Glenn Reynolds, looking at Iraq, mainstream reporting and progress in spite of it, gives us a telling quotation from Strategy Page:

One of those [Iraqis] who survived the [terrorist] blast was a national guard soldier named Qusay Hassan. He spoke with anger following the death and maiming of his comrades, and his spirit seemed unbroken.

"I will not kneel before these terrorists," Mr. Hassan said. "If I don't join the army, who is going to defend the country from the terrorists?"

That reaction serves as the singularly loudest Iraqi response to freedom: one of courage and defiance in the face of terror, one that this weblog has chronicled since April of 2003. As a qualifier in his entry, Glenn says that Iraq is not "hunky-dory." That's the problem with Baby Boomer relativist culture under which all of us — even Boomers like Glenn who understand — operate: a totally fictitious expectation of war based on, as far as I can tell, a willful misunderstanding of history. War, even war for liberty, is never hunky-dory; ever. It's painful as any other war, and either won or lost. Currently, we and our allies are winning.

A friendly but stern reminder: Deroy Murdock on Saddam Hussein's ties to terror.

Like a python:

Iraqi special forces and elements of the I Marine Expeditionary Force formed a dynamic cordon around the city, on the morning of Oct. 15, by establishing vehicle control points to disrupt freedom of movement by fleeing anti-Iraqi forces.

The increased security operations opened Oct. 14 with air-delivered, precision strikes on numerous high-value targets to include buildings and armed control points, and an intense artillery bombardment on known insurgent strongholds followed by the ground combat element advance on objectives outside the city.

The increased security operations enhance security and stability in the Fallujah area by disrupting the capabilities of the anti-Iraqi forces.

In past weeks I've wondered aloud what losses might be inflicted in a thorough offensive not only to the terrorists inside Iraq but, depending on the number and sophistication drawn into Fallujah and surrounding areas, terrorists from throughout the entire region. If the "flypaper theory" is in operation, could it in fact be on the verge of permanently weakening the field capability of Islamofascism?

ELSEWHERE: Iraq's infrastructure expands.

The first thing to know about Fallujah is that the city was made a rough, lawless smuggler's crossroads by Saddam decades before it became a blockhouse for Ba'athists and terrorists in postwar Iraq. It's not unreasonable to imagine pacified Fallujah as a troubled, economically depressed, run-down city for years to come, watching as the rest of Iraq quickly develops into a 21st-Century industrialized democracy. Those who suggested Fallujah was not an outlier but a wide-open gate to Islamism were premature to dismiss the instability of alliances between the exclusory. As I said two weeks ago of persistent amputations of terrorist leadership in Fallujah, "since strongmen are never in league because of mutual trust, a significant loss of power in leading factions could introduce an irresistable opportunity for power seizure."

It looks as if that is happening before our eyes:

Local insurgents in the city of Fallujah are turning against the foreign fighters who have been their allies in the rebellion that has held the U.S. military at bay in parts of Iraq's Sunni Muslim heartland, according to Fallujah residents, insurgent leaders and Iraqi and U.S. officials. Relations are deteriorating as local fighters negotiate to avoid a U.S.-led military offensive against Fallujah, while foreign fighters press to attack Americans and their Iraqi supporters. The disputes have spilled over into harsh words and sporadic violence, with Fallujans killing at least five foreign Arabs in recent weeks, according to witnesses.

...[A]attitudes toward the foreign fighters have changed dramatically since they poured into Fallujah after the Marines' siege ended in April. "We were deceived by them," [Adnan, a taxi driver,] said. "We welcomed them first because we thought they came to support us, but now everything is clear."

...Residents said the overwhelming majority of Fallujah's people also have been repulsed by the atrocities that Zarqawi and other extremists have made commonplace in Iraq.

There is a "local resistance" that is shocked, shocked to have been associated with the inhuman brutality of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Almost comically, they have offered to mediate a withdrawal of foreign terrorists so Ba'athist remnants can keep Saddam Hussein's legacy alive properly — not to be confused with those without legitimate claim over the bodies and souls of Iraqis. American and Iraqi forces, meanwhile, have begun to chew up insurgents along the roads from Baghdad to Fallujah, prompting Saddamites to concede and concede again:

A delegation of six prominent Fallujans began negotiating with Iraq's interim government late last month. But senior government officials said it was only after the Oct. 1 assault on Samarra that the Fallujah delegation approached the task with new zeal.

