the stones to stand up for our military and urge the President to support the war in Afghanistan and give the general Obama handpicked and put in charge, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the surge in troops he has asked for. The rest of the cabinet is lined up solidly behind White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel advising Obama to leave the troops slowly twisting in the wind while he abandons the war on terror as politically inexpedient.

Somewhere in between LBJ's micro-managing a war and Obama abandoning one under way while he endlessly dithers to "deliberate a new strategy" there's gotta be a happy medium. We need a President who will give the troops what they need to fight and let the generals in charge develop and implement strategy. Oh wait, we had a President like that. George W. Bush.

Now for the news from an Alternate Universe of World Peace

When I turned on the news this morning to digest with my eggs and sausage, it's a good thing I didn't have a mouthful of coffee when I heard that President Barack Hussein Obama has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. WTF? He had been in office a grand total of two weeks when the nominees list for this year's peace prize was drawn up by the Nobel committee. And what had he accomplished toward world peace in those first two weeks? About exactly what he has accomplished since on any goal. Nada. Nuthin'. Zip. So far, Obama's legacy is a big fat zero.

Of course, the Nobel Peace Prize has become a total joke in recent years. Obama joins such former luminaries of world peace in or near the White House as...

Former President Jimmy Carter won the award in 2002, while former Vice President Al Gore shared the 2007 prize with the U.N. panel on climate change.

Just what did Jimmy Carter do for world peace? Well he got Palestinian terrorist Yasser Arafat to sit down for "peace talks" with Israeli leaders Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres, for which that odd trio won the 1994 Nobel peace prize. And of course, those historic talks hosted by President Jimmy Carter resulted in peace between the Palestinians and the Israelis, didn't they? Well let's not quibble over details like actual peace breaking out.

And of course, Al Gore has brought world peace with his Chicken Little crusade on global warming, which the leftwingnuts are still blathering about despite the recent trend toward global cooling. But again, let's not quibble over details like actual science vs. junk science.

So in the spirit of Jimmy Carter, Al Gore and Yasser Arafat, the Nobel committee has picked yet another luminary of world peace, Barack Hussein Obama, who has accomplished ... nothing.

Meredith Jessup at Townhall.com comments:

Not only is this award INCREDIBLY premature since Obama has only been in office just over nine months, but also pretty inappropriate. Teddy Roosevelt ended the Russo-Japanese War and received the prize, and Obama... what? Gave a speech in Cairo?

Wesley Pruden, who penned this morning's column in advance of the Obama Nobel prize announcement, is yet quite accurate in describing the "peace accomplishments" on the world scene thus far by our rookie president, whose trademark "dithering" continues on a host of pressing world peace matters, such as Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan, Russia and Eastern Europe.

The cruel world is closing in on Barack Obama. Springfield was never like this. The president can only look back with yearning for the days when he was the star of the state legislature, where a legislator's only concern is who's going to pick up the tab for drinks and supper.

His dithering time in the big new world is limited by events, which occur to a timetable that mere man, even a minor-league messiah, cannot control.

The White House insists that the president is hard at work on what to do about Afghanistan, and whether to send more troops to fuel a "surge" like the surge that prevented a collapse of the West's attempt to rescue Iraq from barbarism and restore a fragile semblance of civilization. The brave young Americans put in harm's way in that godforsaken corner of the world often feel abandoned in a hopeless cause, so the president should feel the pressure to act, and quickly.

But the problem is "multilayered," his spokesman says. Translated into real English, that means "he hasn't yet figured out which layer of public opinion to appease, and which layer to disappoint." He'll do something as soon as he figures out which disappointed layer would squeak loudest and scream longest.

The Pakistanis occupy still another layer. The president is looking for a way to motivate an ally that doesn't want to be motivated. Money is usually the great motivator, and the administration proposes to send the generals who run Pakistan $7.5 billion in aid over the next five years, to, er, ah, ummmm, uh, well, it's not clear what, exactly. They'll think of something. The generals want to make sure the money arrives in Pakistan with no strings attached. It's not as if we're talking about real money.

