Filed under: Capitalism, Economy | Tags: Europe, Political Correctness/Multiculturalism
European greengrocers have been released from restrictions on the appearance of fruits and vegetables that have bedeviled them for 20 years. Busybodies in Brussels have long issued regulations on the shape of a proper carrot, the curve that a banana must have, the lumpiness of a potato. The reasons for all this intrusion in shoppers’ lives were mysterious, but the bans have been lifted. Reason reigns.
“J Sainsbury said that consumers could save up to 40 percent.” Forty percent off the average European’s grocery bill. Mother Nature wins. Not every carrot grows long and svelte, but a farmer loses a lot by having to sort out all the ungainly ones.
The relaxation of the ban doesn’t cover everything, but it’s a start. Shoppers are perfectly able to sort out what they want to buy for themselves, and don’t need the intrusive edicts from the Nannies. Nannies here need to pay attention before they get big ideas.
Filed under: Foreign Policy, Freedom, History, Pop Culture | Tags: Anti-Americanism, Europe, South America
It is not clear just what President Obama hopes to gain from his overseas efforts to apologize for America’s supposed misdeeds in the recent and distant past. Apology has been the centerpiece of his strategy. Those of us who differ with Obama’s approach have a different set of assumptions and beliefs. He has spent an amazing portion of his time speaking of the grievances of our allies and adversaries. He explains his approach in this way:
If we are practicing what we preach and if we occasionally confess to having strayed from our values and our ideals, that strengthens our hand; that allows us to speak with greater moral force and clarity around these issues.
Obama seems to believe that anti-Americanism arises entirely from the terrible actions of that cowboy George Bush, and if he just apologizes enough, everyone will like us. Or at least think that he is an improvement over his predecessor. But Obama needs a better understanding of history.
Anti-Americanism has been around since the earliest days of our country. Think of what a threat America has been to the countries of Europe. We founded this country in opposition to a continent of Kings and Princes. We denied the divine right of Kings, and created a democratic republic. No authority of Princes here. Even at the time of the War of Independence, our soldiers volunteered, they were not conscripted; and when it was time for Spring planting, they might just pack up and go home to get the crops in. They were fighting, in part, mercenaries conscripted by one Prince or another and sold to fight for the British.
Our Declaration of Independence was a direct threat to the rule of a nobility. “All men are created equal” was a reproach to their established order. Americans had nearly one hundred and fifty years of personal independence before their freedoms were challenged by their British rulers. George Washington had a time teaching them to be soldiers and obey orders. They were ready to fight, but the obey part came harder. What if that idea of “equality” were to be transported to the old country. What mischief would that cause.
And it did. The French, inspired by our Revolution, not only threw off their King, but they chopped off his head and those of another 20,000 Frenchmen as well. Certainly that must have made the nobility of Europe sit up and take notice.
Bernard Bailyn describes in his splendid book The Peopling of British North America what we seldom recognize:
The westward transatlantic movement of people is one of the greatest events in recorded history. It’s magnitudes and consequences are beyond measure. From 1500 to the present, it has involved the displacement and resettlement of over fifty million people, and it has affected the foundation of American history and is basic, too, in ways we are only now beginning to understand, to the history of Europe, Africa, and even, to a lesser extent, of Asia.
We think proudly of our immigrants, our forbears. But for Britain and Europe that was fifty million people rejecting the old country and all that it stood for. Reproach.
What is it like for other countries when their country is inundated with American goods. Starbucks, McDonalds, Kentucky Fried, jeans and tee shirts. And in the world capital of fine food, people line up at McDonalds. Reproach.
What is it like for the citizens of Indonesia when an American battle group arrives with hospitals (plural) and a capability of not only flying rescue missions, but of producing vast quantities of fresh drinking water from sea water. Competence beyond their reach. They are grateful, of course, but it is still a reproach to them.
The Pakistani people are deeply proud of their nuclear weapon. It says that they are competent in a world that has so modernized that it has left them behind, out of history. Someone, and I forget who, said that they couldn’t even make a bicycle chain. It is not that they are envious or jealous, but that our freedom and independence and invention and competence are a reproach to them. They focus on our mistakes and failures, for it lessens the reproach for their lack of freedom and invention and competence. And when we make mistakes, we not only tell the whole world about it, we noisily turn around and try to fix it. And worst of all, we are happier than they are, and we’re noisy about that too.