Authoritarians do not follow faith but strength; when that ebbs leadership comes under contest and the blood spurts. There is more than enough legitimate criticism of the Iraq-American decision to have treated Fallujah carefully, even gingerly; but the most compelling reason for doing so was to, as Glenn Reynolds advises this morning, win ideologically. It is very much in Iraq's interest for malcontents in the Sunni Triangle to exhaust themselves fighting against foreign terrorists to the point of disgust and resignation — leaving a weakened cultural and paramilitary force to be swept up by Americans and Iraqis. Via IP:

Although the details are secret, American and Iraqi troops are on the offensive against Sunni Arab and terrorist gangs. Over a year of effort in building up an intelligence network among the population has paid off. Even in the Sunni Arab areas, many people are fed up with the lawlessness and violence created where the gangs operate. So information comes in about who is who and is doing what. ...The process of clearing out these areas has apparently been underway for two weeks. Not a lot of publicity for this effort, as keeping the opposition guessing is a powerful weapon.

In Johann Wolfgang von Goethe's Faust, the newly damned Faust is taken by Mephistopheles to a Leipzig barroom where four coarse drunkards are given their carnal wish — wine flowing freely from holes bored into the tables — before the devil makes short, painful work of blindly selfish fools (with apologies to Wretchard, who sews classics into his work as a matter of occupation):

All [while they pull out the stoppers and the wine desired runs into each one's glass]. O beauteous fountain flowing at our will! Mephistopheles. But watch, I say, that not a drop you spill!

[They drink repeatedly.]

All [sing].
We're just as happy as cannibals,
As if we were five hundred swine!
Mephistopheles. Behold how happy is this folk - it's free!
Faust. I think now I would like to go away.
Mephistopheles. But first give heed to a display
Of glorious bestiality.
Siebel [drinks carelessly; the wine is spilt upon the ground and
turns into flame]. Help! Hell's on fire! It's burning me!
Mephistopheles [conjuring the flame]. Be quiet, friendly element!

[To the young men.]

This time 'twas but a flame that Purgatory sent.
Siebel. What's that? Just wait! For that you will pay dear.
You don't know who we are, that's clear.
Frosch. Don't try that game a second time, I say!
Altmayer. I think we'd better bid him gently go away.
Siebel. What, sir! You venture to provoke us
And carry on your hocus-pocus?
Mephistopheles. Silence, old wine-butt!
Siebel. Broomstick, you!
Will you insult me to my nose?
Brander. Just wait a bit, 'twill soon be raining blows!
Altmayer [draws a stopper out of the table; fire leaps out at him].
I burn! I burn!
Siebel. It's sorcery!
The rogue's an outlaw! Come, thrust home with me!

[They draw their knives and rush at Mephistopheles.]

Mephistopheles [with solemn gestures].
False form and word appear,
Change place and sense's sphere!
Be there and here!

[They stand amazed and look at each other.]

Altmayer. Where am I? What a lovely land!
Frosch. Vineyards! Do I see right?
Siebel. Grape clusters close at hand!
Brander. Here underneath this foliage green,
See, what a bunch! What grapes are to be seen!

[He seizes SIEBEL by the nose. The others do the same, one to the
other, and raise their knives.]

Mephistopheles [as before]. Error, loose from their eyes the band!
And mark you how the Devil's jesting goes.

Our enemies worship death, and death they get.

JUST SAY 'NO' TO WITCHCRAFT: More on Faust.

In keeping with yesterday's writing, here's another example of Iraqis' involvement in their liberated country, one that's of immediate pertinence:

The enthusiasm of U.S. Marine captains Thomas "Tad" Douglas and David Nevers can hardly be contained. Their voices, alternately crackling over a weak satellite-phone connection, are heartening as they describe the successes they are witnessing in Iraq. The insurgency is losing ground. Iraqi civilians, feeling less afraid than in previous months, are increasingly coming forward with solid information about the bad guys. And a new Iraqi special-operations force is taking the lead in wiping out guerilla strongholds, south of Baghdad. ...Today, some 175 Iraqis have made the team. They are taking the fight to the enemy, and, in many ways, are proving themselves capable of operating as an independent unit.

"This are an emerging force, and yet they are taking the lead in our operations against the insurgents," says Nevers. "We conducted an operation a month ago in which this force did most of the planning and then physically led the way. The operation was very successful, and it consequently set the stage for what we are doing right now."

..."With the Americans, we're the same team, no difference," [Iraqi SWAT Team commander] Col. [Salaam Abdul al] Kathom says, through an interpreter. "The training is very good. I am very, very happy with the progress. We will destroy the bad guys."

Who better to share the front on the war than people whose experiential understanding of terrorism and dictatorship makes them natural and able allies? How are 25 million silenced or coerced by a dictator preferable to the same number given the chance to, in liberty, "do what they ought"? The oblivious reactionism of John Kerry and John Edwards — who insist on excluding Iraqis from a place of equality, treating America's new friends as a burden rather than a blessing and a miracle — may be understandable, though no less insulting.