Still another layer is the arsenal of nuclear weapons the Paks already have, and a layer beyond that is the nuclear weapon Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in neighboring Iran is about to have, unless the president gets out of the way and lets the Israelis resolve the dilemma. This would free him to figure out a way to abandon Israel to the terrorists without making noise that would drown out the speech he would make as a consolation prize for the Jews and their Christian allies. He has a useful precedent, having recently thrown the Poles and Czechs under his famous bus (joining his grandmother), to appease the Russians angered by the prospect of a NATO missile base in Poland and the Czech Republic.

On another front, the dollar is shrinking so fast - more than 11 percent over the past few months - that it might disappear before the rest of the world abandons it as the reserve currency. But the most dangerous layer of presidential concerns, if you believe certain European descendants of Chicken Little, is what to do about global warming.

So there you have it in Pruden's insightful analysis, the accomplishments on the world scene of our Dither-In-Chief during his term in office thus far.

Meanwhile, back on the dithering front, the White House has decided the President is just too busy right now for General McChrystal, our top commander in Afghanistan, to come to Washington to brief his staff and Congress. So they put McChrystal on hold for a while. Again.

The White House has told the top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan to delay a planned trip here Friday to brief President Obama and his senior advisers on his recommendation for a major troop increase.

Officials had hoped to have Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal and what national security adviser James L. Jones called "all the key players" speak to Obama in person by the end of this week, leading to final deliberations over a forward strategy.

But "we're not finished," Jones said Thursday, and meetings may extend beyond next week. When the White House is ready, he said, McChrystal -- along with the U.S. ambassadors to Afghanistan and Pakistan -- will fly to Washington so that the three "can meet with the president before a decision is made."

Well that's magnanimous of Obama, to allow McChrystal to come to Washington and meet with him "before a decision is made." Thus far, our busy President has has exactly one 25-minute conversation face-to-face with the top commander in Afghanistan while he has been busily crafting a "new strategy" for the war in Afghanistan. And when he's finished crafting that new strategy, he will allow McChrystal another brief photo-op in the White House before announcing his new strategy, which has been realistically described as the "cut and walk" plan for the war, which is somewhere halfway between "cut and run" and sending troops to actually win the war.

Meanwhile, back in the real world vs. the alternate universe of Nobel peace prize "reality" a hopeful sign is reported today for actually winning the war in Afghanistan. Key Democrats in Congress are speaking out to urge Obama to give McChrystal the troops he has requested.

The Democratic chairmen of several key committees overseeing war policy, including the House Armed Services and Intelligence committees, say they back the military's request for a troop buildup in Afghanistan - despite House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's stance that Congress will not support deploying more U.S. forces.

At a White House meeting this week, participants said about half of the chairmen from the dozen House and Senate panels involved in military issues told President Obama that they supported ordering more troops to Afghanistan.

"A number of us commented that we don't believe you can prevail with a counterterrorism plan alone. You have to have a more comprehensive strategy," said Rep. Silvestre Reyes, Texas Democrat and chairman of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, who attended the meeting.

Perhaps there is some sanity in the real world after all, vs. the insanity of Nobel Peace Prize alternate universe logic. I for one pray for our troops and for victory in Afghanistan and Iraq. As a famous general said, in war there is no substitute for victory.

Oops. I wasn't supposed to quote General MacArthur. He's the leftwingnuts' current example of a bad general as they compare McChrystal to President Harry Truman's firing of MacArthur.

After all, what did MacArthur accomplish, besides leading our troops to victory in the Pacific Theater of World War II and then returning to do it again on the battlefields of Korea?

Mr. Irrelevant makes another speech with no content

What if the President of the United States made a speech, but a tree didn't fall in the woods where nobody was around to hear it? The obvious answer is the press and the leftwingnuts would still applaud, whether there was any actual content or not. And so far, I have yet to hear any of the multitudinous blather of Obama that had any content whatsoever. "Blah, blah, blah...Bush did it!"

