RUSH: Mark in Ann Arbor, Michigan, you’re next on Open Line Friday. Hi.
CALLER: Hey, Rush, 18-year-listener, first time caller. Giga dittos. Mega dittos are no longer enough.
RUSH: Thanks very much.
CALLER: Hey, I want to know about the dynamic, what you think. I don’t hear the media talking about this, but what is the dynamic — now that Al-Qaeda is bombing all these Shi’ite shrines — what is the dynamic between Al-Qaeda and Iran right now, and what does al-Sistani feel about Iran? He seems to hold them at arm’s-length but what’s the relationship there? I don’t hear the media talking about that very much.
RUSH: Oh, the president came out in his most recent press conference and nailed Iran for meddling in Iraq, and it was shortly after that that Iran said, “Okay, let’s talk.” Sort of like when the president pointed fingers at the media and said, “You guys are helping the enemy spread their propaganda with your incessant focus on negative news coming out of Iraq.” They went, “The president criticized us!”
They’ve been in a tizzy ever since, and Iran, you know, being called on it by the president? Everybody knows that Iran’s involved, and Syria as well. The dynamic is obvious. Iran doesn’t want a democratic Iraq. They don’t want any part of it. They have no desire for it. None of the terrormaster regimes over there do, Syria, Egypt. They’re scared to death. But I’ll tell you, your question focuses me on something else. Yeah, Iran’s working on this with Syria and they’re meddling in Iraq, but let me give you some numbers here. These are numbers just today from the Brookings Institution’s Iraq index. Now, the Brookings Institute is a think tank. They’re not, you know, a right-wing bunch.
Brookings has its share of moderates, centrists and leftists, and they have something called the Iraq Index, tracking variables of reconstruction and security in post-Saddam Iraq — and listen, they got four items here. “US troops killed in hostile action in Iraq last six months from October 2005 to March 2006, in order: 81, 76, 50, 49, 43, 25.” That’s the last six months, in reverse order, US troops killed in hostile action. That’s a big improvement. “Iraqi military and police killed in Iraq in the last six months, in order: 215, 176, 193, 189, 158 and 193. The three months before that were 304, 282, and 233.” So September, August, July, you see an even huger trend.
“Car bombings in the last six months, from October to March, in order: 70, 70, 70, 68, 30, 30.” Now, let me ask you a question here. Given that the US troops killed in hostile action last October was 81 and in March was 25, and given that car bombings the last six months, October to March, 70 last October, 30 in March, have you seen corresponding media coverage that would lead you to believe that fewer US troops are killed in hostile fire and that there are fewer car bombs? My guess is you don’t see anything of the sort.
My guess is you don’t see anything that makes you think it’s getting worse. You probably think there are more car bombs. You probably think that there are more deaths taking place. There’s one other category here. “Civilians killed in Iraq, last six months, October 2005 to March 2006 in order: 527, 826, 532, 732, 950, 446 in March,” and in fact the two months before, so looking at August and September of last year — 2,849 and 1,129. So last August, 2,489 civilians killed in Iraq; in March, 446. So in every one of these categories there is a demonstrable, dramatic trend toward the better — and I just know that there’s no corresponding reporting out there.
So it tells me that the military side of this is showing great success. The holdup in Iraq right now — you’ve heard this — is, “Well, they better get their act together over there, better put together a government!” The Democrats want to put a timeline on them getting a government or we pull out. It’s asinine. It’s just lunacy — and that’s good old John Kerry (who, by the way, served in Vietnam). I’ll tell you what needs to really be focused on now, with these numbers especially this way: Let’s just go destroy the enemy. You know, there’s this thing called the Limbaugh Doctrine, ladies and gentlemen. I made this famous when first discussing the Israeli-Palestinian snafu many, many moons ago — a little Indian lingo there – and it is this.
Peace follows victory. You don’t put peace together in the midst of fighting a war. By definition it’s not possible, and all of this pressure to force the Iraqis to come up with a government while a war is going on is a bit mistaken. Let’s go beat the enemy. Let’s focus on defeating the enemy. I’m not saying that we’re not focusing on that exclusively, but let’s make it the real point, not the Iraqi government, as the definition of success, because that will only happen in full-fledged peace. You know, this country’s history, how many decades did it take us to figure all this out ourselves? Trying to force it on these people and then claim, “Well, haven’t had any brilliant leaders surface over there.” Give ’em time. In the meantime, continue to focus on defeating the enemy, that’s victory, and peace will follow that.