Free Republic
Browse · Search
GOP Club
Topics · Post Article

To: Colonel Kangaroo
Confession: I was adamantly for the Iraq war at the time and I was wrong.

The policy was wrong and the execution was wrong.

The policy was wrong not because we were mistaken about the existence of weapons of mass distruction, although we were. We were right and we continue to be right today to be concerned about the introduction into America of a weapon of mass distruction, atomic or germ or even chemical.

The policy was wrong because it was not fit for winning the war on terror. In fact, it proved to be counterproductive in waging the war on terror because we played right into the hands of Osama bin Laden and the Iranians. We impoverished ourselves at a time when America began its headlong rush toward the fiscal cliff. We forfeited allies, dismayed our friends, and embittered Muslims around the world to no purpose. We opened up Iraq to the Iranians and we have made a quagmire of Afghanistan. Strategically, our efforts have resulted in a breakdown of relations with Pakistan, a quagmire in Afghanistan, dither, muddle, and ineffectiveness against Iran and their reach for the bomb, Syria in flames, Egypt gone bad, Turkey moving from Democratic secularism to despotic sharia law, and Libya, well…

The invasion of Iraq was wrong in execution because we had no plan post invasion, no plan against guerrilla warfare, no plan for an endgame. Our failings of execution led the world to believe that we were not quite the superpower we pretended to be and come from that our strategic aims. Domestically, it helped assure the election of Barack Obama which is a disaster for American foreign policy.

We conducted an experiment in nationbuilding when everything in our history should have told us that we would fail. We regarded a yearning for democracy to be in the DNA of every human heart and we were wrong. We failed to understand that democracy requires a culture, a respect for the rule of law, a secularization of science, a respect for the individual and his right to life liberty and happiness as he chooses, in short, the kind of Anglo-Saxon mindset which animated our founding fathers in 1776 and which is heartbreakingly absent in the Muslim world.

We started two wars because 19 men with box cutters took over airplanes and crashed them into American buildings. Put yourself into the sandals of Osama bin Ladin's ghost and decide whether you like that trade.

We obviously must devise a new strategy to fight the war against terrorism and we can start by calling it a war against militant Islam. We would then be well advised to be extremely selective about where and when we deploy military force maintaining a priority toward conserving American resources, including financial resources, as well as American lives. Above all, we should be able to say that a military action in any given Middle Eastern hellhole directly relates to prohibiting terrorist cells from infiltrating America and killing Americans or at least we should be able to say that we are protecting allies whose existence acts as a buffer for us. You must decide for yourself whether Israel serves that purpose.

We should be very careful about writing a blank checks abroad and outsourcing the control of American foreign policy to foreign countries. We should review our relationship to Israel and consider whether it is in America's best interest to be in a perpetual worldwide struggle against 1.6 billion Muslims with a great deal of the world's oil on behalf of a tiny nation with virtually no oil.

We have to decide how and with what weapons we wish to fight this war. Do we use drones or boots on the ground? I vote for drones. Do we restore waterboarding, or do we risk losing an American city? I vote for waterboarding. Do we confine our intelligence efforts to snooping foreigners or do we keep our borders open and feel compelled to snoop on Americans? I vote for closing the border. Do we conclude that Muslims coming into America contain within them a dangerous minority which threatens the homeland, or do we abide by political correctness? I vote against political correctness. We should reconsider our immigration policies concerning Muslims.

Above all, we must get our fiscal house in order before it is too late if we are to preserve our military as our shield and if we are to preserve our economy as the engine which powers the Republic.

If these views make me inimical to the positions of neocons then I guess I am a paleo. Nevertheless, I support Lynn Cheney and her bid in Wyoming.


12 posted on 07/25/2013 6:18:08 AM PDT by nathanbedford ("Attack, repeat, attack!" Bull Halsey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: nathanbedford

Really.

Lyn Cheney is pro-amnesty and pro-homosexual marriage. She grew up in Virginia, attended college in Colorado, and has almost nothing in common with the values of people in Wyoming. It is up to those folks to decide whether they want her as their Senator. I know I wouldn’t.

As for Iraq and Afghanistan, you obviously do not know that Saddam Hussein was up to his neck in aiding and abetting Al Qaida in their 9-11 attack.

What we did wrong was arrogantly believe we could “nation build” in an area of the world that has no genuine nations. The Middle East is made up of pseudo-nations that function more like crime syndicates that nations, each controlled by a corrupt family or clan. That’s why it’s so damned hard to do business there; ‘trust’ isn’t a part of their culture, as everyone there is looking to undercut everyone else.

So what should we have done? What we did in Iraq, going in and removing Saddam Hussein, was correct. Then we should have left. No matter what we do, the people there will follow another dictator/tyrant.

What we should have done in Afghanistan is treat them like those who harbor pirates. You go in, destroy parts of their
country and kill many people. Tell them to stop supporting and protecting the terrorists or it will continue. After that, the Afghanis would probably kill the terrorists themselves. What we did, by trying to nation build, was arrogant and stupid.

Israel is the only rational, functioning democracy in the Middle East. Using oil as the reason for supporting Muslim nations rather than Israel...doesn’t make any sense, especially as the USA is well on its way to energy self-sufficiency. Israel and the United States share a belief in ‘free will’ and the rights of the individual. Islam does not, and will always be a threat to free people.

Basically I agree with everything else you’ve said. What I want to see now is our military brought home. There is no need to have a large, extensive presence oversea.


43 posted on 07/28/2013 5:37:10 AM PDT by SatinDoll (NATURAL BORN CITIZEN: BORN IN THE USA OFCITIZEN PARENTS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: nathanbedford

I appreciate your thoughtful postings. We could use more thinking and less reaction in high places in our country. In the long-run outsourcing our sovereignty helps nobody-especially our allies. An exhausted, depleted superpower is the a dangerous factor toward global instability.


45 posted on 07/29/2013 5:07:29 AM PDT by Colonel Kangaroo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
GOP Club
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson