Mark Steyn: My visit with the President

Macleans ^ | 11/09/06 | Mark Steyn

[Pokey78]

Steyn ping!

[Guenevere]

bttt

[Southerngl]

>>"I ran into a kid the other day who used to work here," mused George W. Bush, "and he goes to a famous law school, and he said, 'The problem, Mr. President, is people don't believe we're at war.' I not only believe we're at war, I know we're at war.">>

The problem is that people don't FEEL it. We are too busy worrying about whether or not someone's dress was 'trashy' or 'flashy' at the Grammy's or whether or not Brittany is going to divorce that loser she chose to let latch on to her and get knocked up twice in two years. Business as usual for America.

[johnny7]

"I mean, you can't lose it militarily over there. The only place you can lose it is here." said Donald Rumsfeld.

And we did Rummy... on Tuesday.

[Vicomte13]

The problem is that we are NOT really at war.
We are engaged in military operations, but the Congress did not actually declare war, with a full-out Declaration of War.
A Declaration of War would have allowed the President to invoked the World War II precedents, which have gone unused since, because America has never been at war, legally and formally, since. America-actually-at-war, DECLARED war, precedent includes full press censorship, political censorship (once war is declared, political opposition to war is a criminal offense: sedition, and maybe treason if it goes too far), censorship of private communications, and the ability of the President to deploy forces wherever he thinks he needs to (i.e., no going back to Congress to ask permission to go into Afghanistan, and then again to ask permission to go into Iraq, etc.). A declared war would allow America to invoke the defensive articles of the NATO alliance, forcing our allies to either declare war, or ending the alliance.

A declared war is a very different thing from an undeclared war. Because a declared war is actually, legally, officially a WAR, and everyone knows it's a war, because things you can normally do in peacetime - like publish articles about Abu Graib in the New York Times, for instance, are subject to government censorship before publication in the event of an actual war.

The country doesn't feel like it's at war because, actually, we're NOT. The President SAYS we're at war, but he didn't ask Congress to actually TAKE US to war.

And that first mistake was the grandest strategic blunder of all.

[tgusa]

You beat me to it. You are spot on!

[Ghost of Philip Marlowe]

"Yet this demeaning, immature conception of war as a reality show you're bored with is said to be the key factor in polls showing big Democrat gains in Tuesday's elections."

While the RINOs got everything they deserved, I'm dismayed that conservatives were willing to "give it to them" during this most critical period of the WOT.

The Bush Administration is at fault for having singularly failed in communicating "the big picture" to the American citizenry. When I explain it to those on the Left, even they are taken aback at the importance and simplicity of the situation (good vs. evil). They invariably say, "why is the Bush Administration not communicating this?"

But what is particularly alarming to me is that 60's-style leftists in this country are so willing to sell out the safety and security of the American citizen for their own personal and collective power and that the people are so easily fooled by their mock patriotism and the mask of the Centrist that they don in the lead-up to elections. If the WOT goes awry, so will the American economy. All else matters little if there are massive attacks on US interests and our oil supply and thus our economy is captured by Islamonazis.

If we fail to convince the majority of Americans on these issues Steyn has so soberly written about (notice the lack of his typical humor and irony), this country is not inching but leaping to join the list of once-great nations that fell from within.

It's possible, people. Our future is not guaranteed but written out on a daily basis. Conservatism must triumph if the country is to survive.

[bella1]

"I ran into a kid the other day who used to work here," mused George W. Bush, "and he goes to a famous law school, and he said, 'The problem, Mr. President, is people don't believe we're at war.' I not only believe we're at war, I know we're at war."


We went to war trying to "win hearts and minds", which is rubbish. If we are going to go to war, either go big or stay home. Instead we are trying to tiptoe around Muslim sensibilities, or the lack thereof, which is no way to win anything. Start over Mr. President, and this time really mean it.

[Valin]

We are engaged in military operations, but the Congress did not actually declare war, with a full-out Declaration of War.


A small question...just who would you declare war on? Remember in most of the wars we've been involved in there has been no declaration of war.

[Night Hides Not]

Nice analysis...

Undeclared wars = unfunded mandates.

I'm not one of those who will blame the voters for Speaker Pelosi, nor shall I blame 3rd or 4th party candidates for Majority Leader Reid. Had the Republican leadership done their jobs, our turnout would have been much greater than it was, and we would not have lost as many seats, to include holding on to the Senate.

