Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Surrender as "Realism"
Weekly Standard | Frontpagemagazine ^ | November 27, 2006 | Robert Kagan and William Kristol

Posted on 11/27/2006 5:14:06 PM PST by SJackson

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

1 posted on 11/27/2006 5:14:07 PM PST by SJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SJackson

Excellent summary of the absurdity that is realism.

It is nice to see neo conservatism in print.


2 posted on 11/27/2006 5:16:38 PM PST by lonestar67 (Its time to withdraw from the War on Bush-- your side is hopelessly lost in a quagmire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

I saw two new buzzwords all over the MSM this weekend: 'realism' and 'reconciliation'.


3 posted on 11/27/2006 5:17:29 PM PST by txhurl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
While I think the War in Iraq has been FUBARed, those who propose defeat under the guise of realpolitik cannot be taken seriously. The likes of Baker, Scowcroft, Hamilton, anmd Kissinger would have had us still engaged with a powerful USSR. Luckily Pres. Reagan had his own ideas, and his own brain trust, like Bill Casey, who saw the truth, the USSR was evil, must be defeated, and will be defeated.

Perhaps Bush 43 needs to find a new Bill Casey, not reprise a tired Jim Baker.

4 posted on 11/27/2006 5:19:32 PM PST by xkaydet65
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
While I think the War in Iraq has been FUBARed, those who propose defeat under the guise of realpolitik cannot be taken seriously. The likes of Baker, Scowcroft, Hamilton, anmd Kissinger would have had us still engaged with a powerful USSR. Luckily Pres. Reagan had his own ideas, and his own brain trust, like Bill Casey, who saw the truth, the USSR was evil, must be defeated, and will be defeated.

Perhaps Bush 43 needs to find a new Bill Casey, not reprise a tired Jim Baker.

5 posted on 11/27/2006 5:19:53 PM PST by xkaydet65
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

I am sure the Dems in the Congress will want to work with either Syria or Iran. It will be like giving them a gift of Iraq


6 posted on 11/27/2006 5:23:26 PM PST by sgtbono2002 (The fourth estate is a fifth column.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lonestar67
Defeat is also very "real."

The way that this will be sold to America is to convince Americans that we have already lost or that "Iraq is not winnable" - all cloaked in a dishonorable diplomacy.
7 posted on 11/27/2006 5:25:51 PM PST by etradervic (Rumsfeld - the sack heard around the world)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: dennisw; Cachelot; Nix 2; veronica; Catspaw; knighthawk; Alouette; Optimist; weikel; Lent; GregB; ..
If you'd like to be on this middle east/political ping list, please FR mail me.

High Volume. Articles on Israel can also be found by clicking on the Topic or Keyword Israel. or WOT [War on Terror]

----------------------------

8 posted on 11/27/2006 5:27:32 PM PST by SJackson (A vote is like a rifle: its usefulness depends upon the character of the user, T. Roosevelt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

OK, let me get this straight... everyone with half a brain (which excludes ALL lieberals and just about all dhimmiecrats) knows darn well that iran and syria are the evil b@st@rds behind the problems in Iraq. So now the "elder statesmen" in this country are going to advise that the only solution to the "Iraq Problem" is to negotiate with these barbarians?

This is Neville Chamberlain appeasing Hitler all over again. Here we go folks.


9 posted on 11/27/2006 5:39:14 PM PST by 43north (7 of 11 living things are insects. This explains liberals and islamofascists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

Woo hoo! Truer words are few and far between


10 posted on 11/27/2006 5:51:15 PM PST by GOP_1900AD (Stomping on "PC," destroying the Left, and smoking out faux "conservatives" - Take Back The GOP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

Well if we are not going to fight back against Iran, we might as well talk to them.....not, instead we should get rid of the spineless leaders of this country who refuse to raise a finger against Iran and replace them with men like Retired General Batiste....someone who is smart enough to say we need to mobilize this country for WAR.


11 posted on 11/27/2006 6:19:47 PM PST by TomasUSMC ( FIGHT LIKE WW2, FINISH LIKE WW2. FIGHT LIKE NAM, FINISH LIKE NAM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xkaydet65

I believe Bush 43 needs to show Baker and his commission the door.


12 posted on 11/27/2006 6:23:21 PM PST by popdonnelly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: TomasUSMC
Federalist No. 23
13 posted on 11/27/2006 6:28:07 PM PST by michigander (The Constitution only guarantees the right to pursue happiness. You have to catch it yourself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

I call it surrealism. Find a way to spin defeat into victory. If we are defeated, it is because of self-imposed restraint. We know what has to be done, but won't do it because of the Euros, the UN, and the NYT will say nasty things about us.


14 posted on 11/27/2006 6:39:13 PM PST by rbg81 (1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rbg81
The left is always revisiting Vietnam when talking about Iraq. Now they are completing the circle, by helping to bring about the same "solution" to the Iraq war as they did to the one in Vietnam: declare victory and go home.