Our juvenile "never run anything but his mouth" (copyright Jesse Jackson on Obama) President is proving himself daily to be Mr. Irrelevant. He reminds me of my daughter's first full sentence at about the age of 2. "Robby did it!" Her older brother Robby was her convenient scapegoat for anything she might possibly be blamed for. "Layla! Have you messed your diaper?" With a straight face, this little blonde beauty would look at me and say "Robby did it!" and continue playing.

And for lo these first 100+ days, the only memorable words Obama has yet to utter are repeated over and over again ad nauseum, "Bush did it!" But finally, Mr. Irrelevant has reached a new low even for him. He has changed his tune to "Cheney did it!"

Yesterday, we were treated to the ridiculous theater of the President of the United States scheduling a speech deliberately just before the weeks-long-scheduled speech of the former Vice President of the United States, to rebut Dick Cheney's comments in advance.

How irrelevant do you have to be to try to one-up the former VP of the previous administration?

President Obama on Thursday vigorously defended his decision to close the Guantanamo Bay detention site but said some terrorist suspects would be held indefinitely, setting up the prospect of a painstaking fight with Congress over relocating detainees to the United States and disappointing supporters critical of what they saw as a concession to Bush-era policies.

The announcement came midway through a 50-minute address, which kicked off a highly public and impassioned debate between Mr. Obama and former Vice President Dick Cheney over how far the government should go to defend itself from terrorism - a back and forth that transfixed Washington and much of the nation...

But it was the give and take with Mr. Cheney that made the day memorable and historically significant.

Mr. Cheney's speech at the institute had been scheduled for a few weeks, and it appeared that the White House intentionally scheduled Mr. Obama's speech so that it fell right before the former vice president's. The White House has already in its four months handpicked conservative figures with low popularity ratings or who are repellent to moderates, such as radio-show host Rush Limbaugh, as foils for them to fight against publicly.

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said "there was an awareness that [Mr. Cheney] was speaking, but the speech wasn't scheduled because he was speaking on a certain day."

And while I'm writing about irrelevant idiots in high office, if you thought that doofus who was briefly press secretary for President Bush (whathisname who wrote the book) was the most clueless White House press flack in history, Robert Gibbs is one-upping him spectacularly. Gibbs is such a doofus, even the liberal-leftwing press (pardon my repetition) is making jokes about him.

Scenes from forgotten war like ghosts from the past

Some long-lost work of one of the pioneers of photojournalism has surfaced, shedding light on one of the long-forgotten wars of the past.

Robert Capa is known as the pioneering war photographer for his work covering the Spanish Civil War in the late 1930s, which was essentially a tune-up for Hitler to try out his new weapons and give his troops some experience prior to launching World War II.

The strange thing about the Spanish Civil War is that the Communists were considered by the liberal press -- and Capa and his fellow war photographers -- as the good guys in this confrontation with the Nazis who were trying to take over Spain. There were no good guys in that Nazi-vs.-Communist war, unlike WWII which followed. But then liberals seldom get history right.

The long-lost 35mm film that has surfaced are some 4,300 negatives taken by Robert Capa, Gerda Taro and David Seymour during the Spanish Civil War, groundbreaking work that was long thought to be lost but resurfaced several years ago in Mexico City.

The top photo is by Seymour of a Spanish partisan who proudly wears a Nazi swastika on his beret. Next photo is of Taro, who was Capa's co-worker and sweetheart, who was killed in 1937 when run over by a tank.

You can view a slideshow of some of the images here at the New York Times online. The article about the restoration of the photos in the NYT is here.

And though Capa is widely credited with being the first war photographer, I did some research in Photojournalism school at the University of Missouri at Columbia about a far earlier war photographer than Capa, who really was one of the pioneers of the dangerous art.

His name was Timothy O'Sullivan and many of the photos of the American Civil War which were credited to Matthew Brady were actually taken by O'Sullivan on the battlefields. He worked for Brady and sent his glass-plate negatives to Brady in New York, who etched his name on the plates.

O'Sullivan was the first photographer on the scene at the Battle of Gettysburg, Pa., and his images of the war dead are still haunting today.