For example, why did Liddy Dole wait until two days before the election to say "The Democrats are content with defeat in Iraq"?

I voted, and I voted for Republicans, but my heart really wasn't in it. I felt like Rush, carrying water for many who did not deserve it. I voted to support our men and women in uniform...they deserved better support than they were given.

[BibChr]

...by which he means the enemy, not Nancy Pelosi and Howard Dean

One wonders if part of the problem lies in seeing these as completely distinct groups.

[jocon307]

ping for later

[.cnI redruM]

You have to hand it to the Islamists. They know how to cook a frog. Just turn up the heat little by little so that the dumb frog never gets the idea to jump out of the pan. That's why Osauma just might win.

[DCPatriot]

The enemy is not confined within or tied to one or two recognized countries.

The enemy is a radical segment of the world's largest religion...spread across the globe.

Because of the disproportinate military strength between the parties, cutting off funding and the use of advanced technology is a major part of the battle.

This makes for glazed eyes and attention deficits to much of the populace whose only experience in warfare is seeing ghastly images of ruined cities...death and destruction.

Add a healthy pinch of political correctness...a cup of leftist MSM and Hollywood celebrity opinion...and here we are on November 9th wondering WTF happened?

[Terpfen]

We are engaged in military operations, but the Congress did not actually declare war, with a full-out Declaration of War.

And I suppose you believe they have a stock "declaration of war" form with blank spaces to be filled in with the names of the countries we're declaring war on. Hint: Congress declared war twice in the form of authorizations of force.

[Irishguy]

dude ...that...is a great post...


from my point of view and to be fair to bush..

when he presented afghanistan and iraq...he did warn that there would be parts of the operation we would not be told about or would not hear...bush also said it would be a new type of war, never before seen

i do believe steyn is correct...what i truly truly fear now, is we may well get a very harsh lesson on this war..and it wont be in iraq...

bin laden said in a race between a strong horse and weak horse, people will bet on a strong horse...they honestly believe we have showed a great weakness in this election...and this will embolden them..just like the marine barracks attacks in the lebanon, the cole, the embassy bombing, somalia, the saudi attacks. our lack of firm reaction in these cases was seen as weakness. the western perception of this war or lack of...is a failure of insight and understanding our enemy...i think may countries around the world will pay also.

to modify an old reagan ad...there truly is a bear now roaming the woods...

finally could or should this vote be equated with the spanish vote after the madrid bombing?

are the democrats not merely following the spanish handbook on terrorism?

not a nice thought i know...

[DCPatriot]

They have something the Western world lacks.

Patience.

They'll wait generations to achieve a goal...while we are used to instant gratification.

[Vicomte13]

"A small question...just who would you declare war on? Remember in most of the wars we've been involved in there has been no declaration of war."

It's not a small question, it's a huge question.

Look at the big wars of US history (since the Constitution): War of 1812, Mexican War, Civil War, Spanish-American War, WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Gulf, War on Terror.

1812, Mexico, the Span-Am War, WWI, WWII were all declared, and all victories.

The Civil War wasn't declared (for obvious reasons), and was very nearly lost, politically, in 1864. Lincoln had the good sense to suspend habeas corpus and arrest all print media opponents of the war right at the outset; he even sent in the Army to arrest the Maryland legislaturein order to prevent them voting to secede. Lincoln clearly broke the law and violated the Constitution, but what he did was necessary to save the country, and had the EFFECT of what the censorship laws have done in other wars.

Korea was not declared...and Eisenhower won by campaigning against the war and promising to get the troops out of combat. Vietnam was not declared, and was a defeat. The Gulf War was swift, but the political will to go back in the field and finish off Saddam once he tore up the treaties was not there.

You say that most wars were not declared, but by those I believe you mean skirmishes, Indian Wars, small deployments of small forces here and there. Besides the Civil War - which was fought using the censorship rules and detentions similar to what America applied in World War II - all of the major wars America has fought, wars of significant duration with 1000 + combat deaths, have been declared.

The string of UNDECLARED wars has been post World War II, and they have not gone well for us.

As far as declare war on WHOM, Bush's "All terrorist organizations of global reach " would have been enough,. Congress was not going to be picky and refuse to declare war on September 15, 2001. Once declared, the precedents kick in.

[FightThePower!]

It was not a formal declaration of war though. The power of Congress to declare war is not some abstract concept, it's in the constitution.