Only it wasn't victory then and it won't be victory now. Further, the VietCong were just happy to have control of the whole country and to start the task of "re-education" of those in the South. The jihadists are different. Without any infidels to use as springboards into the eternal brothel, they will have to seek contact with infidels elsewhere. That means they will try to follow us around the planet and into our homes.

As usual, the left is living in la-la land.

I will never support any politician who votes to walk away from Iraq, no matter what they may call the walk.
15 posted on 11/27/2006 7:20:06 PM PST by theBuckwheat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: rbg81

If we are defeated, it is because of self-imposed restraint.



Or as I would say............ KGC warfighting
(Kinder Gentler Compassionate)


16 posted on 11/27/2006 11:30:26 PM PST by TomasUSMC ( FIGHT LIKE WW2, FINISH LIKE WW2. FIGHT LIKE NAM, FINISH LIKE NAM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: SJackson; Lando Lincoln; quidnunc; .cnI redruM; Valin; King Prout; dennisw; monkeyshine; ...
Robert Kagan and William Kristol:

...So let's add up the "realist" proposals: We must retreat from Iraq, and thus abandon all those Iraqis--Shiite, Sunni, Kurd, and others--who have depended on the United States for safety and the promise of a better future. We must abandon our allies in Lebanon and the very idea of an independent Lebanon in order to win Syria's support for our retreat from Iraq. We must abandon our opposition to Iran's nuclear program in order to convince Iran to help us abandon Iraq. And we must pressure our ally, Israel, to accommodate a violent Hamas in order to gain radical Arab support for our retreat from Iraq.

This is what passes for realism these days. But of course this is not realism. It is capitulation. Were the United States to adopt this approach every time we faced a difficult set of problems, were we to attempt to satisfy our adversaries' every whim in order to win their acquiescence, we would rapidly cease to play any significant role in the world. We would be neither feared nor respected--nor, of course, would we be any better liked. Our retreat would win us no friends and lose us no adversaries.

What our adversaries in the Middle East want from us is very simple: They want us out. Unless we are prepared to withdraw, not just from Iraq but from the entire region, and from elsewhere as well, we had better start figuring out how to pursue effectively--realistically--our interests and goals. This is true American realism. All the rest is a fancy way of justifying surrender.


Nailed It!
Moral Clarity BUMP !

This ping list is not author-specific for articles I'd like to share. Some for the perfect moral clarity, some for provocative thoughts; or simply interesting articles I'd hate to miss myself. (I don't have to agree with the author all 100% to feel the need to share an article.) I will try not to abuse the ping list and not to annoy you too much, but on some days there is more of the good stuff that is worthy of attention. You can see the list of articles I pinged to lately  on  my page.
You are welcome in or out, just freepmail me (and note which PING list you are talking about). Besides this one, I keep 2 separate PING lists for my favorite authors Victor Davis Hanson and Orson Scott Card.  

17 posted on 11/28/2006 4:50:23 AM PST by Tolik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolik

Spot on. Correct.


18 posted on 11/28/2006 5:01:02 AM PST by Alia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Tolik
So let's add up the "realist" proposals: We must retreat from Iraq, and thus abandon all those Iraqis--Shiite, Sunni, Kurd, and others--who have depended on the United States for safety and the promise of a better future. We must abandon our allies in Lebanon and the very idea of an independent Lebanon in order to win Syria's support for our retreat from Iraq. We must abandon our opposition to Iran's nuclear program in order to convince Iran to help us abandon Iraq. And we must pressure our ally, Israel, to accommodate a violent Hamas in order to gain radical Arab support for our retreat from Iraq.

This is what passes for realism these days. But of course this is not realism. It is capitulation. Were the United States to adopt this approach every time we faced a difficult set of problems, were we to attempt to satisfy our adversaries' every whim in order to win their acquiescence, we would rapidly cease to play any significant role in the world. We would be neither feared nor respected--nor, of course, would we be any better liked. Our retreat would win us no friends and lose us no adversaries.

What our adversaries in the Middle East want from us is very simple: They want us out. Unless we are prepared to withdraw, not just from Iraq but from the entire region, and from elsewhere as well, we had better start figuring out how to pursue effectively--realistically--our interests and goals. This is true American realism. All the rest is a fancy way of justifying surrender.

It is truly mad to think we can achieve our aims by 'talking' wit the Syrians, Iraniana, et al. We are at the brink of an historic moment. How we act will determine our fate for the next hundrd years.

19 posted on 11/28/2006 5:30:07 AM PST by Rummyfan (Iraq: Give therapeutic violence a chance!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

Well, I hate to say it but Smiling Bill is right.


20 posted on 11/28/2006 5:33:21 AM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson