America must be strong and not go wobbly in the war aginst Islamic Fascism

08-17-2006 | LYNN WYMAN

[Rhiannon]

Please comment freely.I sent this to WSJ as a response to Dems and the Dark Years

[308MBR]

When GWB is running around the Rose Garden holding hands with a Saudi prince, "wobbly" doesn't come close to an accurate description.

I like George, but dang, what is selling government bonds to fund runaway social spending worth?

[Rameumptom]

Actually militarily there were problems too. Not from the soldiers. But from the rules of engagment by the politicians. Hanoi and other large cities were no go zones for bombing. So the NVA put their Air Force and AA in big cities which we did not target and thus we never fully won the air war. High altitude bombers were not allowed to bomb (to minimize "civilian casualties") but smaller bombers were that had to fly low and were susceptible to AA fire.

Gen. Omar Bradley - "Amateurs talk strategy, professionals talk logistics."

We never cut of the logistical line from China and Russia(The Ho Chi Min trail was from China through Laos and Cambodia). As long as weapons continue to come in the enemy will be able to fight.

The State Dept. was busy supplying Truck factories and millions in food "AID" to Russia which in turn supplied weapons and trucks to the NVA. (We were at War with ourselves.)

The Communists wouldn't agree to a cease fire right near the end of the War so Nixon finally let the big high altitude bombers go in over Christmas and target Hanoi. The Communists quickly agreed to a cease fire. If he would have allowed it years before we could have crushed them.

Nixon kow-towed and offically opened relations with China in 1972 when we "lost."

Limited wars don't work out so well. Unfortunately right now Iran is supplying and fueling the Iraq war. unless we cut of the lines logistically the fighting will continue.

Oh another lesson from Viet Nam the communists didn't keep their "Cease Fire" and promptly invaded the South when we left.

[Rhiannon]

I agree with what you say, I did not want to go into a long analysis on the flaws of Vietnam.

[ChiMark]

Another leason oft ommitted is the failure of the democrats to
fund Vietnam after we left.
The likes of Teddy "the swimmer" Kennedy refused to honor
our committment to supply military and medicine after Nixon left office.
That defeat rests on the radical left in this country.
How many Cambodians , Vietnamese died after the fall 2 million?

Never again was the cry of the Jewish holocaust and now the American left once again refuses to face up to another facist regime.

Never again?

[Hong Kong Expat]

Has there ever been a case in modern history of an invading country putting down a local rebellion by force?

England failed in Northern Ireland, The US, French & Chinese all failed in Vietnam, etc, etc...

Actually the only thing that would be close to what the US is trying in Iraq is Vietnam invading Cambodia.

[arthurus]

This is a long war unless Iran precipitates its own destruction. That is how the war will end, with the massive destruction militarily of the principal foe, which has always been Iran. It will take that to convince the Mohammedans that God does not will Islam to prevail at this time. That is what has happenned in the past, at Vienna, at Lepanto. The defeat is never final because large numbers of the paynim are left alive but the cancer will go into remission and torpor for a couple of generations or centuries.

Nationbulding is okay in Iraq because even obliteration of Iraq does not touch the heart of the beast. That heart resides, in this era, in Iran. Nationbuilding gives us the excuse and visible necessity for keeping our military in Iraq right next to Iran. I fear that Iran will not be finalized in the term of this president and his successor will drop the ball and pull back. If it is a Republican we will remain militarily strong even as we succumb to that other cancer from the south. If it is a Democrat, especially if he has a compatible Congress, then we will probably finish the war but it will be at tremendous cost. We must first suffer some truly grand catastrophe on our own land, perhaps Boston gaining a new and glowing crater or a whole series of 9-11 strikes but I expect a Democrat to suddenly make a spastic response like Clinton did with cruise missiles but this time with ICBMs or SLBMs that will be far broader than necessary and probably not touch the heart of the enemy the first time.

[RightWingRadio]

The American media played a major role in losing the war for us in Vietnam. Ho Chi Minh exploited this splendidly. Terrorist organizations and nations learned well from history. They are relying on the U.S. and worldwide MSM in doing an effective job of it today. So far their hopes have been realized.

[Iris7]

You miss the point.

The United States is in the position to control the Sunni - Shia feud by "balancing the scales". Remember the Battle of Karbala, in 680 AD, was and is sixty miles from Baghdad.

