Posted on 09/07/2013 4:07:29 AM PDT by Kaslin
There's a must-read op/ed in today's Washington Post, authored by a retired Army Major General. He draws on "dozens" of exchanges with active and retired military leaders to mount a case that Pentagon brass want no part of a Syria intervention. He begins by analyzing Gen. Martin Dempsey's body language during Congressional hearings this week -- by far his least compelling argument. Then comes the meat of his case. Brutal:
I feel confident that what follows represents the overwhelming opinion of serving professionals who have been intimate witnesses to the unfolding events that will lead the United States into its next war. They are embarrassed to be associated with the amateurism of the Obama administration’s attempts to craft a plan that makes strategic sense. None of the White House staff has any experience in war or understands it. So far, at least, this path to war violates every principle of war, including the element of surprise, achieving mass and having a clearly defined and obtainable objective. They are repelled by the hypocrisy of a media blitz that warns against the return of Hitlerism but privately acknowledges that the motive for risking American lives is our “responsibility to protect” the world’s innocents. Prospective U.S. action in Syria is not about threats to American security.
The U.S. military’s civilian masters privately are proud that they are motivated by guilt over slaughters in Rwanda, Sudan and Kosovo and not by any systemic threat to our country. They are outraged by the fact that what may happen is an act of war and a willingness to risk American lives to make up for a slip of the tongue about “red lines.” These acts would be for retribution and to restore the reputation of a president. Our serving professionals make the point that killing more Syrians won’t deter Iranian resolve to confront us. The Iranians have already gotten the message. Our people lament our loneliness. Our senior soldiers take pride in their past commitments to fight alongside allies and within coalitions that shared our strategic goals. This war, however, will be ours alone.
They are tired of wannabe soldiers who remain enamored of the lure of bloodless machine warfare. “Look,” one told me, “if you want to end this decisively, send in the troops and let them defeat the Syrian army. If the nation doesn’t think Syria is worth serious commitment, then leave them alone.” But they also warn that Syria is not Libya or Serbia. Perhaps the United States has become too used to fighting third-rate armies. As the Israelis learned in 1973, the Syrians are tough and mean-spirited killers with nothing to lose. Our military members understand and take seriously their oath to defend the constitutional authority of their civilian masters. They understand that the United States is the only liberal democracy that has never been ruled by its military. But today’s soldiers know war and resent civilian policymakers who want the military to fight a war that neither they nor their loved ones will experience firsthand.
Soon the military will salute respectfully and loose the hell of hundreds of cruise missiles in an effort that will, inevitably, kill a few of those we wish to protect. They will do it with all the professionalism and skill we expect from the world’s most proficient military. I wish Kerry would take a moment to look at the images from this week’s hearings before we go to war again.
I'm in no position to determine whether this is a tendentious screed, or a fair approximation of how Pentagon higher-ups feel. If it's more the latter than the former, it sounds as if American military leadership shares the intense skepticism expressed by the American people and many in Congress.
bttt
You don’t have to convince me... I’m totally against going into that craphole.
It does does not benefit the US, no US assests or personnel were attacked, and no US National Security interests are at stake.
Call John Boner to voice your opinions at:
202-225-0600; press 1 for a staffer
DC switchboard:
202-224-3121; ask for the Elitist of your choice
You put together these Military Advisors above (sickening)and the czars that all HATE America, and the fact that the NSA has allowed bammy to have every piece of dirt on Congress critters. Why do you think they are all boot licking at a time like this? Bonehead, jumping out to the microphone to say “I'm backing Bammy”, McJuan, gramnesty et al. I am sick to my stomach.
Keep calling. These films they supposedly are showing congress are gross. Where and when did they obtain these?
Also, it's NOT JUST a coincidence that this “emergency” is coming up just as the one year anniversary to the LIES in Benghazi. Total plan of Jarrett's I'll bet. Panetta said last September 28 (?) that they lost track of some chemical weapons in that Benghazi attack? Also, where was bammy that night, why was the CIA in Benghazi and what arms were they shipping to their muslim brotherhood buddies?
Connect the dots with Huma, Jarret and the Muslim Brotherhood. THIS is a HUGE mess and bammy can't cover his fanny much longer.
Oliver Cromwell?
The next 40 months are likely to be the longest -- and most dangerous -- 40 months in American history.
Cromwell was a politician (Member of Parliament, first for Huntingdon, then for Cambridge) and didn’t become a military man until he joined up after the English Civil War had started. So he was no more a ‘military ruler’ than George Washington (actually less, because George was already in the British redcoat military before the war against Britain and before he became president - he used to toast the King in the Officer’s Mess prior to the secession)
Cromwell. Which is why the English have a statute of him outside the houses of Parliament—to remind them.
Going to war for the presidents reputation?
It’s just insane to think about.
The New Model Army brought Cromwell to power, and because he was such a brilliant commander, he had Europe quaking in its boots when he died, relatively early. He also had brought the Royal Navy into being and, practically, the British Empire. If his son had not been such a wet, Cromwell would likely have become King Oliver I. But he was brought low by a kidney stone, as Pascal reminds us. sic transit...
He has made his reputation. The Iranians know well that he has no intention of asking the military to do anything more than picking up sea shells along the Channel.
This statement is laughable, the Serbian army was so third rate that it remained intact after 78 days of straight bombing by the Perfumed Prince Clark.
The only reason why Assad's army has any teeth is because of Russian support, what a crock.
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.