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

Skip to comments.

Mark Steyn: U.S. Must Prove Its Staying Power (Iraq Test Of US Seriousness Alert Mark Steyn Classic)
Chicago Sun Times ^ | November 12, 2006 | Mark Steyn

Posted on 11/12/2006 2:42:23 AM PST by goldstategop

On the radio a couple of weeks ago, Hugh Hewitt suggested to me the terrorists might try to pull a Spain on the U.S. elections. You'll recall (though evidently many Americans don't) that in 2004 hundreds of commuters were slaughtered in multiple train bombings in Madrid. The Spaniards responded with a huge street demonstration of supposed solidarity with the dead, all teary passivity and signs saying "Basta!" -- "Enough!" By which they meant not "enough!" of these murderers but "enough!" of the government of Prime Minister Aznar, and of Bush and Blair, and troops in Iraq. A couple of days later, they voted in a socialist government, which immediately withdrew Spanish forces from the Middle East. A profitable couple of hours' work for the jihad. I said to Hugh I didn't think that would happen this time round. The enemy aren't a bunch of simpleton Pushtun yakherds, but relatively sophisticated at least in their understanding of us. We're all infidels, but not all infidels crack the same way. If they'd done a Spain -- blown up a bunch of subway cars in New York or vaporized the Empire State Building -- they'd have re-awoken the primal anger of September 2001. With another mound of corpses piled sky-high, the electorate would have stampeded into the Republican column and demanded the U.S. fly somewhere and bomb someone.

The jihad crowd know that. So instead they employed a craftier strategy. Their view of America is roughly that of the British historian Niall Ferguson -- that the Great Satan is the first superpower with ADHD. They reasoned that if you could subject Americans to the drip-drip-drip of remorseless water torture in the deserts of Mesopotamia -- a couple of deaths here, a market bombing there, cars burning, smoke over the city on the evening news, day after day after day, and ratcheted up a notch or two for the weeks before the election -- you could grind down enough of the electorate and persuade them to vote like Spaniards, without even realizing it. And it worked. You can rationalize what happened on Tuesday in the context of previous sixth-year elections -- 1986, 1958, 1938, yada yada -- but that's not how it was seen around the world, either in the chancelleries of Europe, where they're dancing conga lines, or in the caves of the Hindu Kush, where they would also be dancing conga lines if Mullah Omar hadn't made it a beheading offense. And, as if to confirm that Tuesday wasn't merely 1986 or 1938, the president responded to the results by firing the Cabinet officer most closely identified with the prosecution of the war and replacing him with a man associated with James Baker, Brent Scowcroft and the other "stability" fetishists of the unreal realpolitik crowd.

Whether or not Rumsfeld should have been tossed overboard long ago, he certainly shouldn't have been tossed on Wednesday morning. For one thing, it's a startlingly brazen confirmation of the politicization of the war, and a particularly unworthy one: It's difficult to conceive of any more public diminution of a noble cause than to make its leadership contingent on Lincoln Chafee's Senate seat. The president's firing of Rumsfeld was small and graceless.

Still, we are all Spaniards now. The incoming speaker says Iraq is not a war to be won but a problem to be solved. The incoming defense secretary belongs to a commission charged with doing just that. A nostalgic boomer columnist in the Boston Globe argues that honor requires the United States to "accept defeat," as it did in Vietnam. Didn't work out so swell for the natives, but to hell with them.

What does it mean when the world's hyperpower, responsible for 40 percent of the planet's military spending, decides that it cannot withstand a guerrilla war with historically low casualties against a ragbag of local insurgents and imported terrorists? You can call it "redeployment" or "exit strategy" or "peace with honor" but, by the time it's announced on al-Jazeera, you can pretty much bet that whatever official euphemism was agreed on back in Washington will have been lost in translation. Likewise, when it's announced on "Good Morning Pyongyang" and the Khartoum Network and, come to that, the BBC.

For the rest of the world, the Iraq war isn't about Iraq; it's about America, and American will. I'm told that deep in the bowels of the Pentagon there are strategists wargaming for the big showdown with China circa 2030/2040. Well, it's steady work, I guess. But, as things stand, by the time China's powerful enough to challenge the United States it won't need to. Meanwhile, the guys who are challenging us right now -- in Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, North Korea and elsewhere -- are regarded by the American electorate like a reality show we're bored with. Sorry, we don't want to stick around to see if we win; we'd rather vote ourselves off the island.