Slavery is our great sin. We fought a great war to end it, and we are still struggling to eliminate its traces. The whole world knows of our guilt. Yet South America imported nearly 12 slaves and the West Indies 10 slaves for every one slave that went to North America. Slavery did not end in Brazil until 1888. But we don’t spend any time reproaching Brazil, we just get on with criticizing— ourselves.
So the “apology tour” is essentially pointless. It just makes us seem weak to bow down to petty tyrants and dictators, and to invite their insults. And appearing weak is dangerous.
After passively listening to a 50 minute diatribe against the United States by Nicaragua’s Daniel Ortega, Obama said “I’m grateful that President Ortega did not blame me for things that happened when I was three months old.” Obama made much of an offer by Raul Castro to talk with the U.S. Government, but Fidel wrote today that Obama not only misunderstood Raul, but he was “conceited, superficial,” and that he had no right to dare suggest that Cuba make even small concessions.
Obama won a campaign with his personal charm and unusual history. Perhaps he believes that he can win over the world the same way. Apologies don’t seem to be working so well. So far he has come home empty-handed.
Filed under: Foreign Policy, History, Military, Progressivism, Terrorism | Tags: Europe, Missile Proliferation, Obama
Let’s see. North Korea shoots off a missile, claiming that it is a peaceful satellite. The rest of the world notes that it is a dangerous test of a long range missile. Obama says that if the North Koreans launch the missile, there will be serious consequences, which means that we will go back to the U.N., which will do nothing, nothing at all.
In the meantime, China is increasing their defense spending, building up their military. Russia has announced plans to build up their military, and have demanded that America refrain from putting missile defense in Eastern Europe. Iran is ever closer to their first nuclear weapon, and is cooperating with North Korea, attending their missile launch. North Korea is becoming a prime proliferator, selling nuclear technology to all the most disreputable nations.
[The perfect moment.] Obama denounced “fatalism” over nuclear proliferation and promised to lead a global effort to reduce and eventually eliminate nuclear weapons. He hailed the “courageous Czech Republic and Poland for “agreeing to host a defense against these missiles”. The Telegraph (UK) headline says: “Barack Obama goes ahead with missile defense shield despite disarmament pledge.”
President Obama requested a 10% cut in defense spending. [Nice timing] Barney Frank asked for a 25% cut. The Communist Party USA asked for a 50% cut.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced plans to cancel or reduce such major programs as the Airborne Laser, Multiple Kill Vehicle and the installation of additional Ground-Based Interceptor missiles in Alaska, and cut the MDA’s budget for Fiscal Year 2010 by $1.4 billion. These proposals would amount to almost a 15% cut in the MDA budget and a major reduction in our missile defense portfolio. Or so said a bipartisan group of Senators who oppose cuts in Missile Defense. Lieutenant General Daniel Maples, the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, recently testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee that “the threat posed by ballistic missile delivery systems is likely to increase while growing more complex over the next decades,” their letter to the President went on to say. “Adversary nations are increasingly adopting technical and operational countermeasures to defeat missile defenses.” Ballistic missile technology has already proliferated worldwide and is a direct threat to both our allies and our homeland.
Well, some say that North Korea only attempts to scare us so that we will give them more aid. But they have passed nuclear technology on to Iraq, Iran, Pakistan and Syria. Now, you can condemn all this as “provocative,” but only a damn fool doesn’t pay attention.
Obama, was on his apology and appeasement tour. In Strasbourg, the President of the United States said:
In recent years, we’ve allowed our alliance to drift. I know that there have been honest disagreements over policy, but we also know that there’s something more that has crept into our relationship. In America there’s a failure to appreciate Europe’s leading role in the world. Instead of celebrating your dynamic union and seeking to partner with you to meet common challenges, there have been times where America’s shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive.
But in Europe, there is an anti-Americanism that is at once casual but can also be insidious. Instead of recognizing the good that America so often does in the world, there have been times where Europeans choose to blame America for much of what’s bad.
Greta Van Susteren asked her guest Ambassador John Bolton: “Is President Obama right? What do you think about his speech?” John Bolton said:
I was shocked at how poor his knowledge of history is. If he thinks tensions between Europe and the United States are of recent vintage, particularly during the Bush administration, he really needs some additional schooling.