O'Sullivan was also the first photographer to travel down the Colorado River as part of a mapping expedition in 1871, where he took many beautiful photos of the American west, including the first of the Grand Canyon. He took the below photo in Black Canyon.

How the 'Greatest Generation' supported their troops

The Greatest Generation is almost completely gone as the World War II veterans pass on and I wonder what history will say about this generation. I strongly doubt there will be any stories like this one to tell about us. Maybe so, but it doesn't have to be that way. Go to militaryministry.org.

When the "Greatest Generation" passed through North Platte, Nebraska during WWII, they got a hug and a handshake, homemade cakes and cookies, and a moment of respite and prayer provided by thousands of volunteers from the surrounding communities. This spirit of service is vital to America today. You can give something back to our military members and their families. Visit militaryministry.org to see how!

Fighting a lonely war far from home at Christmas

War correspondent Michael Yon, the Ernie Pyle of our day, reports good news and bad news from the frontlines of the war on terror.

The war in Iraq has ended. Violent elements remain, but they no longer threaten the very fabric of Iraq. The Iraqi Army, police and government continue to outpace the elements that would prefer to see Iraq in chaos. Iraq is no longer an enemy. There is no reason for us to ever shoot at each other again.

That's the good news. Now the bad news from Yon, who always tells it just like it is.

But Afghanistan is a different story. I write these words from Kandahar, in the south. This war here is just getting started. Likely we will see severe fighting kicking off by about April of 2009. Iraq is on the mend, but victory in Afghanistan is very much in question.

While Americans sleep tight in their beds, this time of year U.S. soldiers sit shivering through the frigid, crystal clear nights at remote outposts in places most of us have never heard of and will never see.

Often they head out into the enveloping darkness, to hunt down and destroy terrorists, who continue to kill innocent Afghans, Americans, Aussies, Balinese, Brits, Indians, Iraqis, Pakistanis, Spanish ... in short, anyone who opposes their violent tyranny. Their greatest weapons are ignorance and terror. Witness the latest unprovoked attack on our friends in India.

These enemies have no wish to reconcile with their fellow countrymen, or compromise in any way that would diminish their control of the lives of the ordinary Afghans who don't share their feral vision of life. They throw acid in the faces of little girls whose only crime is that they go to school. So we must continue to send our toughest men to confront them eye to eye, while performing the difficult balancing act of not alienating those who intend us no harm. This is particularly difficult in Afghanistan, a proud nation with a deep tradition of antipathy toward outsiders - even those who are here to help, though I am finding many Afghans clearly do not want us to leave.

The hard work is especially difficult when our troops are spread perilously thin. Over the last nearly two weeks I've spent time with teams whose nearest ground support is too far away, and too small anyway, to help them when they get into serious trouble, which happens all the time.

Some of these groups are too far out for helicopters to reach within any reasonable amount of time, and so their only choice often is "CAS," or Close Air Support: jets with bombs. Sadly, despite the extreme precautions I have seen our people taking in Iraq and now Afghanistan, we are bound to make some mistakes, which the enemy exploits to full potential. In fact, there are reports that I believe credible that the enemy is actively trying to bait us into bombing innocent people. Such is the savagery of the Taliban and associated armed opposition groups (AOGs).

In Part Two of Yon's report on the war in Afghanistan, he writes about a little-known element of the coalition forces, Lithuanian Special Forces.

U.S. and Afghan soldiers in Zabul Province give high marks to the Lithuanian Special Forces, who like to ride these captured Taliban motorbikes (photo at top) to sneak up on, and chase Taliban fighters. The "LithSof" are on their way to becoming living legends: Both Afghans and Americans report that the Taliban are afraid of the Lithuanians. Stories about them are filled with dangerous escapades and humor.

Americans say that the Lithuanians are sort of a weaponized version of Borat, who think nothing of sauntering around a base in nothing but flip-flops and underwear. "They look like mountain men. They never shave, sometimes don't bathe, and often roll out the gate wearing nothing but body armor and weapons. Not even a t-shirt," an American soldier told me. The Lithuanians may be a little bit nuts, but the Americans love to have them around because Lithuanians love to fight, and when you need backup, you can count on them. That contrasts starkly with many of the NATO "partners."

