Posted on 10/13/2006 10:50:20 AM PDT by Blackrain4xmas
When their mission involves nothing more than "nation-building," "making Iraq safe for democracy," "winning the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people," and serving as targets for IEDs in a simmering civil war, that's exactly what they are.
Didn't want anyone else making the mistake of reading the article before commenting.
Efficiency you know?
Good Lord.
Everyone knows he was busy planning Hurricane Katrina at the time.
While not willing to take the time to read the article, why would somebody post an article without comment? Posting articles without comment is a useless exercise since anybody can read the article whether it is posted or not. The point is discussion, but an initial comment might start discussion of the topic rather than reading techniques.
The mission was to set up a central government that was capable of ruling the country and not hostile to the Uniuted States AND, not incidentally, to provide us with a base larger than Kuwait. The problem was, imho, opinion, a state department that has no clue and which has had a veto in affairs since the beginning.
For anyone who doesn't want to read the article, here is the author's point.
Maintaining public opinion is vital for prosecuting a war in our republic. The best weapons and the toughest training can't propel the military to victory, when the public gives up.
That might look like where the blame stops, but it's just the beginning. The majority of American people aren't anti-war, by any means. Most people understand history, and recognize that violence can solve problems. If the average American is losing confidence that this is one of those situations, then those concerns will end the war.
It's a VANITY.
It's like standing in a park
talking to yourself . . .
Had Nixon done that, the North surely would have set that trip wire betting that America did not possess the resolve to send hundreds of thousands of troops back into Southeast Asia after withdrawing them. And if that happened, what signal would that send to our enemies regarding the Peninsula and Western Europe?
The appointment of long-time advocates of U.S. military intervention in Iraq to these posts (Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, etc.) was very telling. None of these people had any real expertise in public or private life other than their incessant calls throughout the 1990s for the U.S. to invade Iraq. There wasn't a single expert in U.S.-Chinese relations among them, or a single expert in U.S.-Russian affairs, or even any indication that any of these people knew what al-Qaeda was before 9/11.
P.S. Iraq had a government that wasn't hostile to the United States -- before 1990.
The folks at NPR are scratching their collective cone heads today as to how the British commander could back pedal, as if he might have been pressured by Blair. It doesn't occur to them that perhaps the commander was misquoted in the first place. I reckon that's a matter they'd rather not look into.
correct.
and what the administration never understood was - that 43% of americans were always going to turn against this war, there was never any hope that the american left would stay on board. write them off.
holding the other 57% - requires fighting to win, they want victory. but instead, we pursued a PC approach to try and placate the first group that was never going to stay on board anyway, and thereby lost a portion of the group we needed to hold to maintain a strong majority in support of it.
That's ok, as far as the Left is concerned, because they will blame Bush for it.
"Oh, if only we had left Saddam alone."
That's because the Left has never met an anti-American, totalitarian tyrant it didn't like.
.
It would have set the stage for massive bombing of North Vietnam. It would have been justified as necessary for the defence of US troops.
This is not a terribly complicated business but it isn't exactly straightforward, and it is complicated by the fact that persons with a vested interest in doing so will proclaim it a defeat no matter what we do. Iraq partitioning itself is not a defeat if it's the choice of that government. Victory does not consist in our getting everything we want or establishing a utopia. Neither is possible.
"If they think the TV is ugly to watch now...just imagine watching Baghdad turn into 1980's Beirut. Imagine watching tens or even hundreds of thousands of people dying. Imagine watching hundreds of thousands or millions fleeing. And imagine trying people trying to convince themselves that abandoning the Iraqi people to terrorist insurgents was a good thing to do.
That's ok, as far as the Left is concerned, because they will blame Bush for it.
"Oh, if only we had left Saddam alone."
That's because the Left has never met an anti-American, totalitarian tyrant it didn't like. "
Westbrook,
That's an excellent point*****
Read a few more paragraphs and you'll see where the author is going.
Thanks.
FYI, I wrote it.
I had to title it that way and write it in this fashion in order to draw in readers who-let's just say haven't looked two steps forward to the consequences of their votes.
I really and truly hope people will send this to their friends, family, etc not to boost Bush or anything like that, but so that people can realize the war can be won or lost, and it's not going to be won or lost by the military, but by the politics. That is to say either one is politically behind the idea of staying in Iraq until today's 2yr olds don't have to go there and die, OR they're ready to call for the removal of US troops, the abandonment of millions of Iraqis with purple fingers and a hope for Democracy. It's not a case of 20000 insurgents driving out 150,000 US troops. It's a case of the people deciding whether or not they prefer to watch the war on tv as it is today, or if they prefer to watch the slaughter that would occur if America abandoned it's ally.
Anyone wonder what UBL and AQ want? Remember, they admit to having lost at least 4000 fighters in Iraq. Does it serve them to withdraw US forces?
Look, things might be bad over there, but they really can be a lot lot worse, and while some may have lost faith in seeing the light at the end of the tunnel, few believe that if America left, then everything would just be snuggle buggle.
http://www.investors.com/images/editimg/ramirez/toon092806.gif
Go to the page:
http://www.blackfive.net/main/2006/10/army_strong.html
Click on the video. Watch it.
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.