Two weeks ago, you may remember, I reported on a meeting with the president, in which I'd asked him the following: "You say you need to be on the offense all the time and stay on the offense. Isn't the problem that the American people were solidly behind this when you went in and you toppled the Taliban, when you go in and you topple Saddam. But when it just seems to be a kind of thankless semi-colonial policing defensive operation with no end . . . I mean, where is the offense in this?"

On Tuesday, the national security vote evaporated, and, without it, what's left for the GOP? Congressional Republicans wound up running on the worst of all worlds -- big bloated porked-up entitlements-a-go-go government at home and a fainthearted tentative policing operation abroad. As it happens, my new book argues for the opposite: small lean efficient government at home and muscular assertiveness abroad. It does a superb job, if I do say so myself, of connecting war and foreign policy with the domestic issues. Of course, it doesn't have to be that superb if the GOP's incoherent inversion is the only alternative on offer.

As it is, we're in a very dark place right now. It has been a long time since America unambiguously won a war, and to choose to lose Iraq would be an act of such parochial self-indulgence that the American moment would not endure, and would not deserve to. Europe is becoming semi-Muslim, Third World basket-case states are going nuclear, and, for all that 40 percent of planetary military spending, America can't muster the will to take on pipsqueak enemies. We think we can just call off the game early, and go back home and watch TV.

It doesn't work like that. Whatever it started out as, Iraq is a test of American seriousness. And, if the Great Satan can't win in Vietnam or Iraq, where can it win? That's how China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, Sudan, Venezuela and a whole lot of others look at it. "These Colors Don't Run" is a fine T-shirt slogan, but in reality these colors have spent 40 years running from the jungles of Southeast Asia, the helicopters in the Persian desert, the streets of Mogadishu. ... To add the sands of Mesopotamia to the list will be an act of weakness from which America will never recover.


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 2006election; 911; alqaeda; americanmoment; americanwill; apesandpigs; appeasement; blackhawkdown; chicagosuntimes; congalines; cutandrun; darkplace; democrats; dhimmitude; donrumsfeld; eurarabia; euroweenies; gop; greatsatan; hughhewitt; infidels; iraqwar; islamofascism; jihad; kuffar; kuffr; marksteyn; nancypelosi; nationalsecurity; onemoremogadishu; parrtyof910; presidentbush; problemtobesolved; pullaspain; realworld; robertgates; sandsofmesopotamia; stayingpower; tohellwiththenatives; videogame; voteofftheisland; waronterror
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-139 next last
There are many good things in this Mark Steyn classic this morning but the line, "America can't muster the will to take on pipsqueak enemies. We think we can just call off the game early, and go back home and watch TV," stands out for me. The Democrats think life is a video game. The real world won't be as kind to America if we cannot muster the will to win in Iraq. Both America's allies and enemies are taking note of what will happen in the Sands Of Mesopotamia.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus

1 posted on 11/12/2006 2:42:26 AM PST by goldstategop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

***They reasoned that if you could subject Americans to the drip-drip-drip of remorseless water torture in the deserts of Mesopotamia -- a couple of deaths here, a market bombing there, cars burning, smoke over the city on the evening news, day after day after day, and ratcheted up a notch or two for the weeks before the election -- you could grind down enough of the electorate and persuade them to vote like Spaniards, without even realizing it.***

Now now he's confusing Dem/MSM strategy with terrorist strategy. The terrorists have every intent of attacking America again they just haven't been able to pull it off.


2 posted on 11/12/2006 2:49:53 AM PST by kuma (Mark Sanford '08 http://www.petitiononline.com/msan2008/petition.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kuma
The Democrats think if we stop fighting them over there, they'll leave us alone over here. The Party Of 9/10 has overlooked 9/11 - it happened long BEFORE we ever went into Iraq!

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus

3 posted on 11/12/2006 2:52:22 AM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: kuma
Leftists, jihadists and Euroweenies are dancing in a conga line from the Hindu Kush, through Baghdad over to Madrid up to San Francisco. Let's sing, "kumbaya!"