ELSEWHERE: Prime Minister Iyad Allawi visited recently purged Samarra, and in nearby Ramadi, Iraqi forces have been denying terrorists the use of mosques.

Iraq's investment in its own security continues apace:

More than 300 people became Iraq’s newest Iraqi National Guard members after completion of a 13-day boot camp. With the graduating class of 04-07, Iraq took one step closer to its complete independence as Multi-National Forces transferred responsibility of the ING Academy to the command of the ING at ceremonies held here, Oct 7.

To the south, Iran's proxy war has faltered again. Mohammed Fadhil is guarded but optimistic:

In what looks like a massive recession for Muqtada and his followers; "Mehdi Army" decided to give in all their medium and heavy weapons to end their violent activities and obey the laws as a first step enter the political and electoral process.

...It’s not very clear why Sadr decided this now but I guess it was the result of many factors, the most important of which is — in my opinion — Muqtada’s failure to get enough support from the Iraqi people. ...

The last development will have a significant impact over the remaining tension spots, especially Fallujah where the terrorists lost one of their allies who helped them convince some observers that the "resistance" is not confined to a particular sect or city but a generalized rejection to the current administration in Iraq. Besides, there are at least huge doubts that surround this part of the resistance as it’s obvious that former Ba’athists are at least part of it, and there’s also the brutality it showed and its clear relations to Arabs and foreigners who also form a considerable part of it. The Iraqi "resistance" has lost its Iraqi face.

Mohammed acknowledges that car bombs and other terrorist attacks will continue to occur as long as safe havens remain and attackers slip past Iraq's strengthening internal security. Random bombings, however, have carried little military value, and — if the reaction and progress of Iraqis over eighteen months is any indication — even less psychological value. In the face of a terrorist onslaught Iraqis have become indignant instead of fearful, American-led forces cautiously thorough instead of tentative.

Iran, Syria, al Qaeda and other authoritarian forces witnessed two defeats over the weekend. This past Saturday, Australians rallied behind hawkish, progressive Prime Minister John Howard, ending any Islamist (or leftist) hopes for the departure of another American ally. The same day, millions of Afghans voted in free elections with an informed enthusiasm unthinkable three years ago, a jarring defiance of their former oppressors who fecklessly scurry about on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border. In three weeks, a victory by President Bush would mean another four years of military pursuit of terrorists and state sponsors, actions that may be, contrary to the predictions of critics, more aggressive and comprehensive than during Bush's first term. Back in Iraq, speculation abounds as to when Allied forces will remove remaining terrorist pockets but all parties agree on the operations' inevitability.

Authoritarians and the global, relativist left — whose assumptions coincide far too often for comfort — believed that Iraq would be a humiliating, costly defeat for America. That outcome was never certain, and today appears less and less likely. As Mohammed says, "our enemies may look strong and scary" but they only need a "small push" to "collapse," their success contingent on an impression that is recognized by an increasing number of Iraqis, Americans and allies as illusory. Bloody April killed many and frightened more, yet the Ba'athist-Khomeinist insurrections turned out to be anemic, deeply unpopular and short-lived. And that was the terrorists' best shot. It may not be long before the menagerie of strongmen in and around Iraq remember the protracted engagement as an opportunity-turned-deathtrap, surprised by the resilience of the free world but moreso by the sheer willpower and courage of people they once enslaved.

GREAT MINDS: Ask the same question. National Review contributor Peter Robinson opened a topic to Corner readers and published my response. The perspectives of other readers ought to be interesting, too.

AND: Here's USAID's latest report on Iraq's civil construction if you want to quantify how "Iraqis are becoming more and more involved in their new country." And don't forget Jim Hake's Spirit of America.

William F. Buckley isn't fickle about demolishing the case against President Bush on account of the Iraqi Survey Group (emphasis mine):

We have learned through Duelfer that Saddam Hussein was a super-confident scofflaw, perhaps the richest in history. Iraq’s oil production had been between 3 and 3.5 million barrels per day. When the trading ban was activated, in 1990, oil sales were cut off. But quickly there was a hue and cry that the primary victims of the embargo were Iraqi civilians. Along came the Oil for Food program, which allowed the sale of 2.1 million barrels per day of Iraqi oil as a means of generating income to feed those civilians.

We are talking about a great deal of money. Two-plus million barrels per day yields 766 million barrels per year. If the oil was fetching a measly $15 per barrel, we are talking about $11,490 billion. We know now that a great scandal was born.

...[Saddam's] attitude toward the embargo was lordly in its arrogance. He reassured military leaders at a meeting in January, 2000, that he would have no trouble at all getting the matèriel he wanted: “We have said with certainty that the embargo will not be lifted by a Security Council resolution, but will corrode by itself.”

