And that is why you are a defeatist who is giving an aid and comfort to the enemy. When a terrorist read your statement he will feel comforted and aided and want to fight more, kill more, and destroy more because he knows that people like you do not have the nerve to fight. As I said before, may defeatists hide under the cover of “Macho Talk” but in reality they do not have the guts for a long war and they want to cut and run. Even in your post you said that “let the Iraqis do the nasty fight” because you are not willing to fight, as I said before we are in Iraq not just for the Iraqis, we are mainly there for ourselves so we can destroy terrorism and protect our freedom and our way of life.
"... he knows that people like you do not have the nerve to fight."
Is your 'nerve' to fight words on the internet, poms-poms, etc.? Or not liking discussion on the issues....? Just curious...
Because "I" am not willing to fight?
Au contraire!
Been there, done that, when I was younger.
And now, that I am older and smarter, I am "willing" to fight a hell of a lot harder than we have fought.
We have all this airpower, but we refrain from using it because it will inflict massive collateral civilian casualties.
And, by gum, yes it will! So what?
The Sunni South has always been OUR tormentor. We keep PRETENDING that they're "just another party in the game".
We make this pretense for a variety of reasons, but in the end, they're dumb.
Fight? Use airpower to do the fighting. Great lopsided horrible casualty differentials.
Terrorize them into passivity.
Saddam did it.
And it worked too.
These Sunni Arab males are dead enders. They're going to fight no matter what. They need to be killed. Now, doing it the way we HAVE been doing it, by trying to separate the sheep from the wolves and wasting a lot of American lives and limbs...well...that's what has brought down the morale of the whole USA. There's no end in sight.
I told you the way to get to a swift end.
The President knows this option is out there.
He has publicly rejected it several times, simply because he doesn't want to be that "bad".
But that "bad" is what it is going to take.
Not willing too fight?
No. MORE willing to use firepower than our timid leadership.
And much clearer about who our enemy are, and what we have to do to subjugate them.
Now do please repeat that I am a defeatist again, so I can repeat that the only way to win the war, relatively quickly too, is to take sides in the civil war, arm our chosen sides, and support them in the killing campaign it will take to well and truly subjugate the Sunni Arabs for good, and offer the decisive Arabist alternative to the pro-Iranian Shi'a.
That's what the South really craves, and we have the power to give it to them.
We actually did the same sort of thing in Sarajevo. We decried the use of military power against the Bosnians, but we refused to arm them. Net result: maximize the misery and prolong the war.
Pick the necessary sides, let THEM slaughter their countrymen who need killing, provide them intelligence, logistics and air support, and WIN the damned thing in a year and a half. Or pretend that Americans are going to win a foreign civil war, refuse to take sides against our enemies, and LOSE. That's what we're committed to. I am not going to pretend that it might work, because it can't possibly work. It is idiocy incarnate.
The President needs to understand that by going to war he chose to take on the task of killing a lot of people, and step up the killing so that it is people reasonably allied with US who come out on top. We are not doing that now. We are refusing to do that now.
So we're going to play the hokey-pokey with our Marines again. I wish them good success on the battlefield, but it cannot change the result: political collapse in the United States followed by withdrawal and defeat.
We need to WIN within 18 months. To do THAT, we need to step up the civil war, pick the winning side, and arm them to victory. Bloody, nasty, but victorious in the end.
What we are doing ends in heartbreak. Do YOU want to see your country defeated? That's the course you are on. Calling me a defeatist or a traitor doesn't make it so.
You've got to look to your loyalties: to the US, first. That means making some really hard and nasty decisions and getting on with it.
It means picking sides and letting them do what is necessary to win.
Our Marines cannot do it alone, not in the numbers that are deployed or will be surged.
It's obvious.
If we follow your plan and shut up, we give victory to the enemy.
Bush is a stubborn SOB, but in the end he DID wise up about Rumsfeld, and about some of his strategy, and he DID back down on Miers. He CAN be bludgeoned into reason. What it takes is having his support collapse. He cannot be supported on this present course, not without specifically picking sides, because it won't win. If we support this strategy, we are signing onto Maginot and the defeat of our nation. The political pain needs to be awful until he finally backs down and sullenly does what he has to do: choose the side of the Kurds and the Arabist Shi'a, arm them, and let them go kill our enemies and theirs, the Sunni Arabs, and then let them consolidate their power against the pro-Iranian Shi'a militias.
That's what we have to do.
The longer we delay, the deeper in we go towards defeat.
Our victory is determined by our political cycle.
There's no gas left in the tank for a MAJOR American escalation, and Bush's surge isn't that.
So now the escalation must come within Iraq.
That CANNOT happen if we refuse to arm one side and let it cream the others.
Instead, they all hunker down and wait for the Democratic victory in 2008 that ends the US presence.
We can avoid that fate, but not by SUPPORTING the President.
He needs to be told what to do that will WIN.
Support the Arabist Shia and the Kurds and get it done.
That will WIN. Hands down.
It is nasty and will entail a lot of war crimes. But OUR soldiers will not be committing them, and it WILL result in victory.
Get it done.