Maybe when your country spends almost a half-century with the Soviet boot on its neck, its first generation of free soldiers know what freedom is worth - and that you sometimes have to fight for it.

Try to get that mental image out of your head, Lithuanian soldiers riding Taliban motorcycles wearing nothing but body armor and weapons.

If you'd like to do something to support our troops and their loved ones at Christmas, here ya go:

The Injured Marine Semper Fi Fund

SoldiersAngels

The United Warrior Survivor Foundation

Naval Special Warfare Foundation

Operation Enduring Christmas

Operation Support Our Troops

Iraq War vet challenges Obama for anti-war stand

You've heard of Joe the Plumber. Now here's Sgt. Joe Cook, a wounded Iraq War veteran whose video is the most-watched on youtube in this campaign. He has a challenge for Obama.

And here is Sgt. Cook on Fox News with Shepard Smith.

Two "Joes" outranks one "Colin": McCain-Palin win!

Out of commission on my home blogging computer for almost a week and I missed blogging. Hopefully all is fixed now. Did some "troll" hit me with a bug? Possible. You're not paranoid if folks really are out to get you. And Obama and his trolls and leftwing nuts are playing very dirty.

Question: Do two "Joes" outrank one "Colin"? Out here in redneck country, the answer is HELL yes! Between Joe the plumber and Joe the Biden (Charles Krauthammer said Biden is a Republican plant and I think he's right) the two "Joes" have been playing havoc with Obama's coronation. Joe the plumber is a hero because he doesn't want Obama spreading his hard-earned wealth around to the 40 percent of folks who don't pay taxes in the first place. And Joe the Biden is the unlikely hero who opened his big mouth and admitted Obama ain't ready for prime time. Vote for Obama and get your international crises early and often! Who's up first? Ahmanutjob in Iran? Chavez-Khrushchev in Venezuela? Big Daddy Kim in North Korea? Putin-Stalin in Russia?

And what's a Colin Powell endorsement worth? Not squat to us rednecks who never liked him in the first place since he talked President Bush the 1st into pulling the plug on the first invasion of Iraq just when we had Saddam Hussein by the short hairs and shoulda finished him off.

If not for Colin Powell getting squeamish about victory, there would have been no war in Iraq.

And tell me just one thing the man accomplished as Secretary of State in President Bush the 2nd's first term. I'm waiting. Just like I'm also waiting for someone to tell me exactly what kind of executive experience Barack Obama has. Still waiting. Time's up. Same answer. Big zero.

So liberal pollsters and liberal media keeps on lying like a rug and Sarah and John are gonna shock 'em all in two weeks. I love the smell of burning nutroots rage on the morning of Nov. 5.

Gen. Petraeus: Ignored Hero of Iraq War

You mighta missed it on the news yesterday. It certainly didn't lead off on TV or get a big headline in The Washington Post or New York Times.

General David Petraeus, commander of our troops in Iraq, passed the baton to General Ray Odierno and moved on to a higher command post.

Petraeus was not a household name in the dark days of early 2007 as he took command of the war in Iraq. Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid were leading a baying pack of hounds, quite sure they had President Bush treed at last as they took turns with the whipsaw blades.

Then came Petraeus and the surge, which Bush supported virtually alone in his own administration and with slim backing in Congress. A senator from Arizona whose political obituary had already been written by the mainstream media was one of the few lonely voices pushing for the surge.

But as 2008 dawned, Jewish pundit Charles Krauthammer commented that he might have to revise his view on the resurrection of the dead because reports of the death of John McCain's campaign for President turned out to be greatly exaggerated. The same could also be said of the war in Iraq, because as McCain's fortunes improved, Petraeus was performing a resurrection miracle in Iraq, while at the same time performing mass reverse resurrections on Osama's thugs. Harry "The war is lost!" Reid and Nancy "Cut and run!" Pelosi grew strangely silent about the war.

