As we approach next month’s report by General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker, the debate about Iraq will intensify. One key point of discussion will be a threshold question: How important is Iraq in the larger war against Islamic extremism? Is Iraq a central battleground in the fight against jihadists, or a distraction?
Matt Drudge has posted this headline on his site: "Editor For SC Largest Paper: Edwards Is 'A Big Phony.'" That claim may qualify as the understatement of the political year.
John Edwards: "The core of this presidency has been a political doctrine that George Bush calls the 'Global War on Terror.' He has used this doctrine like a sledgehammer to justify the worst abuses and biggest mistakes of his administration... The war on terror is a slogan designed only for politics, not a strategy to make America safe. It's a bumper sticker, not a plan..."
Last Thursday, by a vote of 50-48, the Senate rejected a Democratic resolution to withdraw most American combat troops from Iraq in early 2008. The House Appropriations Committee, meanwhile, approved an emergency spending bill for Iraq and Afghanistan that includes a timeline for withdrawal from Iraq.
In the wake of North Korea's claim that it conducted its first-ever nuclear weapons test, leading Democrats presented their solution: bilateral negotiations with the Kim Jong Il regime.
Five years ago today, Americans opened their newspapers to read front page stories in The New York Times with these headlines: "School Dress Codes vs. a Sea of Bare Flesh" and "In a Nation of Early Risers, Morning TV Is a Hot Market."
Once in a while, we are provided with a clarifying moment in the jumble of news we have to sort through on a daily basis. Last week, we had one.
George Will is one of the outstanding columnists of our time, and he has significantly shaped conservatism (including my own) over the years. But his latest column about the President's foreign policy agenda in the Middle East is misguided and wrong in several important respects.
Once in a while, we are provided with a clarifying moment in the jumble of news we have to sort through on a daily basis. This morning, we had one.
The Time article asserts that our actions in Iraq have "emboldened" the rulers in Tehran and Pyongyang to obtain nuclear weapons. The implication is that North Korea and Iran would have taken a different path if the Iraq war had never happened.
By now you have probably seen or read President Bush's Rose Garden statement on the death of Abu Musab al Zarqawi. I would only add these points to what the President said.
ISIS Fighters Reach out to Ferguson Protesters, Offer Help In Exchange for Oath of Allegiance to Baghdadi | Leah Barkoukis
Ahead of Thankgiving Holiday, Obama Administration Quietly Submits New EPA Regulation Proposal | Katie Pavlich
WaPo Flashback: DOJ Probably Does Not Have Enough To File Civil Rights Charges Against Darren Wilson | Matt Vespa