Posted on 11/16/2005 10:25:35 PM PST by jmc1969
President Bush is wrong when he says we will not run from Iraq. He is whistling past the graveyard, hoping something good turns up. Sadly, nothing will. Why? Well, we will be beaten in Iraq and elsewhere because we refuse to accept reality and act with the brains or military ruthlessness reality requires.
Domestic political requirements ruled the way the wars were fought; Republicans and Democrats made war plans with an eye toward staying in office. They seem to care nothing for soldiers and Marines killed in wars in which they lack the moral courage to use the force needed to win. Feinstein, Levin and their surrender-prone Democratic colleagues are ready to gift the enemy with a "timeline for withdrawal," and many heroic Republicans will resist only if polls show it useful to do so. From here on, each dead U.S. serviceperson is part of the cost of political maneuvering; our leaders do not, and never did, intend to win.
As a society, we have failed to teach children that war's nature never changes, that wars are tremendously bloody and should not be entered lightly, and that when war is joined, annihilation of the foe is the only moral goal. The result is a lengthening list of lost or failing wars because we fight for issues unrelated to U.S. interests — Somalia, Haiti, the Balkans — or refuse to fully apply the power of the earth's greatest military when our interests are at risk — Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq. In big wars, America's goal is desolation of the enemy, not an exit strategy. The former yields victory, the latter yields quagmire.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
good article ping
So, from what I can glean from this rant is either we nuke mecca or ignore/appease the terrorists.
No, I think he is trying to say we need to be willing to do what is necessary to win even if that includes bombing the hell out of towns that harbor al-Qaeda, we need to not play by Queensbury Rules of Warfare as this war isn't an optional war as Congress regards it as, it truely is life and death.
Oooh, that left a smoking crater, thank God.
Never before in the history of mankind has a country put the lives of the enemy's civilians above the lives of their own soldiers. Until now. "Help is on the way," my ass.
The author is spot on.
In a way, I rather agree with the writer. Our way of making war has also been a casualty of the PC craze. IMHO, our war on terror has suffered, as have our military personnel, because of our sometimes excessive concern for "civilian casualties" and the, seeming, necessity to have a reporter "spying" over the shoulder of every soldier in Iraq/Afghanistan.
There is nothing to be gleaned. the guy is a nutcase, buy for sure, a Rat. What is answer to terrorism, he sure duesn`t know
BUMP!
There are spelling and punctuation errors in the full article. If anyone from the Times is lurking...fix them!
bump
Unfortunatly, I think you're wrong bybybill. This guy, Michael F. Scheuer, is right on the money.
There's the rub... a significant portion of the citizenry doesn't believe that this is a "big" war.
CHRIS MATTHEWS: Just to think outside the box here, would we be better off with Saddam Hussein still running tyrannically that country if Iraq right now next door to Jordan? Would Jordan be more secure in that environment.
SCHEUER: No doubt about it, sir. There would --
MATTHEWS: No doubt.
SCHEUER: There would be many more dead -- many fewer dead Americans, and we would have had many more resources available to annihilate al-Qaeda, which is what we have to do. Without a doubt, in the war against al-Qaeda, Saddam Hussein was one of our best allies.
He is actually partially right.
Saddam himself was a threat, but a threat seperate from al-Qaeda. The real problem is not crushing them and getting order after the regime's fall that let al-Qaeda get a bigger foothold. Sure, it was already there in part, but it took months of fill the ranks of al-Qaeda in Iraq after the war.
Getting rid of Saddam and bringing a democracy to Iraq that helps other countries in the region open up their systems in the long run will release alot of the pressure that allows al-Qaeda to build. But, it is a very long term goal. In the short term we have to shut down al-Qaeda in Iraq ASAP for the good of the world.
If I understand what you are saying, Bush will cut and run and/or his supporters will.
I don`t see any place where Bush does stuff like that.
But, oh the "real conservatives" , the ones that will lose everything to win the minior crap( as they see it), yes, they will forget the War, and what it means to the troops and the country, if they can cut down the President.
And they won! Meirs is out and Bush is trouble. Isn`t that wonderful.
This article only points out what most of the Republican base already knows.
Fight this damn terror war and Iraq campaign like we really want to win the damn thing.
W has played the Democrats losing game to long.
The Democrats cost us the Vietnam and Korean wars.
Don't let the Democrats do it one more time.
This time there is no place to retreat to unless it is in downtown Paris.
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.