Was he ever right on that point. The Duelfer report is extremely informative in tracking down foreign agencies that violated the embargo and shipped sophisticated military equipment to Saddam. It quotes an Iraqi memo stating that the deputy general manager of the French company Sofema, a military component marketer, would be bringing to Baghdad a company catalog so that Iraqi officials could “discuss your needs with him.”

...And a lot of countries whose merchants violated the U.N. embargo are angry with the United States for proceeding to war against a country whose threat against others could only have been realized by successful defiance of the U.N. embargo.

The whole article deserves a read. As USNews' Michael Barone continues, Saddam's threat in hindsight takes on a different form, but one no less serious; only more insidious. President Bush has been magnanimous long enough. While his sideways charge that Saddam "[tried] to influence countries and companies in an effort to undermine sanctions" was a decent enough start, the gravity of this betrayal can't be allowed to come and go without full disclosure to the American people. John Kerry probably expects to tar and feather the president before running him out of the town hall tonight. Bush, on the other hand, has a chance to prove once and for all that his opponent is a dangerous, posturing fool who would keep enemies closer than friends for all the wrong reasons.

STRANGER THAN FICTION: Stephen Hayes thinks the same.

Something tells me Greyhawk isn't being hypothetical:

How many times has this happened to you:

You're flying into Baghdad on a C130 along with a lot of other GIs and some members of the Iraq Survey Group whose report will soon be released and while waiting for the plane engines to fire up (after which point conversation becomes impossible) you say: "So what's the bottom line?"

And one responds: "He didn't have stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction, but he could have reconstituted his programs in a matter of months."

Which Saddam will never have the chance to do, thanks to one President Bush.

I have found past work of the Washington Post's Walter Pincus to be rhetorically suspect but his article on Iraqi Survey Group Charles Duelfer's final report on Iraq' weapons of mass destruction to the Senate Intelligence Committee admirably candid with respect to Saddam Hussein's unchanging character and compulsion for the most powerful weapons. While most press agencies are spinning Duelfer's testimony as directly contradicting the Bush administration, the president's judgment in early 2002 is just as valid now: Saddam Hussein was a dedicated enemy of the United States with increasing terrorist ties, made no effort to verifiably disprove the WMD case against him, and stood as a senior fellow in the Near East's fetid and terrorist-enabling authoritarian culture. Knowing that Saddam was resigned only to wait before fully reactivating his arsenal, the left's implied suggestion of waiting a few years more for the inevitable danger — perhaps from an Iraq led by the respectively brutal and maniacal Qusai and Udai Hussein — only helps the White House's case.

FUNDAMENTALLY: Whatever qualifications are politically set on Saddam's activities, the Iraqi dictator committed dozens of violations of UNSC Resolution 1441, itself a final warning for dozens and dozens of previous violations on a dozen previous resolutions. And "serious consequences" are just that.

TOTALITY: Key findings of Duelfer's report — damning to Saddam, not the allies — can be found here. Full report here.

THIS STICKS OUT: "Saddam sought to balance the need to cooperate with UN inspections — to gain support for lifting sanctions — with his intention to preserve Iraq's intellectual capital for WMD with a minimum of foreign intrusiveness and loss of face. Indeed, this remained the goal to the end of the regime, as the starting of any WMD program, conspicuous or otherwise, risked undoing the progress achieved in eroding sanctions and jeopardizing a political end to the embargo and international monitoring."

In other words, play dumb, run out the clock, see to it that allies end sanctions and inspections; rearm. An unacceptable risk.

ELSEWHERE: The Washington Times does Duelfer's report justice.

The defense of a free Iraq continues:

Iraqi and Multi-National forces today kicked off their most sweeping operation to date in Northern Babil, moving against multiple targets across the central Iraqi province in a continuing campaign to restore security and stability here. From their forward operating bases throughout the zone, Iraqi and Multi-National forces, led by the 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit, punched west across the Euphrates River in search of anti-Iraqi forces and those who aid them.

While rounding up 30 suspects during the initial sweep, the Iraqis and their American allies seized a suspected insurgent training camp and took control of the Jurf Kas Sukr Bridge. The bridge, spanning the Euphrates southwest of Baghdad, is believed to be a favored corridor for insurgents moving into and out of key cities, including the capital hub and the current AIF sanctuary of Fallujah.

The operation involves more than 3,000 Iraqi and Multi-National forces...In their coordinated thrusts this week, the ISF and Marines are intensifying operations they've been conducting since the 24th MEU assumed operational control of Northern Babil in July.

Since then, they have captured more than 160 individuals suspected of engaging directly in or abetting criminal and AIF activity. They have also uncovered numerous weapons caches, enabling them to take about 35,000 pounds of explosives out of action.

Meanwhile, more terrorists were "removed" from Fallujah — and corporeal existence.