The perception of defeat

The video release by al-Qaeda in Iraq starring al-Muhajir has presented an interesting quandary for the newly elected Democrat leadership and President Bush. The democrats were elected by talking about "a new direction" for Iraq, which the whole world understands to mean leaving sooner than later. That perception was invigorated by the departure of Secretary Rumsfeld. It wasn't lost on the terrorists.

Somebody needs to respond, but whom? Friday night the Instapundit linked to Iraqpundit, who thinks the Democrats should quickly act to dispel al-Muhajir's perception. Perhaps, but Bush is still the Commander-in-Chief and speaks for the United States of America. It's his ball.

Here's a suggestion for a Bush response, "the US voters recently elected Democrats to power in our Congress based on a platform of doing something different in Iraq, which is how our democracy works. Some may presume this means leaving, but as long as I'm still the Commander in Chief and as long as there are terrorists who threaten America we'll never stop our efforts to bring them to justice. The Iraqi Army will soon be able to take care of terrorists operating from their soil, but until then we'll be around to make sure the job gets done. Thank you." I'm sure his speechwriters could cobble something that would make that look like Dick and Jane. The point is to get something out.

America is currently in a time of transition, which can be a vulnerable period as the leadership is getting settled. A verbal show of force from the President couldn't hurt. After all, if the troops can say something, so can the Commander-in-Chief.

Speaking of the troops, today is Veterans' Day and I'd like to honor my late grandfather, a wounded veteran of World War I, and my late father, a combat engineer who served with his National Guard unit in Korea.

MORE 11/11/06

Looking back to Sunday, Saddam's plea to the Iraqi people to kiss and make up sounds rather hollow :

Mortar battles have erupted between Shiite and Sunni neighborhoods in Baghdad, and the once-mixed city is reeling as the two sides adopt the weapons and tactics of urban civil war.

However, what's missing are the high casualty totals of American forces like we saw in October, before the election.

But if those high totals were partially timed to influence the American electorate (not just solely part of a Ramadan offensive) then why would a stand-down edict be issued before the election results were known? That suggests the Ba'athists are approaching things from a selfish direction rather than a 'future of Iraq' direction. It's all about Saddam. Meanwhile, the civil war his minions triggered rages on with no end in sight.

JUBA 11/11/06

Over at Counterterrorism Blog Walid Phares has an analysis of al-Muhajir's tape, which he says is strange because of several phrases/words used that don't fit the jihadi MO. Specifically, the use of the word "stupid" when describing the war and "lame duck" in reference to Bush's status at the moment. If connections still exist between the cave-dwellers and the Shura Council it's possible our friend Azzam the American is their advisor. But why not have Zawahiri say it? Allahpundit posted a possible answer to that.

Meanwhile the debate rages as to whether al-Duri's decree to stand down will have any effect. The London Times has a chilling story about a sniper known as "Juba" operating in Baghdad, and mentions:

In a 28-minute video, the Islamic Army in Iraq, made up mainly of veterans from Saddam’s security apparatus, celebrated the exploits of “Juba the Baghdad sniper”

It was CNN's use of propaganda footage supplied by this very same bunch that caused such a stir last month. Note again the origin of their fighters. Perhaps the pudding proof of al-Duri's decree will surface over the next few weeks, especially if "Juba" suddenly turns toes up.