Obama stubbornly refused to admit the surge had actually worked until he grew so desperate about Palin-McCain that he asked Bill O'Reilly to let him end his boycott of Fox News. And when O'Reilly pressed him about the surge, Obama cheerfully said with a straight face that the surge had "exceeded our wildest dreams!" Our dreams? I may have to revise my view of Hillary and Bill being the World Champions at telling whoppers.

Maybe it exceeded Obama's worst nightmare, but more recent events have probably taken that rank in the shapely form of one Sarah Palin.

But where is the hero's welcome home, the ticker-tape parade for Gen. David Petraeus, the hero of Iraq? I suspect he'll never get that well-deserved honor. He and his troops coming home will get roughly the same thing us vets from Vietnam got, indifference or even worse.

At Petraeus' change-of-command ceremony Tuesday in Baghdad, Secretary of Defense Williams Gates did give him an appropriate tribute.

"Darkness had descended on this land; merchants of chaos were gaining strength. Death was commonplace, and people around the world were wondering whether any Iraq strategy would work.”

"Slowly, but inexorably, the tide began to turn, our enemies took a fearsome beating they will not soon forget. Fortified by our own people and renewed commitment, the soldiers of Iraq found new courage and confidence. And the people of Iraq, resilient and emboldened, rose up to take back their country."

Is there an echo in here? As I read that quote, I thought I heard a faint, shrill voice somewhere in the background cying out some nonsense about this being the day the oceans will begin to recede and all the ills of humanity will begin to heal. I was probably just hearing things.

I guess I'll know for sure whether my ears were playing tricks on me when the returns come in on the first Tuesday in November. Because that day, the people will decide whether they're on the side of Gen. Petraeus and McCain or Obama and the "General Betray-Us" move-on crowd.

Caspar Weinberger Jr., son of Reagan's Secretary of Defense, is one of the few joining Gates in extending a hero's tribute to Gen Petraeus.

Here’s to General David Petraeus. He never betrayed us. Indeed, he saved America’s war in Iraq. Maybe not single-handily, but there is no doubt whatsoever that without General Petraeus’ bold move to push for more troops to turn the tide against the insurgents, which has paid off handsomely, America would have been severely weakened both at home and around the world.

Obama's Iraq Deception: Leave troops in war

Move America Forward PAC released an ad this morning slamming Senator Barack Obama for his disgraceful political games with the U.S. military fighting for our freedom in Iraq.

Obama urged Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki "not to rush" into a troop withdrawal plan until he himself takes office. This has been interpreted by most as an attempt to make sure that if he is elected President, he is the one to declare victory in Iraq and end the war.

Obama's spin team issues an angry denial; accidentally reveals the truth! Read more on the MAF PAC BLOG

Petraeus vs. Obama: 'President' Obama's military wisdom?

"Petraeus vs. Obama" asks political leaders to acknowledge the truth about the surge. The ad highlights Senator Obama's refusal to acknowledge that the surge in Iraq was successful, despite countless reports from General Petraeus that we have made significant progress.

Yon reports ‘Death in the Corn II’ from Afghanistan

Michael Yon is back at war, this time in Afghanistan, and just like he did in Iraq, he’s not in the rear with the gear, he’s up front with the troops. Yon reported as an independent correspondent in Iraq as long as that war remained “hot” but with victory at hand there, he’s gone to “The Forgotten War.” He files the second in a 3-part series from a British base in a cornfield, called Death in the Corn.

The ambush was set, but “Terry” Taliban didn’t step into it. The most successful hunters are not the ones who bag something every time, but the ones who hunt all the time, and 2 Para has been hunting the most dangerous prey. The soldiers of C-co 2 Para are not sure how many they’ve killed in the past five months, but the estimates are around 200, and during the days I spent with them, their average daily kill would put them well over that number.

In part 2 of a series, Yon goes on a foot patrol with British Army troops deep in “Terry” Taliban country in Afghanistan and when they occupy an abandoned mud fort, the former Green Beret does what any good soldier does when has a chance. He takes a nap.

