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

Skip to comments.

Let Taliban feel the 'righteous might'
Houston Chronicle ^ | Oct. 29, 2001, 6:09PM | Krauthammer - Best Editorialist Today

Posted on 10/29/2001 8:11:53 PM PST by BCrago66

THE war is not going well. The Taliban have not yielded ground. Not a single important Taliban leader has been killed, captured or has defected. On the contrary. The Taliban have captured and executed our great Pashtun hope, Abdul Haq. The Joint Chiefs express surprise at the tenacity of the enemy.

The war is not going well and it is time to say why. It has been fought with half-measures. It has been fought with an eye on the wishes of our "coalition partners." It has been fought to assuage the Arab "street." It has been fought to satisfy the diplomats rather than the generals.

Thirty years ago in Vietnam, we fought a war finely calibrated to win "hearts and minds." Bomb today, pause tomorrow. That strategy met with nothing but pain and defeat. One of the products of that war was Colin Powell. He and his generation vowed that never again would American lives be sacrificed, their missions compromised, their objectives distorted to satisfy purely political objectives.

And yet for three weeks in Afghanistan we held back from massively bombing the Taliban front lines facing the Northern Alliance. Why? Because Pakistan does not like the Northern Alliance. So we calibrate the war to produce a precise ethnic balance, satisfying our various allies, for a post-Taliban Afghanistan.

But you don't get to post-Taliban until you've defeated the Taliban. And you don't defeat the Taliban with antiseptic attacks on fixed installations and pinpoint raids on front-line positions. You do it by scaring the living hell out of the enemy, producing in him the rational calculation that you're going to win and he'd better change sides.

Why have we turned this into an operation for the liberation of Afghanistan? Afghanistan will be liberated if we succeed. But that is not why we are there. We are there to avenge 5,000 murdered Americans and to protect the rest by killing those preparing to murder again.

That defines our mission: destroying al-Qaida and the Taliban. What comes after will be an interesting problem. But it comes after. To restrain our military now in order to placate the diplomats is a tragic reprise of Vietnam.

The error began in the very naming of the mission. It started out as Infinite Justice. But we could not have that, we were told, because it might offend Muslims, who believe that infinite justice only comes from God. (Don't Christians and Jews believe that too? Were they offended?) So we changed it to Enduring Freedom. Very nice. Too nice. We should have called it Righteous Might, the phrase Franklin Roosevelt used in his Pearl Harbor speech to describe what the enemy would now be facing.

Instead, the enemy today is facing calibration and proportionality. The "Powell Doctrine" once preached overwhelming force to achieve victory. Yet we have held back. Why have we not loosed the B-52s and the B-2s to carpet-bomb Taliban positions? And why are we giving the Taliban sanctuary in their cities? We could drop leaflets giving civilians 48 hours to evacuate, after which the cities become legitimate military targets. We know our enemy is planning more mass murder. Every day of urban safety for them is another day of peril for innocent Americans.

Restraint has already cost a lot. An important element of winning is psychological shock, the key to demoralization, defection and disintegration. We have squandered it. Now that the first wave of American power has come and gone, the Taliban are ever more convinced of American uncertainty and of their own indestructibility.

Our solicitousness knows no bounds. The president urges the children of America to each send a dollar to feed Afghan children. He now urges American schoolchildren to find Muslim pen pals. After the carnage of Sept. 11, should not our Muslim allies be urging their people to seek out American pen pals? We were the ones attacked, by Muslims invoking Islam. Why are we the ones required to demonstrate religious tolerance?

Nice is nice but this is war. We cannot fight it apologetically -- the very talk of holding our fire during Ramadan is beyond belief -- with one hand tied behind our back.

Half-measures are for wars of choice, wars like Vietnam. In wars of choice, losing is an option. You lose and still survive as a nation. The war on terrorism, like World War II, is a war of necessity. Losing is not an option. Losing is fatal. This is no time for restraint and other niceties. This is a time for righteous might.


TOPICS: Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-24 next last

1 posted on 10/29/2001 8:11:53 PM PST by BCrago66
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: BCrago66
Amen!
2 posted on 10/29/2001 8:16:09 PM PST by RobbyS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BCrago66
This guy must be a Freeper. Amen brother!
3 posted on 10/29/2001 8:19:38 PM PST by Professional
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BCrago66
Losing is not an option. Losing is fatal. This is no time for restraint and other niceties. This is a time for righteous might.

Yep. Bring in the big guns....

4 posted on 10/29/2001 8:20:41 PM PST by b4its2late
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS
Robby, I have been keeping my mouth shut because I am not a General and I don't have access to the information that the Brass have, but DAMN if this does not express EXACTLY what I feel.

You do not fight a war by Marquis de Queensbury rules. You fight with maximum force, destructiveness and power at sustainable cost and the ONLY acceptable conclusion is victory.

Just what in the name of Ned is going on here?

5 posted on 10/29/2001 8:21:35 PM PST by Ronin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS
Yea , we all know we are half ass fighting.
Powell the moron should be fired, he screwed up with leaving Sadman in Iraq, and now he is listening to his muslim friends the Pakistani and Saudi. ( who by the created the Taliban)
After all, the soviets did lose to this bunch.
If America wants to win this war , it has to let the armed forces take care of the fighting first and worry about the political stuff later.
6 posted on 10/29/2001 8:23:43 PM PST by KQQL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ronin
Shock 'em and then rock 'em.
7 posted on 10/29/2001 8:24:25 PM PST by RobbyS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: BCrago66
Very interesting article, and I pretty much agree with the premise and the conclusions. The problem is no matter what we do over there we are going to make the overall situation worse.

I try to think through the ramifications of Pakistan or Egypt falling to Islamic fundamentalist governments, or the House of Saud falling in Saudi Arabia. It's like trying to plot the trajectory of billiard balls on the break, a dozen balls all moving in different directions and bouncing off of each other. The major difference is that the calculus of the Middle East is about a million times more complicated than the billards example. I keep coming to the conclusion that things are going to get very, very interesting in the not too distant future.

8 posted on 10/29/2001 8:24:37 PM PST by Billy_bob_bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Yea , we all know we are half ass fighting.
Powell the moron should be fired, he screwed up with leaving Sadman in Iraq, and now he is listening to his muslim friends the Pakistani and Saudi. ( who by the created the Taliban)
After all, the soviets did lose to this bunch.
If America wants to win this war , it has to let the armed forces take care of the fighting first and worry about the political stuff later.

Guess who ratted out HAQ.... Pakistan's CIA , our new friend.

9 posted on 10/29/2001 8:25:43 PM PST by KQQL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: KQQL
Don't blame Powell. He didn't make the decision in Iraq. And now he is following the "realpolitik" notions of Scowcroft and "Others" who did make the big decisions on Iraq.
10 posted on 10/29/2001 8:26:41 PM PST by RobbyS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Billy_bob_bob
Your point is very well taken, but it seems to me that a half-assed war effort would only increase the chances that the "moderate" Abab states will fall to the radical Islamic faction. Like animals and savages, this element smells weakness and then pounces.
11 posted on 10/29/2001 8:28:41 PM PST by BCrago66
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

Comment #12 Removed by Moderator

To: KQQL
"Guess who ratted out HAQ.... Pakistan's CIA , our new friend."

I had not heard this information. What is your source? This is very, very interesting data, and I would really like to find out more about this story.

13 posted on 10/29/2001 8:34:35 PM PST by Billy_bob_bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: BCrago66
You are basing your argument on the premise that Islam and Islamic fundamentalists are the problem. You are correct in your premise, but this is not the premise upon which we have based our current campaign. Since our campaign is based on the idea of punishing "terrorists" without offending "Islam", we have tied ourselves into knots right out of the gate and put ourselves in the difficult position we are now in.
14 posted on 10/29/2001 8:38:33 PM PST by Billy_bob_bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: BCrago66
Interesting story on tv tonight showing that there are about 60,000 afghanistan people living in Freemont California who left Afghanistan 20years ago and many are now succesful....Seems these people would like to return to their homeland and help restore democracy should the Taliban be gone...found a couple of links showing that they advised the US and Clinton about the training camps and conditions in Afghanistan years ago...sad...

http://www.afghanistanvoice.org/NEWSLTRS/1997DEC.shtml

http://www.afghanistanvoice.org/AfghanistanVoice-March2000.htm
15 posted on 10/29/2001 8:39:36 PM PST by rolling_stone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BCrago66
30 years ago in vietnam, we fought a war finely calibrated to win 'hearts and minds'. bomb today, pause tomorrow. that strategy met with nothing but pain and defeat.'

we lost the war because of the media and communists infesting the U.S.A.

this time, the media should be made to 'walk point'!!!

16 posted on 10/29/2001 8:42:34 PM PST by rockfish59
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rolling_stone
I am shamefully ignorant of the history of Afganistan, but I have read in these last weeks that a couple decades ago, it was somewhat of a semi-Western nation, with enlightened art, female doctors, etc.

I've also read that there is in Afganistan great resentment at both Pakistan and other Mid-east nations for high-jacking their country and causing the present disaster.

17 posted on 10/29/2001 8:49:19 PM PST by BCrago66
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: BCrago66
I am ignorant of the history of afghanistan also, seeing the short clip on tv about the people who fled 20 years ago certainly gave me a different picture of their people. Amazing what democracy and capitalism can do for people!
18 posted on 10/29/2001 8:59:18 PM PST by rolling_stone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: BCrago66
Yep, I could care less if Pakistan is happy. No, I take that back, I would be upset if Pakistan ends up happy. We should side with the Northern Alliance, India, Russia, and Iran, and drive the Taliban right out of power.
19 posted on 10/29/2001 9:14:05 PM PST by EaglesUpForever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ronin
Simple. If you want to fight a war in afghanistan, hundreds of miles from the sea, 1500 miles from our nearest major logistics base, 12,000 miles from the US coast, with the need to airlift all supplies, equipment, etc., you have to carefully plan what you are going to do, with what troops, and how. You don't want to drop a half-baked force into Afghanistan that you can't resupply. You particularly don't want to drop them into Afghanistan without serious degrading and shaping of the Taliban armed forces. I spent a year in Afghanistan, my parents spent three. Like hundreds of thousands of Russian troops, my dad got dysentery. Not a pleasant experience. To effectively fight the Taliban, we need to invade at a time and place of our choosing with forces that can help build a logistics base in Afghanistan while hard-core spec ops troops and rangers take the fight to the enemy. Winter will be our ally, not theirs. Time is on our side, not theirs. The Taliban are in for some rude shocks in the next few months. This is not the Clinton "slam-bam-so-long-mam" cruise missile administration. The Bush people are serious players who know how to keep good op sec. Cheney gave us a little hint. "The Taliban and Al Qaeda will not know anything till it is upon them." In other words, we are going to kick their butts good.
20 posted on 10/29/2001 9:18:57 PM PST by Vauss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-24 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