If you go back to the time of the Revolution, there have been differences between Europeans and Americans very reminiscent of things we’ve seen in more recent years. If you read the diaries and letters of the British and American top political and military leaders in World War II, they were at each others’ throats. Lord Allenbrook, the British commander, didn’t think Dwight Eisenhower was fit to be Supreme Commander or Americans were fit to fight.
This goes back and forth all the time. The idea that, suddenly, he’s going to change this as a matter of attitude is itself a form of arrogance on his part.
President Obama needs to recognize that he is no longer in campaign mode. He is now the President of the United States, all of us, not just the ones who gave him campaign funds. Part of his duty is to preserve the dignity of the office of the Presidency, and a world apology tour just isn’t doing it. Did he not grasp the graciousness of President Bush who refused to comment in any way on his successors’ term of office?
Filed under: Democrat Corruption, Domestic Policy, Europe, Foreign Policy, Terrorism | Tags: Democrat Demagogues, Europe, Homeland Security
A President of the United States has many new lessons to learn as he takes office. Every word that he utters in public is analyzed by governments all over the world for clues to the inner man, and to the American character and intentions.
Observers often wondered why George W. Bush seemed to speak in short bursts, and often mangled words; yet in informal conversation he spoke easily and eloquently. He may have mangled words —’ misunderestimated’ comes quickly to mind — but there were no verbal gaffes. Mr. Bush was well aware that his words would be closely analyzed, and he spoke with great care, if in short bursts.
Observers particularly watch for signs of weakness. Suddenly North Korea is testing new longer range missiles, and has broken off talks with South Korea, and is doing some saber rattling. Kyrgyzstan has begun moves to close a U.S. military air base in the former Soviet republic, which is vital for U.S. led troops fighting in Afghanistan, after securing Russian financial aid promises of more than $2 billion in credit and aid — equal to about half of Kyrgyzstan’s gross domestic product.
Protesters are marching in Vladivostok and Moscow as the Russian economy implodes. There are repeated reports of trouble in China. The financial crisis is not just in this country.
The Obama campaign apparently commenced negotiations with Iran and Syria long before American voters went to the polls, in violation of Federal Law and simple propriety. The chief Iranian spokesman, Gholam-Hossein Elham, responded to Obama’s public peace feelers with contempt: “This request means Western ideology has become passive, that capitalist thought and the system of domination have failed.” Iran is working on long range missiles, as well as what they insist is simple nuclear power. A good percentage of the population of Iran is pro-democracy and pro-American, and opposed to their government. Iran has just launched its first satellite into space.
Anti-trade provisions in the stimulus bill have antagonized most of our trade partners with “buy American” provisions. Those provisions were demanded by the Unions who supported Obama so heavily in the past election and by protectionist members of Congress. Canada and the EU have warned that such a trade policy in the middle of a global economic downturn could ignite a trade war; and that such policies were disastrous in the Great Depression. Obama is trying to change the wording.
The Times of India has noticed that Obama has already issued 17 exceptions to his no-lobbyists position for White House hires. The Telegraph in London notes that the “Sheen Already Coming Off Obama’s Presidency.”
Obama has had a very bad first two weeks. He needs to realize that the campaign is over. It’s time to stop blaming Bush, and face up like a man to the fact that what happens now is on his plate. He has duties now, not to his campaign supporters, but directly to the American people.
That’s what that oath he took was all about.
Filed under: Election 2008, Europe, Foreign Policy, Iraq, Liberalism, Media Bias, Military, News, News the Media Doesn't Want You to Hear, Politics, Terrorism, The Constitution | Tags: Europe, Germany, Liberal lies, Washington Post
Barack Obama’s “Presidential World Tour” provoked a fair amount of humor and sarcasm on many right-leaning blogs, including this one. The repainted plane, with the U.S. flag on the tail removed to be replaced by the Obama symbol, the seat labeled “the President”, the entourage including three major television anchors, the announcement of his foreign policy towards Iraq and Afghanistan before going there on a “learning” trip were a few of the occasions for questioning presumptuous behavior.
But it was the arrogant request to speak at the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin that really raised questions. (Like who does he think he is?). Wolfram Weimer, editor in chief of the German political monthly Cicero said:
It would not occur to any one in France to let Oskar Lafontaine, the co-Chair of the German Left Party, hold a campaign speech at the Arc de Triomphe. No one in England would think of helping one of the Kaczynski brothers stump for Polish votes in front of Buckingham Palace….Why not? Because there is such a thing as a feeling of reverence toward national symbols. And this feeling forbids one from allowing such places to be misused for the politicking of foreign nations. It shows a lack of respect to want to degrade the historical monuments of friendly countries into electoral campaign scenery.
Weimer added that “By virtue of his request he makes brazenly clear that he is not really interested in Germany as such. What interests him is, above all, the décor for a good photo opportunity.”
His Berlin speech, where he presented himself as a “citizen of the world”, without irony, made him sound like a candidate of transnational progressivism — where global rules and norms are more important than sovereign nations — and little things like the American Constitution. The Press, however, ate it up. “He looks so Presidential”, they gushed.
Amir Taheri wrote about Obama’s tour that:
“He looked like a man in a hurry,” a source close to Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said last week. “He was not interested in what we had to say.”…Iraqis were most surprised by Obama’s apparent readiness to throw away all the gains made in Iraq simply to prove that he’d been right in opposing the 2003 overthrow of Saddam Hussein. “He gave us the impression that the last thing he wanted was for Iraq to look anything like a success for the United States,” a senior Iraqi official told me. “As far as he is concerned, this is Bush’s war and must end in lack of success, if not actual defeat.”
There were, however, some cracks in the media’s adoration. Katie Couric gave him the toughest questioning of the tour. Reporters had to gently remind his campaign staff that “He isn’t President yet”. The slight bounce in the polls after his appearances in Berlin, Paris and London has pretty much disappeared. He has encouraged portrayal of himself as a messianic figure, welcomed portraits of himself with halos. Though the mock “presidential seal” has disappeared, the media enthusiasm has not. Chris Matthews still has that ‘tingle’.
Dana Milbank from the Washington Post showed today that the press is not always a faithful and dependable doormat:
Fresh from his presidential-style world tour, during which foreign leaders and American generals lined up to show him affection, Obama settled down to some presidential-style business in Washington yesterday. He ordered up a teleconference with the (current president’s) Treasury secretary, granted an audience to the Pakistani prime minister and had his staff arrange for the chairman of the Federal Reserve to give him a briefing. Then he went up to Capitol Hill to be adored by House Democrats in a presidential-style pep rally.
Along the way he traveled in a bubble more insulating than the actual president’s. Traffic was shut down for him as he zoomed about town in a long, presidential-style motorcade, while the public and most of the press were kept in the dark about his activities, which included a fundraiser at the Mayflower where donors paid $10,000 or more to have photos taken with him.
[At the] adoration session with lawmakers in the Cannon Caucus Room…he told the House members, “This is the moment…that the world is waiting for,”adding’ “I have become a symbol of the possibility of America returning to our best traditions.”
As he marches toward Inauguration Day (Election Day is but a milestone on that path), Obama’s biggest challenger may not be Republican John McCain but rather his own hubris.
Filed under: Foreign Policy, News | Tags: Asia, Education, Europe, Military, Support the Troops!
Paul Tibbetts is a hero.
Most often referred to as, “the man who bombed Hiroshima,” the pilot of the Enola Gay would be better remembered as, “the man who ended World War II,” for that is precisely what his famous mission accomplished, saving millions of lives.
The war against Japan had to be won, but the Japanese were prepared, and determined, to fight to the death. President Truman had approved invasion plans that conservative estimates conclude would have resulted in the deaths of approximately 1 million American servicemen and up to 10 million Japanese.
Paul Tibbets’ heroic mission, no matter what detractors say, prevented that much more horrific outcome.
He died in his home last Thursday at the age of 92. He is survived by his wife, three sons, and numerous grandchildren and great-grandchildren.
It is shameful, however, that America has allowed its citizenry to become so misinformed and ignorant that Tibbets requested no funeral and no headstone lest protesters use his grave as a place to demonstrate. This man’s dire mission saved millions in what would have been a long, protracted and very bloody invasion. That our children are being taught differently by ignorant liberal activists and that we allow it is truly shameful.
Paul Tibbets should be buried and remembered with the highest of honors. America, and the world, owe him a debt of gratitude.
God rest Paul Tibbets’ soul. And may He bring comfort to his family and loved ones.
The following is an excerpt from The Los Angeles Times. I encourage you to read it in it’s entirety.
By late summer 1942 — nine months after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor that thrust America into World War II against the Axis powers of Germany, Japan and Italy — Tibbets was flying some of the first U.S. bombing raids over German-held targets in Western Europe. Two months later, he led the bombing runs supporting the American landings in North Africa.
In early 1943, Tibbets was recalled to the United States to begin testing a new super bomber, the B-29. Within months, he was one of the nation’s most experienced B-29 pilots.
In September 1944, Lt. Col. Tibbets was summoned to a secret military conclave in Colorado, where he was told that he had been selected over dozens of other candidates to head a unit called the 509th Composite Group.
“My job, in brief, was to wage atomic war,” he wrote in his book, “Flight of the Enola Gay” (1989).
Tibbets searched for the perfect airfield to train his men and knew he had found it in Wendover, Utah. “It was remote in the truest sense,” he wrote. “Surrounding the field were miles and miles of salt flats.”
The arriving crewmen were told nothing about their mission, according to “Ruin From the Air,” a 1977 history of the project by Gordon Thomas and Max Morgan Witts.
“Don’t ask what the job is,” Tibbets told his men. “Stop being curious. . . . Never mention this base to anybody. That means your wives, girlfriends, sisters, family.”…[read more on Paul Tibbets' historic mission]
Lt. General Ion Mihai Pacepa is the highest-ranking intelligence officer ever to have defected from the former Soviet bloc. He writes in National Review Online today:
“The Russians enjoy greater freedom than ever before in the long history of that autocratic empire. But after 2000, when former KGB officers took over the Kremlin, Russia started slipping back into her traditional samoderzhaviye, a form of autocracy traceable to the 14th century’s Ivan the Terrible, in which a feudal lord ruled the country with the help of his personal political police.”
Read the whole thing here.
Filed under: Foreign Policy, Politics | Tags: Democrat Lies/Dirty Tricks, Europe, Harry Reid, Hillary Clinton, Homeland Security, Iraq, Nancy Pelosi, Support the Troops!
In unusually strong language from perhaps America’s most respected editorial page, the Wall Street Journal has said it can no longer give Nancy Pelosi and Democrats the benefit of the doubt that their political maneuvers are not, “consciously intended to cause a U.S. policy failure in Iraq.”
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, famous for donning a head scarf earlier this year to commune for peace with the Syrians, has now concluded that this is the perfect moment to pass a Congressional resolution condemning Turkey for the Armenian genocide of 1915. Problem is, Turkey in 2007 has it within its power to damage the growing success of the U.S. effort in Iraq. We would like to assume this is not Speaker Pelosi’s goal.
To be clear: We write that we would like to assume, rather than that we do assume, because we are no longer able to discern whether the Speaker’s foreign-policy intrusions are merely misguided or are consciously intended to cause a U.S. policy failure in Iraq. [emphasis added]
This is an unuusally powerful condemnation coming from a paper so well respected that its Op-Ed pages regularly play host to world leaders and heads of state, but it is in response to a political maneuver that is unusually treacherous even by Democrat standards.
As we explained the other day, there is no valid reason to pass this resolution at this time. The event in question took place 91 years ago, and has already been condemned by Congress twice.
The only rational explanation remaining then, and quite frankly the obvious explanation, is that Democrats are trying to undermine their own country in order to end the war without having to be held accountable for ending the war.
The maneuver has been condemned by eight former Secretaries of State, including Democrats Madeline Albright and Warren Christopher, by current and former Secreteries of Defense, and even by Demcorats such as Jane Harman who wrote just as much in an Op Ed in the Los Angeles Times.
Last time we looked, treason meant intentionally attempting to harm your country. And how can anyone argue that intentionally trashing our relationship with an ally for bogus, trumped up reasons is anything but that?
The fact remains that if Democrats want to end the war, they have it within their constituional powers to do so. Having won control of the House, Democrats control the purse strings. If they want us out of Iraq, all they need do is stop funding the war.
The reason Democrats refuse to do so is because they know that while they desperately try to paint the war they themselves approved as , “Bush’s war,” that if they cut funding out from under the president and the troops, then the aftermath really will be, “the Democrat aftermath.” If we leave and things get worse, as everyone predicts they will, Democrats will own that regional chaos lock, stock and barrell.
But no one, absolutely no one, should tolerate Democrats thinly veiled attempt to trash our relationship with Turkey in their attempt to undermine their own country out of war. Since when is intentionally undermining your country an acceptable means to any end? As the Wall Street Journal concludes:
If Nancy Pelosi and Tom Lantos want to take down U.S. policy in Iraq to tag George Bush with the failure, they should have the courage to walk through the front door to do it.
Indeed! Nor should the Democrats like Nancy Pelosi, and co-sponsor in the Senate Hillary Clinton, be let off the hook for their treacherous politics.
Filed under: Foreign Policy, Politics | Tags: Democrat Lies/Dirty Tricks, Europe, Harry Reid, Hillary Clinton, Homeland Security, Iraq, Nancy Pelosi, Obama, President Bush, Support the Troops!
What else can you call it when Democrats decide that now is the precise time in which it is necessary to condemn our ally Turkey for an event that took place 91 years ago and when our key ally has made it exceedingly clear that it would regard such an act as a direct insult and that it would have to reconsider co-operating with the United States?
Congress has already condemned the action twice in the past, so the claim that this is necessary for any reason is yet another in an excruiatingly long list of Democrats bald-faced lies.
The move by Democrats, a thinly veiled attempt to damage relations with a key ally in the war in Iraq, has been condemned by eight former secretaries of state and three former defense secretaries, by the current secretary of state and the current defense secretary,
Eight former secretaries of state and three former defence secretaries wrote to members of Congress warning that passing the resolution would damage vital US interests in the Middle East.
recieved, “rare and uncharacteristically strong condmenation” from the Turkish President:
…President Abdullah Gul criticized the vote by the House Foreign Affairs Committee and warned that the decision would damage Turkey’s relations with the United States. Reports on private NTV television said a Turkish naval commander had canceled a U.S. trip.
“Unfortunately, some politicians in the United States have once more dismissed calls for common sense, and made an attempt to sacrifice big issues for minor domestic political games,” Gul said in a statement to the semiofficial Anatolian News Agency. “This unacceptable decision of the committee, like similar ones in the past, has no validity and is not worthy of the respect of the Turkish people.”
In a lettersent to Mr Bush, Mr Gul vowed that “in the case that Armenian allegations are accepted, there will be serious problems in the relations between the two countries.”
The Turkish Foereign Minister warned that relations between the US and Turkey would suffer:
The Turkish Foreign Ministry, in a statement issued Thursday, warned that relations with the United States would be made more complicated. “The committee’s approval of this resolution was an irresponsible move which, at a greatly sensitive time, will make relations with a friend and ally” more difficult, the news agency quoted the Foreign Ministry as saying.
The move is also condemned by the current Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates and Secretary of State Condaleeza Rice:
In London, the US Secretary of Defence, Robert Gates, warned that the consequences of the decision to have a full vote on the genocide resolution could be severe. “The Turks have been quite clear about some of the measures they would have to take if this resolution passes.” …
Turkey did its best to confirm Mr Gates’ warning. “This draft resolution will put US soldiers in danger,” Egemen Bagis, an adviser to the Turkish president, Tayyip Erdogan, told CNN. “If our ally accuses us of crimes that we did not commit then we will start to question the advantages of our co-operation.
“Yesterday some in Congress wanted to play hardball. I can assure you Turkey knows how to play hardball.”
He promised that if the resolution was passed “we will do something and I can promise you it won’t be pleasant”.
The fact is congress has already condemned these events, there is no reason whatsoever to do it again other than to anger Turkey, which Democrats knew it would, in order to destroy our relationship with a key ally in the war on Iraq.
If Democrats want to end the war in Iraq, all they have to do is refuse to fund it. But that would require them to be held accountable for their actions, which they refuse to do. So instead they are working to destroy our relationship with a key ally, a NATO ally to make the war much harder to fight.
Of course this means Democrats are also putting our troops in much greater danger since if Turkey stops allowing us to use their airspace, it will take much longer to move personnel and supplies in and out of Iraq.
There is only one word that can describe such tactics,