There was some heavy shooting far in front of us that abated within minutes, and I fell back asleep in the last slivers of shade. Then a very sharp firefight broke out at the forward positions. Again, Lima 1-1 was not involved, but intelligence came in that Taliban might be heading in our direction, although no one knew if they were aware of our position. Probably they did know, because two boys rode by on a donkey, and there were other compounds nearby where we could hear dogs barking and kids playing. Some of the dogs here are massive and look like Cujo.

I tried to fall back asleep, but the shade was evaporating as the sun rose, and every time sweet dreams started, they were interrupted by a firefight, so I climbed down the precarious ladder to sit with Dr. Lalani. Soldiers have great respect for medical doctors who can justifiably stay on base, but instead push into combat. If the doctor is there during those first minutes after a soldier is wounded, there is a far greater chance of survival.

At about 1106, the enemy initiated contact on one of the forward positions. It was so loud that I thought our guys were firing from the roof. Rockets were blasting away. About 40 seconds after contact, the 81mm mortars were firing straight over our heads and crashing down on enemy positions about a klick to our front. Thousands of rounds were being fired, though the guns all around me were silent.

The elements up front were fighting while I just listened to the gunfire and explosions while eating one of the MREs the Danes had given me. Up front in the fight, Lance Corporal Alex Fraenzel was hauling a Javelin missile. Fraenzel and Private Richard Lloyd ran forward. While Fraenzel set up for the shot, Lloyd began firing his SA-80 rifle into suspected enemy positions to provide cover.

Yon ends his second report in the series “Death in the Corn” with a promise of even more lively action to come in the third report.

The patrol returned to Gibraltar, not knowing how many Taliban they had killed, if any. But tomorrow they would go out hunting again. This time, they would bag their limit.

Michael Yon returns to war: 'Death in the Corn'

A t-shirt worn by one of the British troops in Afghanistan says plainly that their business is killing Taliban -- and business is good.

Michael Yon is back at war with the troops, this time in Afghanistan. Nobody since Ernie Pyle in WWII has spent more time with the troops in the mud, blood and grime of war than Yon.

He's posted Part 1 of a series he calls "Death in the Corn" with British troops way out in no man's land, where "Terry" Taliban shells the Brits daily and even hourly with RPGs and attacks often.

The soldiers are living like animals at a little rat’s nest called FOB Gibraltar. They call it “Gib.” Named after the lynchpin of British naval dominance in the Mediterranean, this cluster of mud huts in the middle of hostile territory is more like Fort Apache, Afghanistan. The British soldiers from C-Company 2 Para live in ugly conditions, fight just about every day, and morale is the best I have seen probably anywhere.

Say a prayer for Michael and the troops, ours and our allies, in the never-ending war on terror.

The way forward to victory in 'The Forgotten War'

In his 5th and last in a series of reports on Afghanistan, the Forgotten War, retired Marine Lt. Col. Oliver North examines the big picture and makes an assessment of the way forward to victory.

Though there are significant cultural and tribal differences between Afghanistan and Iraq -- the military/security situation in Afghanistan is similar to what it was in Mesopotamia 2 1/2 years ago -- they are equally "winnable" if we do the right things. Some repairs will take time, but these are needed urgently:

--Inform both the Pakistani and Iranian governments that insurgent cross-border operations will not be tolerated and that if Taliban/terror bases on their territories are not closed, they will be attacked.

--Commence building paved roads throughout all of Afghanistan's 34 provinces, not just in urban areas. Such projects will generate tens of thousands of jobs, create lasting infrastructure, reduce casualties from IEDs and mines, and show the Afghan people that their government cares about them.

--Stop illicit drug production from the top down, not the bottom up. Arrest and prosecute the kingpins, and then go for eradication and crop replacement. It worked in Colombia, and it can work in Afghanistan.

--Fix the unity of command problem immediately. The NATO-ISAF command structure should be shut down. "Allied" forces that can't or won't fight should be thanked and sent home. More U.S. troops are needed desperately in Afghanistan, but unless Gen. Petraeus is given clear lines of authority to do what has to be done, the Afghan army and police never will get the equipment and training they need. He did it in Iraq. Now he needs to do it in Afghanistan.