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus

4 posted on 11/12/2006 3:00:42 AM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
"Whether or not Rumsfeld should have been tossed overboard long ago, he certainly shouldn't have been tossed on Wednesday morning. For one thing, it's a startlingly brazen confirmation of the politicization of the war, and a particularly unworthy one: It's difficult to conceive of any more public diminution of a noble cause than to make its leadership contingent on Lincoln Chafee's Senate seat. The president's firing of Rumsfeld was small and graceless."

This certainly came off poorly.

5 posted on 11/12/2006 3:04:53 AM PST by beyond the sea ( Now that Pelosi Galore is in charge, it's never too late to start drinking.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

Yes, that's why I forgive Steyn for getting the two confused. They all dance to the same tune "Death to America".


6 posted on 11/12/2006 3:05:01 AM PST by kuma (Mark Sanford '08 http://www.petitiononline.com/msan2008/petition.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

Just read George Washington's vision. That's about where we are at.

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Aegean/2444/gwvision.html


7 posted on 11/12/2006 3:05:18 AM PST by HisKingdomWillAbolishSinDeath (All the horns of the wicked also will I cut off; but the horns of the righteous shall be exalted.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

" For the rest of the world, the Iraq war isn't about Iraq; it's about America, and American will. I'm told that deep in the bowels of the Pentagon there are strategists wargaming for the big showdown with China circa 2030/2040. Well, it's steady work, I guess. But, as things stand, by the time China's powerful enough to challenge the United States it won't need to. "

That's the "money quote" in the article...

The United States is declining on an accelerating trend towards ineffectual Euro-Socialism...


8 posted on 11/12/2006 3:06:44 AM PST by Uncle Ike (Stop the "tyranny of the 'offended' " -- say what you mean and stand by it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

Isn't the problem that the American people were solidly behind this when you went in and you toppled the Taliban, when you go in and you topple Saddam. But when it just seems to be a kind of thankless semi-colonial policing defensive operation with no end . . . I mean, where is the offense in this?"


9 posted on 11/12/2006 3:07:52 AM PST by beyond the sea ( Now that Pelosi Galore is in charge, it's never too late to start drinking.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
The Demoscaggs and their clown allies in the media are now beginning to understand the political trap they have put themselves in. After they take over in January, if they put undue pressure on President Bush, forcing him to withdraw the military, and if there is a "meltdown" into a civil war, and if the entire area becomes destabilized, they are going to get the blame. The reasoning is that the media and the Demohags forced President Bush to remove Rumsfeld and change course in Iraq, causing a foreign policy disaster and a miltary defeat, along with a huge spike in energy and a stock market crash. A lot can happen in the next two years, and the Dems know that this may not have been the best time for them to win total control of the Senate and the House. If a disaster unfolds, they know the American people will blame THEM! because the people are already generally suspicious of Democrat support for the military. And it goes double if they spend the next two years in endless subpoenas and circus style investigations.
10 posted on 11/12/2006 3:08:45 AM PST by Enterprise (Let's not enforce laws that are already on the books, let's just write new laws we won't enforce.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kuma
The majority of Americans think Iraq is a distant island like on "Survivor". We can just vote ourselves off before its played out. To the jihadists, it confirms for them we ARE the weak horse.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus

11 posted on 11/12/2006 3:08:55 AM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

I love Steyn and thinks he's the best and I do not think he is wrong on most things. But (and you knew it was comign) I do not think the President fired Rumsfeld. I think Rumsfeld insisted on going in the face of what was coming now that the dems had been elected.


12 posted on 11/12/2006 3:09:04 AM PST by James Ewell Brown Stuart (Sorry, we don't want to stick around to see if we win; we'd rather vote ourselves off the island.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: leadpenny; TomasUSMC; GraniteStateConservative

ping


13 posted on 11/12/2006 3:09:19 AM PST by Kozak (Anti Shahada: " There is no God named Allah, and Muhammed is his False Prophet")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
The Democrats think if we stop fighting them over there, they'll leave us alone over here.

It's not just the DBM/dems, it's also the mood of the country now. Selfish and clueless! If the good people of America do not understand by now this is a spiritual war, a war we must win or we die, our way of life will cease to exist and being a selfish people we couldn't give a tinker's damn about anyone else, especially bringing democracy to the middle east. Like the Spainards, we've just shown who we really are with this election, clueless!

14 posted on 11/12/2006 3:10:04 AM PST by sirchtruth (No one has the RIGHT not to be offended...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
"These Colors Don't Run"

These colors ran the past Tuesday in the form of emotional voters, the continual old media anti-American bias, and just genuinely soft, poorly-informed citizens.

Bad days ahead.

15 posted on 11/12/2006 3:12:51 AM PST by beyond the sea ( Now that Pelosi Galore is in charge, it's never too late to start drinking.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: beyond the sea
My take is Americans would STILL be solidly behind Iraq if the President was going to do whatever it takes to win. But I beg to differ with Mark here: if all we're going to be doing is engage in a long drawn out colonial policing operation, then the Democrats are right: its time to leave. If the President won't put enough boots on the ground to win, its time to pull up stakes and go home. America is not suited to be an imperial overlord and we don't want the thankless role of one.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus

16 posted on 11/12/2006 3:12:53 AM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

"Iraq is a test of American seriousness"

Bzzt-game over--the American people had their say and the jihadists win.


17 posted on 11/12/2006 3:17:06 AM PST by freeangel ( (free speech is only good until someone else doesn't like what you say))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
Doing whatever it takes to win...

That is a loaded statement that needs to be explained. I do not think you can just say that and drive on by.

As you are aware, we can fight the war two ways. We can fight a limited war, in a political strait jacket that is designed to do the following: 1) Topple Saddam from power. 2) Not alienate a very easily humiliated and alienatable people. 3) Set up an Iraqi government as a model for other governments in the region that the people can see and hopefully achieve for themselves through bloodless revolution. 4) Teach them to defend themselves against not only the insurgents that have come, but from the sectarianism that has always been a part of Iraq due to the Shi'ite majority and the Sunni sense of self-importance, and the Kurdish dynamic. 5) To prove ourselves the friends of governments who have supported us like Qatar and Bahrain, Jordan, and U.A.E.

OR...

We can forget the five objectives and declare total war on the region, fight friend and foe alike and get after them like Grant did the South and Eisenhower did the Nazis and McArthur did the Japanese.

Those are your options.

We are not involved in a long drawn out colonial policing operation. What is happening now is necessary to meet those five objectives.

Again...win what? We are winning... the five objectives are being met. I didn't know there was a time table to victory. No army, no matter how great, can meet a predetermined time table so that folks back home can stop being impatient. It's war, man...and we are winning.

18 posted on 11/12/2006 3:25:02 AM PST by James Ewell Brown Stuart (Sorry, we don't want to stick around to see if we win; we'd rather vote ourselves off the island.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: sirchtruth
Like the Spainards, we've just shown who we really are with this election, clueless!

Agreed. And, if I may say, let's not forget the influence of the publik skulz and universities over the past 40 or so years. The non-judgmentalism, diversity training, anti-American history classes, and genuine socialism being taught to the young has churned out millions of fools each year. Now those propagandized fools are voting.

And it will get nothing but worse.

****

Charlotte Iserbyte: The Deliberate Dumbing-Down of America.

19 posted on 11/12/2006 3:27:24 AM PST by beyond the sea ( Now that Pelosi Galore is in charge, it's never too late to start drinking.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
My take is Americans would STILL be solidly behind Iraq if the President was going to do whatever it takes to win. But I beg to differ with Mark here

I think Mark agrees with you when he writes mockingly, "But when it just seems to be a kind of thankless semi-colonial policing defensive operation with no end . . . I mean, where is the offense in this?""

20 posted on 11/12/2006 3:30:08 AM PST by beyond the sea ( Now that Pelosi Galore is in charge, it's never too late to start drinking.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

I have to agree with you on that. If you had a conversation one on one with the average American about Al Sadr then asked that person "If you were Commander in Chief what would you do about him?", I'm inclined to think they would want him captured or dead.

Yet no one at the top including the President seems serious about dealing with Sadr. Rather than allow the troops to be bled by that nutbag day after day, if we're not gonna do anything about the problem, then why are we sticking around? That is the general attitude at this time.

That doesn't make me think we should leave Iraq. They are our ally on the WOT. That is the purpose of why we took out an unfriendly regime there. It would be a waste of the sacrifice that was made by US troops. That's what makes me think if the GOP starts building up the new leadership for 2008 now, we can turn this all around.

The WOT isn't gonna go away, so we need this ally that sits in the center of the Middle East. New Republican leadership needs to help the American People understand that and let them know we will address any threat seriously including nutbags like Sadr.


21 posted on 11/12/2006 3:30:25 AM PST by kuma (Mark Sanford '08 http://www.petitiononline.com/msan2008/petition.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: James Ewell Brown Stuart
I do realize life isn't a video game where you can call a time out. Americans are asking though, what is our criterion for victory? All they're seeing is endless violence in Iraq and little in the way of progress towards an effective government and security on the ground. So they can be forgiven for deciding they've had enough. The President needs to tell the American people what terms he would view as a victory there. Its either that or we're going to be departing from there as soon as political circumstances make such a move propitious.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus

22 posted on 11/12/2006 3:30:40 AM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: James Ewell Brown Stuart; beyond the sea

As I was reading down, J.E.B.S., I was going to say, I'm not sure but what it was Rumsfeld who told the Prez and the Veep when he was going to leave. My earlier predictions had been (if it was certain the dems would take the House) that he would leave a number of weeks before or after the election. This was a brilliant move and he will be a whipping boy for a while, but only for a short while. By January the American people will be saying, "no, let's move on" and Rummy will be tending his ranch in AZ or NM or where ever it is.


23 posted on 11/12/2006 3:33:11 AM PST by leadpenny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Kozak

Thanks for the ping.


24 posted on 11/12/2006 3:33:53 AM PST by leadpenny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
I know you from your posts, and it was not my intention to suggest that you did not understand what was at stake.

I read a lot on FR that the President does not do a good enough in defining our criteria for winning. I just happen to believe that is not true. He has defined it over and over again.

TO say that there has been little in the way of progress seems to be selling what is really happening in Iraq short. There has been tremendous progress. It has not been swift, but it has been steady, yet it has been opposed. But that is war isn't it...active opposition to your stated objectives.

What? Did we honestly think that we would go into Iraq and not be opposed?

25 posted on 11/12/2006 3:39:14 AM PST by James Ewell Brown Stuart (Sorry, we don't want to stick around to see if we win; we'd rather vote ourselves off the island.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop; kuma; HisKingdomWillAbolishSinDeath; Enterprise; sirchtruth
What does it mean when the world's hyperpower, responsible for 40 percent of the planet's military spending, decides that it cannot withstand a guerrilla war with historically low casualties against a ragbag of local insurgents and imported terrorists?

It says we are gutless, but not to worry, as the self-righteous and ever-irritating Sean Vanity would say, "let not your heart be troubled."

As Mort Kondracke would say, "The shotgun wedding........... the Republican President and Democrat Congress" will take care of everything. (sarcasm off)

26 posted on 11/12/2006 3:43:03 AM PST by beyond the sea ( Now that Pelosi Galore is in charge, it's never too late to start drinking.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
All they're seeing is endless violence in Iraq and little in the way of progress

Sure...the propoganda shown by the US media.

Truth is...the violence is a necessary process through which the Iraqi people must move in order to achieve a stable government; a pacifistic approach could be advanced, but the violent instigators who believe in totalitarian government would then achieve their goal of having a strong voice in the new government.

Despite what the media tells you, progress is significant. The goal of pushing hard for a democratic wave in the Mid-East is a noble and necessary one and Pres. Bush and his guys have performed their part admirably.

27 posted on 11/12/2006 3:47:39 AM PST by Siena Dreaming
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: kstewskis; Victoria Delsoul; Raquel; DollyCali; Miss Marple; Molly Pitcher; lysie; kassie; kayak

A good read.


28 posted on 11/12/2006 3:48:25 AM PST by Northern Yankee ( Stay The Course!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: James Ewell Brown Stuart
I do understand what is at stake. We have to win there in order to maintain our power and to create a deterrence to future aggression. Somewhere we have to draw a line and send a message to our enemies we are committed to defeating them because in the end, its the existence of our country that is on the line.

That's what Iraq is all about. We always knew the elements we removed from power after our invasion and Al Qaeda would oppose our objectives of making Iraq a free and democratic country that would be a model for the rest of the region and not pose a threat to its neighbors. That ought to be the minimum we should settle for as a victory criterion and its in keeping with America's deepest ideals. In short, the security of a friendly people is an investment in our own security as well. I don't think the President has tried to get across to the American people why the Bush Doctrine would both enhance our national security and help to free a violence-prone region of the world run by murderous despots. Its both conservative and Wilsonian. I haven't changed my mind about the Iraq War. I believed then and I believe now it was absolutely the right thing to do. Now we need to win.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus

29 posted on 11/12/2006 3:48:30 AM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

Ultimately we will win, but we will have to show those assholes what a REAL IED is.


