I got yer ‘quagmire’ right here

via Powerline

The world changed today. Do you think opponents of intervention in Iraq or of George Bush will even notice?

UPDATE: Noted just now on Cavuto by David Drier (R-CA): The 1981 inaugural speech by Ronald Reagan:

Above all we must realize that no arsenal or no weapon in the arsenals of the world is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women. It is a weapon our adversaries in today’s world do not have. It is a weapon that we as Americans do have. Let that be understood by those who practice terrorism and prey upon their neighbors.

Yep. He sure was pretty stupid.

I’ve realized that I don’t really have the words to say what isn’t already being said across the blogosphere. This was a great day.


  1. I’m still not as optimistic as many are about the long term prospects of democracy and a stable Iraq are concerned………but! I have to admit I’m offended by the naysayers (especially the partizan bozos of a particular American political party) who are trying to run the Iraqi election down. While it’s not the light at the end of anywhere………the election went far better than many (including myself) expected, and is truly a success in and of itself. This election shows their are many determined Iraqis who will brave great personal peril to establish and nuture democracy (no matter what it’s ultimate flavor) under harsh cicumstances. That is NOTHING but GOOD news!

  2. This IS democracy in action, people! I’m a realist, and I know that we’ll be in Iraq for a long time, but for God’s sake, how are elections bad? Somebody please explain to me how free, open, and non-biased elections are bad. If the Iraqis only get 50% voter turnout (all indications point to higher than that) they still put America to shame. What, we get 20% of registered voter( or is it eligible) voters to show up. I’m proud of the Iraqis that voted, and I’m proud of my president, government, and fellow soldiers for making this happen. Thank you, to all who’ve made Iraq into a (soon to be) democracy. To the Iraqis: good luck on your constitution, and we hope it takes less time for you than it did for America to get one put together.

  3. actually the (public?) vote for the new Iraqi Constitution I hear will take place Decmber 15th, if the schedule holds.

  4. Sam: Yes, they don’t have the constitution yet, but yesterday was where they voted on who will write it, and who will represent them. The representation is what I’m talking about. That’s democracy, it’s a process, not a one day event. Those purple fingers are a thing of beauty.

  5. Yes, indeed it seems to have gone well, so UK coverage of this is pretty dismal. Not so many hundreds dead as expected, and now focus only goes on how many people voted. It was a better turn out than an average UK election in my view anyway, so I have no idea what they were trying to prove. But anyways, I saw a convoy protecting truck, which you posted earlier in a news report :) I read a whole deal about the vietnam ones on some website, but its a pity the current ones do not have a minigun attached :( Does someone here know why the US no longer employs the Minigun that achieved widespread use in Vietnam? Seems the troops there loved the arrival of it. Would it do much harm to have the return of say the M113 with Vulcan minigun or even fit the stryker with it, instead of trying to outfit light vehicles with a 105mm gun?

  6. You know, I meant to say something about your minigun idea when you mentioned it earlier. First of all, some of the things the 105mm is wanted for (anti-bunker, for instance) cannot be performed by a smaller weapon. So the minigun idae wouldn’t be a replacement for the 105 in all cases. But I recall playing the Twilight:2000 role-palying game as a kid and using an M163 Vulcan Air Defense system as a fire support platform. It was pretty awesome, but we had trouble finding enough ammo for the 20mm gatling gun. Seems something like that, maybe mounted on a stryker, might be useful. The minigun, of course, would be even easier to adapt to current vehicles as it’s so much smaller and lighter. Here’s a link to the Vulcan-armed M163: http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m163.htm

  7. I’m surprised someone hasn’t started referring to pictures like the one you have here as ‘The Iraqi people giving the finger to the terrorists’, or some such thing.

  8. Actually, I did see someone do that yesterday somewhere. Not sure where. Maybe it’s just so obvious that no one wants to use it. Heaven knows Murdoc Online would never stoop to using such a headline. This is a class act going on, here.

  9. vstress……..you’ve got two similar weapon systems mixed up. The M134 ‘minigun’ (called such because it’s a smaler version of the M61 Vulcan cannon) is chmabered in 7.62 x 51mm and is still widely used by the U.S. on a number of aerial (mostly choppers/I’m sure some of our troops know of other M134 carriers too) platforms. The Vulcan (typed as the M61 in aircraft i.s. F15, F16, F18 etc, and as the M163 in a ground based air defense role) is chambered in the 20 x 110mm cannon round. Actually, for ground based fire support on the M113 or Stryker…….I’d prefer a Bushmaster turret (25mm ala M2 Bradley or 30mm ala AH64 Apache and soon to be Marine Advance Amphibias Assault Vehicle).

  10. Yeah, I’m sorry, I do actually know about the differences, but was stupid enough to use the terms so interchangably (amateur, doh). Either would be good though; example being used for troop or convoy escort, the rate of fire of both versions of the gun would be welcomed(understanding that the 20mm is possibly too large). Stopping a suicide bomber in a car I do believe would take half the time it would using a 50cal. or lighter machine gun. These are currently employed on the HMMWV as you all well know. A minigun i cannot see being a problem to fit, especially that the recoil is probably less than that of a 50cal(though i really have no idea, just a guess about this part).

  11. Vstress: there is a minigun (m134) mount for Humvees, problem is ammo capacity. To give you any reasonable length of firing time, you take up the whole inside of the vehicle with 7.62×51 mm ammo containers, and the feed is complicated. You’d be better off with the 105 mm version, or I’d like to see a .50 quad mount (think WWII).

  12. Do we need such a long period of time? That possibly is more my point as it seems that attacks are sporadic and short. We need to stop a suicide bomber short of reaching his target, or supress and enemy hiding in a building so that defensive positions can be gained, etc. I dont think we need weapons that provide long periods of suppresion. The enemy is fluid enough, and if he is not, US air power is now so quick on call that I doubt it is necessary.

  13. Oh Yeah, firing time is necessary. Ask any of the guys that were in Mogadishu. You hope for the best, but you plan for the worst. There’s already been times that our guys have fired their weapons dry. It can happen, and eventually it will. The best thing you can do is be prepared.