Posted on 04/09/2004 4:01:53 PM PDT by M 91 u2 K
I keep hearing the so called experts or pundits that our options in Iraq are if US forces respond too weakly, they will embolden both sets of insurgents, and if they respond muscularly they risk inflaming the entire population.
This sounds as if it came out of the experts in 1968, when discussing our options in Vietnam. Well in Vietnam a young officer on the ground quickly learned the harsh realities of war. 22 years later that young officer was the Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs, and help lead one of the most succesfull military operations in recent history, Operation Desert Storm.
After the end of Persian Gulf War in 1991, Colin Powell, then chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, outlined his vision for efficient and decisive military action. His plan is now referred to as the Powell Doctrine, although there is not an actual formal document named as such. Powell, currently the U.S. secretary of state, has recently invoked the Doctrine in articulating the justifications for the Bush administration's preparations for war in Iraq. Essentially, the Doctrine expresses that military action should be used only as a last resort and only if there is a clear risk to national security by the intended target; the force, when used, should be overwhelming and disproportionate to the force used by the enemy; there must be strong support for the campaign by the general public; and there must be a clear exit strategy from the conflict in which the military is engaged.
Powell based this strategy for warfare in part on the views held by his former boss in the Reagan administration, Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger, and also on his own experience as a major in Vietnam. That protracted campaign, in Powell's view, was representative of a war in which public support was flimsy, the military objectives were not clear, overwhelming force was not used consistently, and an exit strategy was ill defined.
For more on the Powell Doctrine Click here
It has become apparent that no one in the Bush administration or anywhere is following this brillant doctrine.
Creating a democracy in Iraq should not be our first objective. Analogies to WW2 are not reasonable, since both the Japanese and the Germans prior to the war had a history of Democracy. We can try to lay the seeds for Democracy, but our first Objective must be to win the War Against Radical Islam. The Arab and Muslim world seeks to destroy us, and we are currently fighting a war against Radical Islam. We cannot create peaceful relations with the Iraqi people, until the enemy (Radical Islamists around the world) has been killed.
As for the issue of civilian casualities, there are numerous Iraqi women and children who are helping the enemy, and therefore civilians in Iraq lose their protective status. This is when analogies to WW2 are appropriate. In WW2 millions of civilians were killed but it was COLLATERAL DAMAGE. The Muslims populations were are fighting operate on power and fear. They view acts of kindess as acts of weakness. They view acts of cruelty as acts of power. Look at AL-Sadr the current rage among Iraqis, his thugs are responsible for the bombing of religious ceremonies that killed hundreds of Iraqis. The Iraqis saw his cruelty as strength, and our inadequate response as weakness.
Most importantly if we show mercy to our enemy, we are being inhumane to our own people, by sentencing them to a future of terror and mayhem that the enemy will unleash on us if we retreat in Iraq.
I support President Bush 100% and will vote for him in November, but he must not care what the media says. No matter what he does to appease the liberals they will eat him alive, unless he FIGHTS them. We are engaged in the toughest fight for our countries survival. We must face Radical Muslims on one front, and degenerate liberals on another front.
Take a deep breath, relax, and read some Clausewitz. Once you have a good grasp of strategic theory, then read some Gerard Chaliand. Chaliand is a Frog, but he has spent most of his career here in the US. His works on counter-insurgency are brilliant, and the man has a superb grasp of strategy. Indiscriminate killing ain't gonna help. You are right about the need to be tough, given the nature of Arab culture, but we need to be smart about it.
put down the straw and back away from the vodka...slowly
Reductio ad absurdum. If there are no more Iraqis, there will by definition be peace in Iraq.
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.