Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bush, Military Forces, and a Strategic Vision (Peggy Noonan is part of the problem!)
The American Thinker ^ | February 1, 2005 | Douglas Hanson

Posted on 02/01/2005 5:21:21 PM PST by quidnunc

Most of the punditry got it right about GW’s second inaugural address: it was a monumental speech that prescribed a major shift in our foreign policy and national security posture.  Not only was it a true description of the dangerous world we live in, it also established the framework for our military operations in the years to come.

Some analysts have examined the implications of the speech for our armed forces and their roles and responsibilities in ensuring freedom and promotion of democracy around the world. But they lose sight of the historical context of how this changes our strategic outlook. GW’s speech portends not so much changes in the organization and equipping of our forces, but rather changes in the mindset of our military leadership, especially regarding our decade-long rest and “years of repose” from our responsibilities in safeguarding liberty, the period of time otherwise known as the Clinton Administration.  If you read between the lines, he was blunt: former military and national security leaders, who are the most vocal in the criticism of our War on Terror, are also the same people who let our military capabilities lapse to a dangerously low level.  In a nutshell, get with the program, and let’s win this thing.

However, his address was much more than a chewing out of the naysayers in our fight against global Islamo-fascism.  It prescribed the manner in which we would apply force if absolutely necessary, and put teeth into decades-old policies that we thought had served us well, but, in reality had contributed to a soft approach to national security for the better part of 15 years.

It is not surprising then, that Peggy Noonan, who was at the center of the realist school of thought that brought us victory in the Cold War, would be first in line to critique the address as being too moralistic.  She then later defended her initial criticisms with an admonition that the White House and the President lack a historical context, especially in regard to what type of enemy we face.  The problem for Ms. Noonan is that she is the one lacking in historical context, particularly in the analysis of whom we are fighting.  But more importantly, the so-called realist school of thought that she wishes the President would adhere to, has, in reality, not been very realistic. More than anything, the realists’ concepts set the stage at the end of Gulf War I for a drawdown that was too severe and too fast, and allowed some of our military leadership to place warfighting as secondary to other considerations.

-snip-


TOPICS: Editorial; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: inauguraladdress; noonan; w2

1 posted on 02/01/2005 5:21:21 PM PST by quidnunc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
Well said!

Sorry Peggy, you're still wrong.

2 posted on 02/01/2005 5:32:40 PM PST by OldFriend (America's glory is not dominion, but liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
More than anything, the realists’ concepts set the stage at the end of Gulf War I for a drawdown that was too severe and too fast, and allowed some of our military leadership to place warfighting as secondary to other considerations.

You can say that again!

3 posted on 02/01/2005 5:48:38 PM PST by Minuteman23
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
Peggy Noonan is a fine writer who's usually spot on, however,.... She was way off base in her criticism of Bush's Second Inaugural. Bush did not neglect history. To the contrary, he learned well from it.

He learned from the strength and style of the best of his predecessors, including Lincoln especially. And regarding history, he learned from Jefferson's War against the Barbary Pirates, a war declared in almost the same language now that Congress used to authorize Jefferson to pursue those Muslim bandits wherever they might be found.

Congressman Billybob [TWO different columns this week]

Click for latest, "Homer, Shakespeare, Pope, and George Bush"

Click for latest, "Dusty Rhodes, a Death in the Family"

4 posted on 02/01/2005 5:50:58 PM PST by Congressman Billybob (Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Congressman Billybob

Do you really think she's usually spot on? She's close a lot, but spot on? I wouldn't say so. And she talks in circles sometimes, like she has no real point to make or she hasn't thought it out yet. Just my opinion. I think she would be a good fiction writer. As for politcal opinion, I'd rather read Congressman Billybob.


5 posted on 02/01/2005 6:01:11 PM PST by The Ghost of FReepers Past (Legislatures are so outdated. If you want real politcal victory, take your issue to court.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc

Guess Peggy just couldn't stand it that she didn't write the speech for President Bush. Maybe it's time for Peggy to step down, eh? Hmmmmm? I'd rather go out with a good attitude than sour grapes.


6 posted on 02/01/2005 6:04:19 PM PST by cubreporter (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc

It will be interesting to see if Peggy, in her next column, continues to dig her hole or if she will admit that perhaps President Bush is on the right track.


7 posted on 02/01/2005 6:04:42 PM PST by jackbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lainie

Ping bttt


8 posted on 02/01/2005 6:05:15 PM PST by BurbankKarl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jackbill

I was really surprised at her comments. I thought perhaps she was gunning for another speech-writing position, hinting she could have done a better job.


9 posted on 02/01/2005 6:08:08 PM PST by UpHereEh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc

I still say you find the best articles posted on FR.

A most interesting read.


10 posted on 02/01/2005 6:09:07 PM PST by Howlin (It's a great day to be an American -- and a Bush Republican!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: UpHereEh
I was really surprised at her comments. I thought perhaps she was gunning for another speech-writing position, hinting she could have done a better job.

At least one pundit has suggested a fit of jealousy, especially in view of her nasty comments around the time of the Reagan funeral, about several of the other Reagan speech writers.

If so, it's a pity. Peggy should be able to stand on her own, and not worry about others.

11 posted on 02/01/2005 6:42:14 PM PST by jackbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: BurbankKarl

mm hm.


12 posted on 02/01/2005 7:26:50 PM PST by lainie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
An Iraqi said it best.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1333932/posts

"Finally, we heard the speech of President Bush Loud and clear. He, and the American people and their British and other valiant allies have much to do with this event. All I can say is that this man has all the essential traits of character that distinguishes the great men of history; the insistence and utter conviction and the perseverance and steadfastness in the face of all doubters and detractors. This was no ordinary election, and it was not simply to elect a constituent assembly. It was the answer of the people, what they really thought about the liberation, what they really thought of the ideas preached by the president. This was a message by the Iraqi people to the American people and their great president. It was the heart of Iraq answering the heart of America that voted to give the President the mandate to finish the task; it was the answer that the common people of Iraq gave by braving danger and exposing their life and that of their children and families to death, this was their way to make their voice heard.

Well, thank you Mr. President, we heard you; and I am sure you also heard us."

Enough said Peggy. You missed the mark this time.

13 posted on 02/01/2005 7:40:40 PM PST by Chgogal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc

Peggy was right. If Peggy and broken glass Republicans like myself are nervous about that speech he needs to focus the messages. If "W" decides to use the state of the union speech to talk to freedom movements again we'll know he's really losing it. Hey 'W' we are here, we are here, I know you never have to run for office again but throw us a bone and talk to us. You know, immigration, Bush Doctrine, School decay, Moral decay, Abortion, Evil Judges, the U.N., eliminate income tax, remember? "W"? You there?


14 posted on 02/01/2005 8:03:46 PM PST by Rippin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson