Posted on 05/17/2007 6:47:18 PM PDT by jazusamo
May 17, 2007
Without much notice and even less discussion, "civil war" has become the new abracadabra phrase for American foreign policy.
Sen. Joe Biden leads the magicians who've seemed to convince everybody that it never makes sense to get involved in a civil war. In March, he screamed from the Senate floor: "I'm so tired of hearing on this floor about courage. Have the courage to tell the administration, 'Stop this ridiculous policy you have.' We're taking sides in a civil war."
Biden's not alone. It's become a standard talking point for most major opponents of the Iraq war. The Democrats' Iraq-withdrawal point man in the House, John Murtha, says we're "caught in a civil war" in almost every interview, as if this is the geopolitical equivalent of "I've fallen and can't get up." Senator Majority Leader Harry Reid said last week that, "We stand united ... in our belief that troops are enmeshed in an intractable civil war."
The assumption behind this gambit is obvious: Declaring it a civil war is like blowing a whistle at the end of the game. There's nothing left to do but pack up the equipment and go home.
Al-Qaida in Iraq (and perhaps the Iranians) have clearly figured this out. That's why they consistently try to stoke sectarian passions by, for example, bombing the Golden Mosque in Samarra, Iraq's holiest Shia shrine. That 2006 attack prompted the formation of Shiite militias and death squads, which in turn provided fresh evidence that Iraq was heading toward civil war.
Meanwhile, the Bush administration has been desperate to keep the press from describing the situation in Iraq as a "civil war," for the obvious reason that the administration will lose its remaining support if the American public thinks this is just a civil war.
(Excerpt) Read more at orlandosentinel.com ...
Good points. The fact is, it’s true - even in a civil war, there is a right side and a wrong side - which side will America be on?
Good point!!
In fact, outside influences that cannot be controlled force a nation into these kinds of alliances.
Jonah should sign up to go fight in Iraq.
So if we lost Iraq to al qaeda and Iran and they turned it into a massive terrorist base from which to launch devastating attacks on us and the rest of the western world you wouldn’t mind?
If Iran got nukes because we were too far away to stop them and they hit some of our cities killing hundreds of thousands of Americans and ruining our economy you wouldn’t mind?
If we left and terrorists killed tens of thousands or hndreds of thousands of Iraqi’s because we betrayed them you wouldn’t mind?
If America lost any trust in the world for generations you wouldn’t mind?
As long as Thomas Jefferson was happy.
Didn’t Jefferson go to war against the barbary pirates to secure American interests?
He won’t have to go to Iraq if you and the Al-dimocRATS have their way. We will be fighting them right here in due time.
Well said, PB.
It may not be wrong to take sides in a civil war, but is sure seems foolish to attempt to fight against both sides of the civil war, and at the same time.
That calamity can be laid at the doorstep of the Rumsfeld legacy.
And I’m sure Jonah will be in the front lines of defense.
Agreed but that is changing. The tribes of the Anbar province is an example.
I'm not so much concerned with right and wrong as with figuring out which side is friendly and which side hostile to our interests.
The way Roosevelt should have signed up to fight in North Africa? The way you'll sign up for any war you agree with? There is a reason we pay taxes. If we wanted to fight all our own wars, we'd abolish the Federal government. The job of the military is to fight the nation's wars - it's just another risky job, just like the jobs that policemen and firefighters do.
If you’re not on the front lines you shouldn’t have an opinion?
As Jonah says, this is a false argument. It is made only by politicians who are geopolitical morons. Unfortunately, there are a lot of those on Capitol Hill.
Congressman Billybob
Latest article: "Jeffrey Has Escaped, and Other Tales of Divorce"
I can assure you he will not assume the fetal position such as you might.
Joe Biden doesn’t know what he’s talking about.
Exactly, both good examples and it seems the geopolitical morons outnumber the sane ones on the Hill now.
You have no idea of what you are talking about. And yes I do assume he would assume the fetal position. He is a low class blow hard who got to where he is in life because of his mommy.
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.