Combined PING to the two ping lists
|
|
Let me know if you want in or out. Links: FR Index of his articles: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/keyword?k=victordavishanson |
Posted on 08/11/2006 4:41:26 AM PDT by Tolik
Prior to September 11, the general consensus was that conventional Middle East armies were paper tigers and that their terrorist alternatives were best dealt with by bombing them from a distance — as in Lebanon, Afghanistan, Iraq, east Africa, etc. — and then letting them sort out their own rubble.
Then following 9/11, the West adopted a necessary change in strategy that involved regime change and the need to win “hearts and minds” to ensure something better was established in place of the deposed dictator or theocrat. That necessitated close engagements with terrorists in their favored urban landscape. After the last four years, we have learned just how difficult that struggle can be, especially in light of the type of weapons $500 billion in Middle East windfall petroleum profits can buy, when oil went from $20 a barrel to almost $80 over the last few years. To best deal with certain difficulties we’ve encountered in these battles thus far, perhaps the United States should adopt the following set of surreal rules of war.
1. Any death — enemy or friendly, accidental or deliberate, civilian or soldier — favors the terrorists. The Islamists have no claim on morality; Westerners do and show it hourly. So, in a strange way, images of the dead and dying are attributed only to our failing. If ours are killed, it is because those in power were not careful (inadequate body armor, unarmored humvees, etc), most likely due to some supposed conspiracy (Halliburton profiteering, blood for oil, wars for Israel, etc.). When Muslim enemies are killed, whether by intent or accidentally, the whole arsenal of Western postmodern thought comes into play. For the United States to have such power over life and death, the enemy appears to the world as weak, sympathetic, and victimized; we as strong and oppressive. Terrorists are still “constructed” as “the other” and thus are seen as suffering — doctored photos or not — through the grim prism of Western colonialism, racism, imperialism.
In short, it is not just that Western public opinion won’t tolerate many losses; it won’t tolerate for very long killing the enemy either — unless the belligerents are something akin to the white, Christian Europeans of Milosevic’s Serbia, who, fortunately for NATO war planners in the Balkans, could not seek refuge behind any politically correct paradigm and so were bombed with impunity. Remember, multiculturalism always trumps fascism: the worst homophobe, the intolerant theocrat, and the woman-hating bigot is always sympathetic if he wears some third-world garb, mouths anti-Americanism, and looks most un-European. To win these wars, our soldiers must not die or kill.
2. All media coverage of fighting in the Middle East is ultimately hostile — and for a variety of reasons. Since the 1960s too many reporters have seen their mission as more than disinterested news gathering, but rather as near missionary: they seek to counter the advantages of the Western capitalist power structure by preparing the news in such a way as to show us the victims of profit-making and an affluent elite. Second, most fighting is far from home and dangerous. Trash the U.S. military and you might suffer a bad look at a well-stocked PX as the downside for winning the Pulitzer; trash Hezbollah or Hamas, and you might end up headless on the side of the road. Third, while in a southern Lebanon or the Green Zone, it is always safer to outsource a story and photos to local stringers, whose sympathies are usually with the enemy. A doctored photo that exaggerates Israeli “war crimes” causes a mini-controversy for a day or two back in the States; a doctored photo that exaggerates Hezbollah atrocities wins an RPG in your hotel window. To win these wars, there must be no news of them.
3. The opposition — whether an establishment figure like Howard Dean or an activist such as Cindy Sheehan — ultimately prefers the enemy to win. In their way of thinking, there is such a reservoir of American strength that no enemy can ever really defeat us at home and so take away our Starbucks’ lattes, iPods, Reeboks, or 401Ks. But being checked in “optional” wars in Iraq, or seeing Israel falter in Lebanon, has its advantages: a George Bush and his conservatives are humiliated; the military-industrial complex learns to be a little bit more humble; and guilt over living in a prosperous Western suburb is assuaged. When a Jimmy Carter or Bill Clinton — unlike a Nixon, Reagan, or Bush — sends helicopters or bombs into the Middle East desert, it is always as a last resort and with reluctance, and so can be grudgingly supported. To win these wars, a liberal Democrat must wage them.
4. Europeans have shown little morality, but plenty of influence, abroad and here at home during Middle East wars. Europeans, who helped to bomb Belgrade, now easily condemn Israel in the skies over Beirut. They sold Saddam his bunkers and reactor, and won in exchange sweetheart oil concessions. Iran could not build a bomb without Russian and European machine tools. Iran is not on any serious European embargo list; much of the off-the-shelf weaponry so critical to Hezbollah was purchased through European arms merchants. And if they are consistent in their willingness to do business with any tyrant, the Europeans also know how to spread enough aid or money around to the Middle East, to ensure some protection and a prominent role in any postwar conference. Had we allowed eager Europeans to get in on the postbellum contracts in Iraq, they would have muted their criticism considerably. To win these wars, we must win over the Europeans by ensuring they can always earn a profit.
5. To fight in the Middle East, the United States and Israel must enlist China, Russia, Europe, or any nation in the Arab world to fight its wars. China has killed tens of thousands in Tibet in a ruthless war leading to occupation and annexation. Russia leveled Grozny and obliterated Chechnyans. Europeans helped to bomb Belgrade, where hundreds of civilians were lost to “collateral damage.” Egyptians gassed Yemenis; Iraqis gassed Kurds; Iraqis gassed Iranians; Syrians murdered thousands of men, women, and children in Hama; Jordanians slaughtered thousands of Palestinians. None received much lasting, if any, global condemnation. In the sick moral calculus of the world’s attention span, a terrorist who commits suicide in Guantanamo Bay always merits at least 500 dead Kurds, 1,000 Chechnyans, or 10,000 Tibetans. To win these wars, we need to outsource the job to those who can fight them with impunity.