30 posted on 11/12/2006 3:50:43 AM PST by wastoute
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
The President needs to tell the American people what terms he would view as a victory there. Its either that or we're going to be departing from there as soon as political circumstances make such a move propitious.

Unfortunately we know the ability of G.W. to speak and persuade. And personally I think he's getting worse at speaking of late. It's been painful to watch him try to make a point. (And of course the old media would try to distort anything he says.)

Our problem is is that we have few excellent and forceful speakers to make the needed points. Tony Snow is very good and makes a good impression.

Actually....... I say give Mark Steyn a three hour talk show five (or six) days a week like the sometimes helpful sometimes hurtful Rush Limbaugh, and the world would be a better place!

31 posted on 11/12/2006 3:51:06 AM PST by beyond the sea ( Now that Pelosi Galore is in charge, it's never too late to start drinking.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: James Ewell Brown Stuart

"I do not think the President fired Rumsfeld. I think Rumsfeld insisted on going in the face of what was coming now that the dems had been elected."

I think you are right although Rumsfeld and the President had to know this was coming. It looks like they had no clue or maybe the wanted the dems to win? Let them take some heat for whatever happens after they cut off funds etc?
I am really baffled by all of this!


32 posted on 11/12/2006 3:51:31 AM PST by Cricket24 (ULTRA PATRIOT!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: leadpenny
and Rummy will be tending his ranch in AZ or NM or where ever it is

Hopefully.

I wish Rummy peace in the future. I cannot pretend to be anything of an insider who knows what has really happened, but Rummy deserves his peace to me.

33 posted on 11/12/2006 3:53:39 AM PST by beyond the sea ( Now that Pelosi Galore is in charge, it's never too late to start drinking.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Ike

American will can be summed up in one word "Metrosexual"...we have become a nation obsessed with how we look and feel instead of a nation with a steel backbone. We shall see where it takes us...


34 posted on 11/12/2006 3:55:50 AM PST by databoss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: wastoute

lol


35 posted on 11/12/2006 3:56:10 AM PST by beyond the sea ( Now that Pelosi Galore is in charge, it's never too late to start drinking.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: databoss

Well said.


36 posted on 11/12/2006 3:58:00 AM PST by beyond the sea ( Now that Pelosi Galore is in charge, it's never too late to start drinking.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Enterprise
the Dems know that this may not have been the best time for them to win total control of the Senate and the House. If a disaster unfolds, they know the American people will blame THEM!

Wishful thinking.

Dems never take blame for anything; then only give it. The MSM sees to that.

Everything is "Bush's fault." It is naive to expect that the MSM will allow the American people to see the Dems as they really are.

37 posted on 11/12/2006 3:58:14 AM PST by wai-ming
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
Again, I am not saying that you don't understand what is at stake. I have not said that...

Where you and I disagree is whether the President has gotten across why the Bush doctrine is important. I think he has. I think he has told us over and over again what he is doing, why it must be done, and what is at stake, why we must stay, and why we cannot leave.

There is not going to be a Hollywood moment where he will speak and the people as one will embrace what he says. He has been stating the Bush Doctrine since 9/11...he keeps repeating it... I don't think it is his fault that we are not listening.

38 posted on 11/12/2006 3:59:48 AM PST by James Ewell Brown Stuart (Sorry, we don't want to stick around to see if we win; we'd rather vote ourselves off the island.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
Bush is going to be president for two more years. The Dems don't have the numbers to overturn any vetos.

And we still may have a pro-war majority in the Senate. Liebermann is a hawk. I'm guessing the Dem from Montana might be one too.

39 posted on 11/12/2006 4:00:24 AM PST by Tribune7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wai-ming
Dems never take blame for anything; then only give it. The MSM sees to that. .......... It is naive to expect that the MSM will allow the American people to see the Dems as they really are.

Truer words have never been said.

****

The socialist/Marxist/liberal media is the most destructive, relentless, and ruthless enemy of this Republic.

****

Happy Birthday, Gerald Ford

40 posted on 11/12/2006 4:01:35 AM PST by beyond the sea ( Now that Pelosi Galore is in charge, it's never too late to start drinking.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: James Ewell Brown Stuart
"I think Rumsfeld insisted on going..."

On Wednesday morning right after the election while the losses were still being counted?? The timing of the resignation/firing screamed defeat and worse. What could Bush have been thinking - We are all Spanish now?

41 posted on 11/12/2006 4:04:02 AM PST by Truth29
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

bttt


42 posted on 11/12/2006 4:05:11 AM PST by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: beyond the sea
Unfortunately we know the ability of G.W. to speak and persuade. And personally I think he's getting worse at speaking of late. It's been painful to watch him try to make a point.

Ouch!, when you consider his oratory skills to begin with. I didn't see or hear his news conferences this week but my brother was saying the same thing you did when I talked to him by phone yesterday.

W doesn't have the faking ability like the Cigar King does. If he doesn't believe in it, he can't sell it. The notable exceptions were on the mound of ruble in NY and his speech before the joint session of congress in September 01. He believed everything he was saying then.

43 posted on 11/12/2006 4:05:47 AM PST by leadpenny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: James Ewell Brown Stuart
I think Americans would like to take a time out. As I observed at the outset of the thread, the real world won't be kind to us since our enemies will regard a breather as a sign we lack the resolve to defend ourselves and are weak and decadent to the point where we are more interested in being self-absorbed in the lap of luxury rather than securing our own survival. The question is what choice we will make. It will have a tremendous bearing upon our future.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus

44 posted on 11/12/2006 4:09:25 AM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Cricket24

I was baffled, too. It didn't seem that there would be any good in having Rummy leave when he did; I was wondering too if it was some sort of misguided offer by Rumsfeld himself to fall on his sword, thinking that would take the heat off. All the act did was make it look like an acknowledgement of error and a moment of bungling, particularly with Bush's confused response.

I didn't get the feeling it was part of a long-thought out plan, overall.

Aside from that, I agree 100% with Steyn. That said, I think Rumsfeld would probably have prosecuted the war differently if it had not been from the constant harrassment from the media and the Dems. He and Bush should have ignored them, but instead they allowed themselves to follow a strategy of "almost" and "we could if we wanted to - but we don't."


45 posted on 11/12/2006 4:09:48 AM PST by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: James Ewell Brown Stuart
There is not going to be a Hollywood moment

Agreed. No matter what Pres. Bush says, the anti-war, intellectuals will attack it.

He could tweak his rhetoric and alter his phrasing, but it would make NO difference whatsoever as that would be the new phrase du jour to parse and spin.

Pres. Bush should continue with his approach. It's been extremely effective so far IMO, despite what the propogandists say.

Also agree with you about Rumsfeld. The thought of Rummy being tied up for months in Dem congressional hearings with Carl Levin and Conyers overseeing the inquisition is odious. The stepping down was a good decision IMO.

46 posted on 11/12/2006 4:10:41 AM PST by Siena Dreaming
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Cricket24
I'm not... I think they would wait until after the election. If the Repub kept control, Rummy would stay. If the Dems gain control, Rummy would leave.

Where I worked, a similar thing happened. There was a power struggle between two different sales groups, and it did not work out for my two bosses.

They read the writing on the wall. They gave it about four months, but in the end they left. It was the best for the company and for them. It happens. Even offices are political.

Defeat is an orphan. That has been reinforced here on FR since Tuesday.

47 posted on 11/12/2006 4:11:34 AM PST by James Ewell Brown Stuart (Sorry, we don't want to stick around to see if we win; we'd rather vote ourselves off the island.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
It's difficult to conceive of any more public diminution of a noble cause than to make its leadership contingent on Lincoln Chafee's Senate seat... A nostalgic boomer columnist in the Boston Globe argues that honor requires the United States to "accept defeat," as it did in Vietnam. Didn't work out so swell for the natives, but to hell with them.

I couldn't read any further. This is too painful.

48 posted on 11/12/2006 4:12:54 AM PST by Aquinasfan (When you find "Sola Scriptura" in the Bible, let me know)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #49 Removed by Moderator

To: Truth29
On Wednesday morning right after the election while the losses were still being counted??

Best time IMO. The big story was the elections. It actually diluted the impact.

Any other time and the media would have gone on for weeks about it.

50 posted on 11/12/2006 4:15:12 AM PST by Siena Dreaming
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-139 next last

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