Attempting to "suppress an insurrection" in Iraq is unnecessary. It is not even an insurrection but rather the Shia and Sunni arguing about who is boss. Normal politics, that is. Yeah, bloody by American standards, at least American standards if one ignores 1861 - 65.

By the way, insurrections have been put down by foreign troops time and again. In Arab countries the Turks were notably successful. Philippine insurrection was an American experience. Poland in WWII. Napoleon's troops in Spain. The Normans in the years after 1066. The Hundred Years War. English occupation of French Canada. King Phillip's war.

The French had won in Algeria until the Lefties snatched defeat from victory. Likewise Viet Nam, where the Viet Cong were destroyed during the Tet Offensive.

There are endless examples.

[Iris7]

Agree in full.

[HisKingdomWillAbolishSinDeath]

According to the Bible, this is going to make Vietnam look like a tea party, if the West doesn't wake up to this threat soon, and start acting like we are really in an all-out war for survival.

Matthew 24 (Amplified Bible)

21 For then there will be great tribulation (affliction, distress, and oppression) such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now--no, and never will be again.

22 And if those days had not been shortened, no human being would endure and survive, but for the sake of the elect (God's chosen ones) those days will be shortened.

[Iris7]

The war with the Left will never end. This is no reason not to neutralize those evil creatures.

As Ann Coulter put it, "When we decide to suppress you you will know it." Time to let them know it.

[Iris7]

We have a chance to short circuit a truly major war. Small war now or huge war later.

The Lefties want to loose the small war, I suppose so that they can enjoy the millions of dead bodies to come. Bloodthirsty serial killer wannabees, the lot of them.

A bad tree bears bad fruit. An evil tree bears evil fruit.

[Iris7]

"Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?"

"Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel."

"And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!"

There are plenty enough heathen here in the USA.

[DustyMoment]

America must be strong and not go wobbly in the war aginst(sic) Islamic Fascism

It's a little late for this. Bush has already gone "wobbly in the war against Islamic Fascism" by working with France (France!!??) on the DOA "cease-fire" between Israel and Hezbollah.

[Coldwater Creek]

I heard the President say that "if we do not finish the war, it will follow us home."

I don't find that to be WEAK talk at all.

Thank God that we have George W and not his father.

[DustyMoment]

Thank God that we have George W and not his father.

I guess you missed the part where the current "cease-fire" agreement (the one that is DOA before the ink dried) was developed by Bush and Chirac (France) and, basically, punishes Israel for defending itself.

[Convert from ECUSA]

Ping!

[jclimacus]

It's interesting to note how militaristic minds find only military solutions to the world's problems.

Our loss in Viet-Nam (and I served during that period) was in large part due to the lack of morale among the troops, caused in large part because we had NO true sense of what we were fighting for ("democracy, freedom" and other propaganda flags were not enough), and NO exit strategy; much as we now have in Iraq.

You cannot expect an occupying army to continually fight a guerrilla war against a population that, in large part, DOES NOT WANT YOU IN THEIR COUNTRY!

Would Americans suffer an occupying army on their own turf? Hell NO!

We shouldn't think that people of other countries, regardless of their religious persuasion, would tolerate anything less than a removal of an occupying army AS SOON AS POSSIBLE; but we SHOULD EXPECT that they will defend their own nationalist aspirations, and quickly show us the door out of their country -- by public demonstration and BY FORCE if necessary.

No self-respecting American would do anything less to an occupying army in their own country.

[jclimacus]

Yes, I am one of those heathen!
But I used to be a pre-seminarian in a conservative college in the Midwest.

I marvel how those of you who quote the bible so prolifically, especially in defense of American imperialism, intermingle with such ease the god of wrath (so aptly depicted in much of the Old Testament) with a Christian theology that claims to be founded on the teachings of Christ, who understood god as a god of love.

I also marvel how tolerance of other religions and other ideas finds no room in hearts; that punishment of the infidel is the only remedy for dealing with differences; or that opinions different than your own can only be greeted with an attempt to convert the opinion holder.

Thomas Jefferson said, "Our particular principles of religion are a subject of accountability to our god alone. I enquire after no man's and trouble none with mine; nor is it given to us in this life to know whether yours or mine, our friend's or our foe's, are exactly the right."

I find it peculiar too how little our fundamentalist friends know of the origin of the modern bible, and recommend for your "open minds" the reading of "Misquoting Jesus".