6. Time is always an enemy. Most Westerners are oblivious to criticism if they wake up in the morning and learn their military has bombed a Saddam or sent a missile into Afghanistan — and the war was begun and then ended all while they were sleeping. In contrast, 6-8 weeks — about the length of the Balkan or Afghanistan war — is the limit of our patience. After that, Americans become so sensitive to global criticism that they begin to hate themselves as much as others do. To win these wars, they should be over in 24 hours — but at all cost no more than 8 weeks.
Silly, you say, are such fanciful rules? Of course — but not as absurd as the wars now going on in the Middle East.
— Victor Davis Hanson is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution. He is the author, most recently, of A War Like No Other. How the Athenians and Spartans Fought the Peloponnesian War.
Combined PING to the two ping lists
|
|
Let me know if you want in or out. Links: FR Index of his articles: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/keyword?k=victordavishanson |
(Go Israel, Go! Slap 'Em Down Hezbullies.)
Well I guess Nov will tell us if the American People have actually fallen this low.
Excellent points all.
In his "to win this war" points, btw, he summed up the "strategy" used by the Dems for years. And we can see exactly where that has gotten us. With more war and perhaps even a chance of not winning.
1. No civilian casualties or collateral damage.
2. No soldier deaths for the US. Nothing more serious than "invisible shrapnel" wounds requiring Bactine and a Purple Bandaid.
3. 100% cooperation of all countries- even those in the employ of the enemy.
4. Treat all Prisoners gently- even the ones that just ambushed and killed your buddies.
5. All negative news must be reported immediately so the enemy can get the most mileage from it.
6. No interrogation of suspected spies.
7. No interruption of food or medical deliveries.
8. Enemy country must be brought above the economic level of Massachusetts within 30 days.
9. 100% of the enemy civilian population must sign off on the action before any evil dictator may be removed.
10. All soldiers must be of the highest caliber, no bad eggs allowed, 100% angels.
11. US troops have 180 days MAX to be out of the country after the "action".
12. Both sides must be considered as morally equivalent. People using the word "evil" are reprehensible, on the level of Hitler.
13. We must give the enemy sufficient time to hide his WMD and establish his plans before any surprise attack. (the Colin clause) The UN is the preferred vehicle for this delaying tactic.
14 The opposition party gets to second-guess every decision but never has to state its own position.
15. The opposition party may also support and take at least half the credit for every thing that goes well, but do not need to go on the record ahead of time. (also known as the "I was for it before I was against it clause)
16. Religious builldings, schools, and hospitals are considered "Home Base" and safe, and we must yell "Ollly Olly Oxenfree" before uncovering our eyes in an enemy neighborhood.
17. All classified information shall be released to Sixty Minutes for review prior to being given to the President.
18. All bi-partisan commissions must be made up of partisan ex-Politicians (and spineless RINOpublicans) who are either hiding something that is being investigated, are sleeping with someone who is being investigated, or whose FBI files are safely stored in the "file wing" at Chappaqua.
19. All environmental laws must be followed, and war areas cleaned up to the level of "pristine" within 10 days or fines will be levied.
20. Snowboarding facilities must be present at all military installation.
Better jokes are those that have quite a bit of truth in them.
Yours is insanely good one. Nailed It!
Carnage and Culture should be required reading for all Congresscritters.
I brought up this point a long time ago. When Dims are out of power, they oppose everything, which means, even if the cause is right and just, they are against it. When dims are in power, repubs will support them if they do things that are right and just. Which leads to the sickening thought that if we truly want to win the war on Terror we need to get an Ass, ur Donkey in the white house. That way a sympathetic media, Europe and leftist moonbats will turn a blind eye to what would be called "war crime" "Atrocities"(i.e. war) while a republican is in office.
No, I am not advocating this so save the hate mail, I'm just pointing out a truism.
Rules to be memorized for use in discussions with "War is not the Answer" folks.
Hanson sounds really furious, in his erudite way.
That would possibly work if not for the fact that any Dem elected to the Presidency would likely switch to appeasement mode on January 21, with disaster as the end result.
No, we need to ignore the idiots and the Drive-by Media, and carry, which appears to be what Bush is doing. I do think that a Rudy presidency looks more likely after yesterday as people realize that we are going to be at War with Islam for at least the next five years.
Israel is a case-in-study for this idea now. They do have a central-left coalition with a Labor leader (long time leftist union boss) in the position of a defence minister. Prime Minister Olmert's own family is raving leftists activists. Israeli left dominated media is behaving better than it ever did over the last many-many years. One explanation can be of course that they finally got it. But I still cynically think that the fact that the war is waged by the left had greatly helped to clarify their brains.
On another hand, the Israel is much more timid, slow and unsure in its prolonged actions that it should have been (and used to be) in such situation. Just another side of the coin.
See my post #14 please
On another hand, the Israel is much more timid, slow and unsure in its prolonged actions that it should have been (and used to be) in such situation. Just another side of the coin.
Very insightful observation.
Upon reflection, I've no doubt as to its accuracy.
BUMP!
That way a sympathetic media, Europe and leftist moonbats will turn a blind eye to what would be called "war crime" "Atrocities"(i.e. war) while a republican is in office.
The NewYorkSlimes will turn hawkish sure, but the likes of al-Guardian or Le Formage-capitulations-Monde and Guenter Grass Die Zeit will keep on US bashing. Saw a lot of bashings on Bubba in the 1990s from these media saying that Clinton was too "right-wing".
saving
bttt
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.
