I was more than a little surprised at Helprin and this piece. He must have been in some cranky mood when he wrote it. The prose is really not up to his usual level, and the needless sarcasm is particularly irritating. Saying that cops in NYC "live off the land at Dunkin Donuts" is just stupid and sneering.
This same sneering tone pervades the entire piece, and to my mind, calls into question any good points the author may have to make.
This article is nothing more than carping. He's got no read advice to offer, other than to find another wannabe Sadam (quick!) and install him in Iraq, than run like the desert wind back to Saudi Arabia. I, for one, don't think that's a good plan at all.
Yes, we should be taking a harder line in Iraq, and yes, we should be really building up our military, if this is what Helprin is saying I agree. I'm not sure Bush's plan for Iraq will work, but despite everything it is far too soon to call it a failure.
And now I really, really, really want a Dunkin Donuts donut! I must get one this morning, for sure.
Military tactical convention calls for massing forces. We are diluting forces in Iraq by diverting military force to civilian policing and "nation building". Helprin is not so much saying that "nation building is bad", as he is stating, quite accurately in my military opinion, that nation building is detrimental to winning the war. It dulls the "tip" of our spear. Quite obviously, we do not have the men (and women) under arms to sustain the tempo of operations now ongoing in Iraq and Afghanistan. The "nation building" in Iraq is bleeding us to death, economically, militarily, and in Bush's case, politically. If the USA can better accomplish our mission with expenditures of fewer casualties and less national treasure by removing our troops from the midst of warring factions, and supporting those factions who will support our interests, then we ought to persue that strategy. How 'bout leaving the "nation building" to the Iraqi's, and mass our forces where they can be most effectively employed, be it Saudi Arabian bases, Iraqi bases, or new U.S. bases in Syria, Lebanon, and Iran. I don't care, as long as we win the war, and the body bags no longer carry American or coalition bodies.
On the other hand, the Democrat's partisanship have made it impossible for Bush to persue any other approach. Bush cannot propose a WWII type of war effort, doubling the size of the sitting U.S. Armed forces, ceasing "nation building", or expanding the war to countries who are NOW providing the RPG's, AK's, mortars, and other supplies to the Muslim "insurgents". In my opinion, from the Democrat's perspective, every dead American soldier is worth a half-dozen or so votes for Kerry. The Dem's love dead American military personnel; they always have since I've been..."of age" (1970's).
That's the main area where I differ with Helprin. He's a bit tough on the one guy who took action, i.e. Bush, holding Democrat and Republican "partisanship" to be a equal thing. It's moral relativism. The Democrats have been deceptive, unpatriotic, and even treasonous in their partisanship; the GOP have been at most, cowardly in the face of their enemy, which is as much the Democrats as Al Queda, i.e. both groups have similar goals in common, i.e. tearing down Bush to punish American for pursuing war against the terrorists and their sponsors. Both Kerry Democrats and Al Queda hope that dead American soldiers will eventually result in a change of government in the U.S., and then total capitulation of U.S. forces to the Arab-Muslim nationalists.
SFS
Yes, we should be taking a harder line in Iraq, and yes, we should be really building up our military, if this is what Helprin is saying I agree. I'm not sure Bush's plan for Iraq will work, but despite everything it is far too soon to call it a failure.I think you've extracted the best of this article and set it straight. We've got to get tougher in Iraq, and we've got to beef up our military.
I would offer one other correction to this article: Once the time comes for us to pull our forces out of Baghdad, and pull back to bases in the region, I suggest that at least one of those bases be in Kurdish Iraq, where we will surely be welcome.