We already have. The old regime is dead.
Posted on 04/30/2004 9:16:18 AM PDT by Check_Your_Premises
As an avid supporter of the President's Iraq policies, the last few days have been difficult for me. The number of casualties seemed to reach a "critical mass" for me. I found myself simply not caring to sacrifice anymore of our brave soldiers for Iraqi independence and democracy. Screw 'em.
I was not sure why I began to feel this way. As I said I am an avid supporter of the plan to bring an oasis of freedom and liberty to the 12th century toilet that is the middle east. It seemed to me that if we are to end terrorism we have to destroy the sources, which are the failed states and ideology of that region.
Why not? We have succeeded at such things in the past. We transformed post war Germany and Japan into thriving and peaceful democracies. Unfortunately, we have also failed at such things in the past. Of course, I am speaking of the war that Teddy Kennedy's brother got us into.
The one problem I had with liberating Iraq from Saddam's clutches is that we were removing one of the most important steps to the forming of a successful democracy. The successful overthrow of tyranny is a process that produces the type of leaders that are required to bring the successful transition from tyranny to liberal democracy. By liberating Iraq, for the Iraqis we were not allowing their "Founding Fathers" to become. It is of course worth noting that such leaders may never have been produced.
It seems to me now that the war in Iraq suffers from the same fatal flaw as the war in Vietnam. I may be speculating here, but it seems we simply cared more than the South Vietnamese, that their nation remain free. No American should be expected to die defending the home of another not willing to do the same. In the same sense we seem to care more about the freedom of the Iraqi people than they do themselves. This is why I don't really care anymore. If they truly cared or understood their fate, they would be dying ten to our one. And in that case I think the American people would support them steadfastly. God knows I would.
So what was different about our success stories, Japan and Germany. Well we basically bombed the entire nation back into the stone age. I think their civilians were probably so glad that we weren't going to execute our own "final solution" to the "Japanese and German question", that they were willing to do whatever we said. It is also worth noting that in annhilating their armies we effectively removed any person who would be opposed to our efforts. As George Will put it recently, they "knew they were defeated".
So the question is if:
1) we care more about the freedom of the Iraqi people than they do (something we could only have known in hindsight), and
2)we are not willing to wage total war until all opposition is removed,
than how can we possibly win there?
Well I think you see where I am getting at. General Sherman would probably agree with me. However since we do not have the will to fight this way, it is clear that we cannot win until that fact changes. What could bring such a change of will about? Unfortunately, I think we are victims of our own success in preventing further terrorist attacks. Until every man, woman, child, and leftist acutely feels that they are in grave danger of death at the hands of these murderers, America will not be ready to do what she must to win this war.
Until we are ready, maybe we should hold off on any further "imperialist" adventures in the world's excretory regions.
Semper Fidelis
MDP
I suggest your do as your screen name says.
Yeah, you contradicted yourself:
Why not? We have succeeded at such things in the past. We transformed post war Germany and Japan into thriving and peaceful democracies ... The one problem I had with liberating Iraq from Saddam's clutches is that we were removing one of the most important steps to the forming of a successful democracy. The successful overthrow of tyranny is a process that produces the type of leaders that are required to bring the successful transition from tyranny to liberal democracy...
So in one breath you mention Japan and Germany as successes, and in the next you state that one of the most important steps is an action that never happened with Japan and Germany.
We already have. The old regime is dead.
Would I rather we waited until these battles were brought onto our soil?
Would I rather have the terrorists more widely dispersed, as opposed to seeing many of them concentrate in one region where they can be eliminated in greater numbers?
Get a grip and start reading some history of WWII. When we start to lose over 700 in one day from a training accident, or 19,000 in one battle that lasts about 5 weeks, then we can talk about "critical mass."
My opposition to this war in Iraq, which dates back to 2002, is based on the following:
1. The voters of this country are not focused, intelligent, or disciplined enough to support a long-term war like this.
2. The civilian leadership in the Defense Department has proven itself to be untrustworthy, incompetent, or corrupt . . . or any combination of these three.
3. It was clear to me even in 2002 that this was nothing more than a veiled attempt at "nation-building," by a President who had promised as a candidate in 2000 not to engage in nation-builing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.