King of Fools

And in a fourth incident, American troops apparently misidentified the members of an allied Iraqi security force today and fired on them, killing eight Iraqi policeman and wounding five other people, news agencies reported.

Military officials said the foreign fighters came from Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Sudan and Syria, and were carrying machine guns and rifles, as well as $75,000 in Iraqi dinars.

U.S. officials suspect they are part of a growing al Qaeda foreign legion whose members are being recruited at mosques and over the Internet throughout the world to undermine U.S. rebuilding efforts and drive coalition forces out of Iraq.

Besides which, they have been targeting homes all along.

The kind of bombing campaign they are carrying out is distinctly low-resource. They cannot deliver many bombs, and the ones they do deliver are not very powerful because they must be carried by a single person without detection. That limits the size, weight and shape of the weapon, and they've settled on the "explosive belt" as the best compromise. This is a ring made up of a couple of kilos of plastic explosive around the midriff of the bomber, with a layer of metal fragments (e.g. ball bearings, nails) on top. When the explosive goes off, shrapnel spreads out horizontally in all directions. The entire thing probably doesn't weigh 10 kilos and can be comfortably worn under loose clothing (which is common there). It doesn't cause the bomber to move differently (by weight or physical obstruction) and doesn't create any unseemly lumps under the clothing. It can be reliably detonated electrically, using a simple switch.

In terms of maximizing destructive ability within the essential constraints of stealth, it seems optimal, especially if one doesn't care about the fate of the operator. But as military weapons go, it isn't really very impressive, except for the sophistication of the delivery system. It's a "smart weapon" but the warhead is tiny. The weapon's lethality range upon detonation is pretty small, and the shrapnel is easily stopped by any kind of significant physical barrier. The only way such a bomb can be effective is if it is used near (or in the middle of) concentrations of people in a single space.

The aptness of the battlefields we have chosen is proven every time we uncover another connection between the shadowy forces of Al-Quaeda (simply "The Base") and its many allies around the world. These groups go by different names in different countries, but ties of communication, doctrine and deadly method have been well-established. In turn, the support of these groups by countries such Afghanistan and Iraq – the countries where we have taken the fight – has also been well-established.

Osama bin Laden was able to use the entire country of Afghanistan as his base and training ground. He and members of his Al-Quaeda visited Saddam Hussein's Iraq for supplies and training, such as practicing taking over large passenger jets in the camp at Salman Pak. In fact, bin Laden bragged about his success in the 9-11 attack, while Hussein openly sent huge payments to those who carried out the terrorist murders he so desired. There now can be no doubt that the horrendous events of 9-11 can be laid at both their feet. They were indeed among the many perpetrators of that deed – and many more.

And now they are both dead, or in deep hiding. As President Bush has said, "They aren't leading any parades lately." The world is better for their absence. To say otherwise is anti-human, anti-civilization, and anti-reason.

Yet there are those who do say otherwise, who dispute the wisdom of this war that was so suddenly thrust upon us. Why they would say so is open to question, for it is difficult to credit that they could actually believe that Iraq, Afghanistan, the United States and the world would have been better off had we just allowed these two villains their will.

Unfortunately, those carrying this dishonest story are among the most influential voices in our society: left-leaning politicians and the mainstream media who support them. And the only possible answer to the question "why?" is the simple one-word answer: "Politics." Those on the left are so set against President Bush, against any Republican serving in nationwide office, that they would undermine their own country's strength in order to undermine his.

So they tell lie after lie, about President Bush, his actions, his motives. More cruelly, they tell lies about the brave men who are fighting and dying for our security in deserts halfway around the world from home. The US Armed Forces valiantly destroyed the base of Al-Quaeda and their allies, the Taliban of Afghanistan. They then brilliantly drove up the heart of the country of Iraq and in a matter of days took the capital Baghdad. In both cases, they took great care to minimize the impact on civilians, not only in terms of precious lives, but also of essential infrastructure.

Now they are rebuilding both countries, reopening schools and hospitals, repairing plants and lines for water, gas and oil. Even more importantly, they are building relationships with local citizens, gathering information on where the continuing threats are coming from, and teaching those who want to build their country how to be police and firefighters, leaders and legislators. Both countries are physically well on the way to restoration, and politically more free and representative than ever before.

Meanwhile, in this country and around the world, we are tracking, finding and stopping jihadi terrorists who are still intent on killing us and destroying our civilization. Over 1,000 proven terrorists have been captured, and many more killed. And although the terrorists have enjoyed some bloody successes, over 100 intended attacks have been thwarted. Despite threats and attempts, no further major attack has occurred in America. This has been done with a minimum of disruption to our own lives, and even with sensitivity to non-jihadist Muslims.

Yet still we hear the constant drumbeat of negativity from the hostile media. Why are they so loath to pass on the good news? Why don't they want Americans to be proud of their own country, and solicitous for her security? Could it be, could it possibly be, that they are so small-minded that they would rather see us suffer than to see George Bush prosper and be popular?

Fortunately for us, President Bush himself is of opposite mind. If he had to do something unpopular in order to protect our country, so unpopular that it would cost him re-election, he would do it in a moment. He is better and finer than his opponents in this: his country is more important to him than that word, "Politics."

The truth of 9-11-2003 is that we are, as President Bush told us two years ago, in a war that will be long and hard-fought. The truth is that we are winning that war, and winning it honorably. The truth is that we are taking the fight to the terrorists' back yard, instead of letting them bring it to ours. And, the truth is, no matter how hard the Left tries to spin it, that we are winning that war because of the leadership of President George W. Bush.

They'll hold hands, light candles, and pass around a plateful of platitudes: 'Never forget,' they'll intone. 'Let's roll,' they'll thunder. 'God bless America,' they'll warble in perfect harmony.

They'll assure us that they are committed to fighting terror and securing our borders and doing whatever it takes to protect the homeland from another horrific mass murder at the hands of freedom-hating fanatics. And then?

That's what's in store for the Middle East in the wake of the resignation of Palestinian prime minister Mahmoud Abbas, according to online commentators in the region. The exit of Abbas, in combination with Israel's attempted assassination on Saturday of Sheik Ahmed Yassin, spiritual founder of Hamas, is widely seen as the demise of the Bush administration’s 'road map' for peace.