The Afghan people don't want to be ruled by Islamic radicals. Afghan soldiers -- properly trained, equipped, led and supported -- are brave and fight well, but they can't win unless these problems are fixed. Neither they nor the young Americans serving here should have to wait for a new administration in Washington to make the necessary repairs.

If you missed the first four parts of Ollie North's reports on the Forgotten War:

Friday Aug 29, 2008

Report From a Forgotten War (4th in a Series)

Friday Aug 22, 2008

Report From a Forgotten War (3rd in a Series)

Friday Aug 15, 2008

Report From a Forgotten War (2nd in a Series)

Friday Aug 8, 2008

Report From a Forgotten War (1st in a Series)

The real story from Afghanistan

Retired Marine Lt. Col. Oliver North and his Fox News cameraman go along on a Special Ops raid deep in Taliban territory in Afghanistan and record a vicious gun battle that results in victory for the good guys and a defeat for the bad guys.

HERAT, Afghanistan -- A Taliban sentry fired the first shots shortly after 2:30 a.m. as Afghan commandos and U.S. Special Operations Command troops surrounded the compound at Aziz Abad. Though the Marine Special Operations Team had employed a daring deception to achieve surprise, they were engaged heavily by gunfire from AK-47s and machine guns almost immediately after deploying at the objective.

For the next 2 1/2 hours, the 207th Afghan Commandos and their U.S. Army and Marine counterparts were in a running gunfight with heavily armed Taliban fighters inside the walled compound. When enemy combatants on rooftops and in narrow alleyways could not be dislodged by fire from U.S. and Afghan troops on the ground, they were hit by supporting fire from manned and unmanned aircraft overhead.

By dawn Aug. 22, it appeared that the commandos and their American advisers had achieved a stunning success. Credible information received after a "Shura" -- a town meeting with local tribal leaders -- had revealed the timing and location of a Taliban gathering. The intelligence was confirmed painstakingly, and U.S. Special Operations Command officers sat down with their Afghan commando counterparts to carefully plan a "capture-kill mission" with the goal of taking several key Taliban leaders into custody. Fox News cameraman Chris Jackson and I accompanied the raid force.

But wait, that's not the end of the story. That's only the beginning. The Taliban did what they always do when they're defeated. Lie. Lie, lie and lie some more, telling ever bigger lies. About the only lie they didn't tell this time is that it was a wedding party. And then the investigations begin and the "Haditha massacre" is replayed in Afghanistan . All this sad tale lacks is Lyin' John Murtha.

On Aug. 24, with several investigations under way but not yet complete, the commando battalion commander was "suspended." That evening, in a report on Fox News, I noted that neither cameraman Chris Jackson nor I had seen any noncombatants killed and that "the Taliban and their supporters are running a very effective propaganda campaign to discredit coalition efforts. Exaggerated claims of damage often result in demands for more money in compensation."

The next day, the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan concluded that 90 civilians had been killed during the raid at Aziz Abad. Then, as we were departing for Herat, we were informed that the government in Kabul was offering $200,000 to settle the claims and was planning new restrictions on Special Operations Command missions.

Let's hope that won't be the end of this story. U.S. commanders here are appealing to the Karzai government to look at the evidence -- including our videotape -- and to continue to support intelligence-driven operations against the Taliban. Brig. Gen. Khair Mohammad, chief of staff of the 207th Corps, Western Military Region, told me: "We need to have America's help to win this fight. Your enemy is our enemy."

It's like the famous lawyer who told the jury, "Who are you gonna believe, me or your lying eyes?" Ollie was there and he's got the videotape to prove the truth. God help our troops.

This is the 4th in a series by Ollie reporting on the war in Afghanistan. Here's the previous ones:

Friday Aug 22, 2008

Report From a Forgotten War

Friday Aug 15, 2008

Report From a Forgotten War (2nd in a Series)

Friday Aug 22, 2008

Report From a Forgotten War