Nowhere to run [Bush should be impeached, Iraq war is foolish]

The Guardian ^ | Tuesday November 29, 2005 | Brian Whitaker

[F14 Pilot]

There is a remarkable article in the latest issue of the American Jewish weekly, Forward. It calls for President Bush to be impeached and put on trial "for misleading the American people, and launching the most foolish war since Emperor Augustus in 9 BC sent his legions into Germany and lost them". To describe Iraq as the most foolish war of the last 2,014 years is a sweeping statement, but the writer is well qualified to know.

He is Martin van Creveld, a professor at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem and one of the world's foremost military historians. Several of his books have influenced modern military theory and he is the only non-American author on the US Army's list of required reading for officers.

Professor van Creveld has previously drawn parallels between Iraq and Vietnam, and pointed out that almost all countries that have tried to fight similar wars during the last 60 years or so have ended up losing. Why President Bush "nevertheless decided to go to war escapes me and will no doubt preoccupy historians to come," he told one interviewer.

The professor's puzzlement is understandable. More than two years after the war began, and despite the huge financial and human cost, it is difficult to see any real benefits.

The weapons of mass destruction that provided the excuse for the invasion turned out not to exist and the idea that Iraq could become a beacon of democracy for the Middle East has proved equally far-fetched.

True, there is now a multi-party electoral system, but it has institutionalised and consolidated the country's ethnic, sectarian and tribal divisions - exactly the sort of thing that should be avoided when attempting to democratise.

In the absence of anything more positive, Tony Blair has

[clee1]

Someone really needs to beotch-slap these leftist Brits.

[Old Seadog]

"If it's in the Guardian then I guess we should pull out."

[An.American.Expatriate]

...he is the only non-American author on the US Army's list of required reading for officers.

I seriously dount this statement - IIRC Sun Tzu is on that list and certainly, many others as well.

[Prime Choice]

Ah, the Guardian. The same bunch of Leftist Euro-twits who thought they had a right to interfere with an American election by mailbombing Ohio residents. Yup...that sure worked, didn't it?

*snicker*

[Stayingawayfromthedarkside]

Doesn't this professor remember the wars that the Arab nations waged against Israel. They outnumbered Israel and they still got their butts kicked. I think this professor doesn't want to get killed by those muslim thugs. What a moron.

[Hugin]

Von Clauswitz, "On War"?

[blondee123]

the world will revolt when the weapons are seized in Syria.....you know it,I know it,and they know it.

Yes, we all have known it, what the heck do people think Saddam was doing for the 8 months or so that he stalled??? Playing checkers???

What I don't get, is why Rumsfeld or someone from our government does not continue to point this out!!

[highlander_UW]

Looks like some nut case Liberal accidentally wandered into a history section of a book store and thought that perhaps a historical reference might add credence to their insane screed. Silly Liberals.

[F14 Pilot]

I also think they moved caches of weapons to SW of Iran

[Berlin_Freeper]

These are people who in the year 2005 are still subjects of royalty.

Nuff said.

[An.American.Expatriate]

yeah, that would be on there as well . . .

[Hugin]

The professor's puzzlement is understandable. More than two years after the war began, and despite the huge financial and human cost, it is difficult to see any real benefits.

A poll by an Iraqi university shows two thirds of Iraqis say their life is better off than under Saddam, and over 80% believe they will be better off a year from now. I guess they don't read the Guardian.

True, there is now a multi-party electoral system, but it has institutionalised and consolidated the country's ethnic, sectarian and tribal divisions - exactly the sort of thing that should be avoided when attempting to democratise.

As opposed to what? Trying to eliminate traditional ethnic, tribal and cultural structures that have been in place millenia? Oh, that would make our job much easier, I'm sure. Sounds kind of Marxist to me.

Worse still, in Iraq there is no equivalent of the North Vietnamese regime poised to take power.

Oh, no wonder it sounded Marxist. Yep, what a shame there is no Communist dictatorship on hand to crush all opposition and kill millions of Iraqis.

[jonrick46]

I wonder if this Martin van Creveld is tied into the Union, which represents the largest branch of Judaism in North America. Such has a long history of opposition to war and was the first religious organization to oppose the War in Vietnam. In 1965, the Union’s General Assembly called for a cease-fire in Vietnam; four years later, the General assembly demanded an immediate ceasefire and the withdrawal of all troops no later than December 31, 1970."

[AlexW]

I should have known from the title that this was typical leftist crap from The Guardian, the NYT of London.

This rag gives a bad name to fish wrap.

[Gordongekko909]

The professor's puzzlement is understandable. More than two years after the war began, and despite the huge financial and human cost, it is difficult to see any real benefits. Then there's also Libya surrendering its nuclear program, Hamas being financially hamstrung (although The Guardian probably wouldn't see that as a benefit), Saddam's WMD program being shut down (he DID have one, and don't let any leftie tell you otherwise. See the Duelfer Report). True, there is now a multi-party electoral system, but it has institutionalised and consolidated the country's ethnic, sectarian and tribal divisions - exactly the sort of thing that should be avoided when attempting to democratise. Blurring these lines by fiat can't be done without some serious atrocities, including genocide and forced miscegenation. The Iraqis are just going to have to grow out of the whole tribalism thing. Worse still, in Iraq there is no equivalent of the North Vietnamese regime poised to take power. One, only The Guardian would consider no adversary just over the horizon a good thing. Two, they're wrong. If the United States backs out like we did in Vietnam, there will be plenty of powers rushing into the resulting vacuum, including, but not limited to, Syria, Iran, and whatever is left of Zarqawi's crew. Eventually, one will wear the other two out, and bam, Iraq is right back where it started.

[Gordongekko909]

Curse my failure to use < p >! Curse it!

[Fenris6]

Professor van Creveld has previously drawn parallels between Iraq and Vietnam,

Thats his first mistake. Next moonbat please...

[carumba]

Lets just hope the analogy of Pol Pot is not revving up in Iran or one of those former USSR nations.