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

Skip to comments.

It’s Not Unusual
NRO ^ | 3 Mar 07 | Victor Davis Hanson

Posted on 03/01/2007 5:56:38 AM PST by rellimpank

Given all of this country’s past wars involving intelligence failures, tactical and strategic blunders, congressional fights and popular anger at the president, Iraq and the rising furor over it are hardly unusual.

Imagine if the House of Representatives had debated a resolution to authorize the president’s use of force in Iraq only after the bombs were already falling. And what if after the debate, in the middle of the war, with our troops already in combat, Congress had suddenly denied such approval?

That is precisely what happened to President Clinton during the Serbian war of 1999. Neither the Senate nor the House agreed to sanction the administration’s ongoing preemptive bombing campaign against Serbia

(Excerpt) Read more at article.nationalreview.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: iraq; vdh; wot
--realism--
1 posted on 03/01/2007 5:56:40 AM PST by rellimpank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: rellimpank

Again, VDH is spot on. Americans are impatient, especially when it is apparent that mistakes have been made. Of course, the MSM will always beat the "quagmire" drum when our military is involved, unless it is one of those humanitarian interventions that Clinton was so fond of.


2 posted on 03/01/2007 6:09:16 AM PST by GeorgefromGeorgia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rellimpank

No, it's not unusual, but it's frustrating.

Why does the US have the best military and the worst diplomats?

If we'd tried, we couldn't've picked a more treasonous and incompetent pair - respectively - than Powell and Rice.

Until someone with real skill takes over at State, we're not going anywhere.

Saudi delendum est.


3 posted on 03/01/2007 6:10:32 AM PST by Santiago de la Vega (El hijo del Zorro)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rellimpank
But I think what is new is that we now have people in the media "24/7" calling the Bush administration liars and murderers. The US is in serious danger of losing the ability -- the will -- to wage a war in a serious fashion.

Once upon a time, cities had (at least) two newspapers. One paper thought that the Democrats were destroying the country. The other thought that the Republicans were destroying the country. They didn't hide their bias. And people read both papers, and made up their own mind.

Today, the media is overwhelmingly anti-Administration, yet they insist that they are completely objective, and the people are receiving the message that "everyone now accepts the fact" that Bush lied to get us into the war, the casualties are stronomical, we are losing, and Muslims hate us because of the damage Bush has done to our reputation.

There is precious little to counteract this message. I think this is new.

4 posted on 03/01/2007 6:11:08 AM PST by ClearCase_guy (Enoch Powell was right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rellimpank

5 posted on 03/01/2007 6:11:58 AM PST by Hatteras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

--IMHO, the treason wing of the Demotraitors has largely dominated the mass media since Viet Nam--


6 posted on 03/01/2007 6:13:53 AM PST by rellimpank (-don't believe anything the MSM states about firearms or explosives--NRA Benefactor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Santiago de la Vega
"Until someone with real skill takes over at State"

I guess we could bring back that successful North Korean Peace negotiator> Madeline Not2Bright?.....LOL...

7 posted on 03/01/2007 6:20:11 AM PST by litehaus (A memory tooooo long)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GeorgefromGeorgia
I don't always agree with VDH, but he does usually make some very good points. On this one, I beg to differ with his general theme . . .

If the U.S. people had known in 2002-03 that Congress was considering authorization for a military campaign that would eventually see U.S. soldiers killed and maimed on a daily basis -- more than four years later -- in a civil conflict in support of an Islamic government in Iraq (and a socialist one at that), the Bush administration would have been luck to scrape together 25 votes between both Houses of Congress on that "war resolution."

. . . the MSM will always beat the "quagmire" drum when our military is involved, unless it is one of those humanitarian interventions that Clinton was so fond of.

True. It's also worth noting that the so-called "neo-conservative" elements in the U.S. Department of Defense who were the driving force behind the U.S. invasion of Iraq were among the only "Republicans" to support Clinton's disgraceful military intervention in the Balkans in 1999.

If you haven't figured this out yet from the tone of my post, I don't trust any of those f#%&ers.

8 posted on 03/01/2007 6:20:53 AM PST by Alberta's Child (Can money pay for all the days I lived awake but half asleep?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
If the U.S. people had known in 2002-03.........

You are one of the very few to have 20-20 foresight apparently.

Geez!

9 posted on 03/01/2007 6:23:01 AM PST by Chuck54 (For those who understand the War on Terror, no explanation is needed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Chuck54
Hey, don't laugh . . .

One of these days I'm going to put together a list of all my posts on this subject dating back to the fall of 2002.

Once you read it, you'll think I'm some kind of prophet.

10 posted on 03/01/2007 6:38:07 AM PST by Alberta's Child (Can money pay for all the days I lived awake but half asleep?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

When you get 'em together, ping me.


11 posted on 03/01/2007 6:42:19 AM PST by Chuck54 (For those who understand the War on Terror, no explanation is needed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

From the colun: Nothing in Iraq comes close to the furor over Korea

Differences between the wars...

A. Ten times as many Americans died in Korea in 30 months as died in Iraq in 30 months. (30,000 vs. less than 3,000)

B. Full wartime censorship was imposed on correspondents in Korea..

1.Correspondents were placed under jurisdiction of the army and were subject to courtmartial.
2. Correspondents could not criticize the Allied conduct of the War and could not send demoralizing dispatches
3.Correspondents could not quote officers or report casualties without authorization.
4.More regulations listed at the link above.

C. Thousands of young Americans were drafted to serve in Korea.

Let's hope the outcome in Iraq is the same as that in South Korea...
millions of people, freed from the control of a deadly dictator (Saddam in Iraq; Kim il-Sung in Korea)

12 posted on 03/01/2007 6:46:40 AM PST by syriacus (If Al Gore's friends misplace a decimal point and cool the Earth too much, we're doomed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Chuck54

Will do.


13 posted on 03/01/2007 6:47:22 AM PST by Alberta's Child (Can money pay for all the days I lived awake but half asleep?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy
There is precious little to counteract this message. I think this is new.

For more than a decade before September 11, 2001 - Americans appeared to have developed local expectations about their politics, environment and economy that they believed were universal. Some still seem to think that way. If I’m right, I think we are watching throngs of Americans fighting the realization that they cannot transfer their local expectations to the rest of the world. The data clearly says, what works here doesn’t always work out there. That’s the reason for the dissociation between American domestic policies and American foreign policy. The fact is, Americans can have a relationship with their neighbors that they could never have with a fascist ayatollah or insular tribal chieftain. I believe the Bush Administration is facing a temporary public backlash for correcting that rampant public misunderstanding about foreign affairs. Before GWB took responsibility for the threats that Americans face, domestic fantasies about the mechanics of foreign affairs were allowed to flourish. The time has come to confront those dangerous fantasies with cold fact. I think VDH does an outstanding job of developing the requisite context for an American awakening. I think his message counteracts most if not all of the emotional sound bites that target a disaffected and frustrated few among a relatively responsible electorate.

14 posted on 03/01/2007 7:12:23 AM PST by humint (...err the least, and endure. VDH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

Hersh has reported recently of US and Saudi covert funding of Al-Qaeda- related Sunni extremist groups to counter Hezbollah and Iran in Lebanon.

If true, it dims the Bush vision of no more expedient compromises.

Of course Hersh may have it all wrong - perhaps the CIA has planted these stories to scare Iran.


15 posted on 03/01/2007 10:09:37 AM PST by secretagent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

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