Posted on 12/05/2006 10:10:32 AM PST by jveritas
Based on what on what Defense Secretary nominee Mr. Gates has said so far in the Senate confirmation hearings, it is easy to conclude that he is a “Defeatist”. No matter how tough the situation is in Iraq he must not say in public that we are not winning the war in Iraq. That is totally demoralizing to our troops and will further embolden our enemies there like Al Qaeda, Iran, and Syria. Moreover the man has shown extreme ambiguity and uncertainty in his answers to many questions.
I doubt very much that he told the President that we are not winning in Iraq or else the President would not have nominated him. It may be too late to withdraw his nomination now, but our country and most importantly our brave troops deserve a better person to be the Secretary of Defense.
I love to stump people who complain that we lost or are losing the "War in Iraq" with the question "What War? Against what enemy? Who are we fighting there?" and see a very puzzled and confused look on their face for several minutes while they are searching for answer, as obviously they didn't have the time to think about it...
After that period of "self" retrospective analysis they're much more amenable to understanding of what's reallly going on, and either start asking the right questions or willing to hear the right answers.
Regarding post 19, reinvading Iraq with twice the troops and a massive Air War against Iran.
We will do neither.
Until our leaders get crudely tough against our enemies, I repeat, we have lost....get our troops out of there.
Either fight to win or get out and prepare for the next battle.
OMG I forgot about those statements. Rudy's broken window syndrome was ignored early.
1. Moqtada al-Sadr, backed by a soon-to-be nuclear Iran.
2. Sunnis backed by Al Qaeda.
The war is not won. There is an enemy. And if the US withdraws, that enemy will be in control.
There will be no dealing with Iran and Syria. If there hasn't been by now (when Bush was at his apex), there won't be now that he's a lame duck being abandoned in droves.
I agree.
But where, oh where, will we get the political will to do such a thing now? We are in psychological retreat in this country, even if George Bush isn't.
We sit on their borders right now, they are up to their elbows in our blood and the blood of innocent Iraqis, and still we do nothing but talk about it. We need no more proof of their intentions.
If we haven't mustered the will to take on these mortal enemies of ours at this juncture, what will it take for us to do it at the next? A nuclear blast in Tel Aviv? A nuclear blast in Washington? Would an anthrax attack meet the high threshold?
Where/what is our real line in the sand?
"If some terrorists in a cave in Afghanistan were able to do 9/11 with few people and some little money, imagine what the terrorists will do with hundreds of billions of oil money"
The terrorist are already supported by much of the worlds oil wealth, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and now Venezuela.
OK, so your solution is to leave and complete surrender. We can win this war and we must, we have no other option.
On the money.
The problem is Bush has been exposed. We all thought the image of him standing on the rubble of the TWC, saying "I can hear you" was the real Bush. It wasn't. It was just a lucky remark he made off-hand that resonated with people. He's a weak politician who is controlled by events and bureaucrats.
Everything Bush had achieved was larely off of the patriotic fervor that happened after 9-11. After that wore off, he didn't have much else. He can't manipulate people to accomplish things as a politician should. There is no strategy for anything--it's a stumble along thing and hope for the best. He surrounded himself with people he thought were good enough for the job--but like in most things mediocrities get the job done until something goes wrong.
Oh brother. Revisionism as absurdist theater.
If that's true, then that will be because Bush will ignore the Baker-Hamilton Report, even though incoming SecDef Gates wrote it. Gates is on record supporting collaboration with Ahmedinejad and al-Assad.
I haven't seen his testimony, what he is actually saying.
But if he were to speak the truth - it would be that we won phase 1 of the war. But phase 2 has not achieved victory. It hasn't failed mind you, but it hasn't succeeded either. It has left us in this "limbo" state we are in now.
That's what he should have said. If he has described it as an outright defeat, then I agree with you, he should not be sec'y of defense.
My solution is to go Roman on them. Forced relocation of population. Raze villages where unrest against US Forces occurs. Take back the fake sovereigty and install a military governor.
"If that's true, then that will be because Bush will ignore the Baker-Hamilton Report, even though incoming SecDef Gates wrote it. Gates is on record supporting collaboration with Ahmedinejad and al-Assad."
And this leaves us to ponder the peculiar illogic of having a Secretary of Defense, who authored such a report, only to ignore the report. Everything points to political expediency, from the resignation of Rumsfeld, to the negative remarks about the ISG from the Bush administration to deflect outrage from the right. But, in the end, with Gates in, that's exactly what we're likely to get. Cut and run, albeit with just enough political cover to mitigate the domestic fallout, plus collaboration with Iran and Syria.
I mean dealing in the sense of confrontation. Collaboration I can definately see.
Your solution will never be tried, hence you are left with two choices: get out or continue as usual. This is the political reality.
I know. We are a decadent civilization. Might as well get it over with.
I don't recall any speeches by Churchill in which he said, "We're losing this war!" I have to agree with jveritas on this one.
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.