Our Unceasing Ambivalence -- Why it's so hard to define victory in Iraq.

The Wall Street Journal ^ | December 8, 2006 | Shelby Steele

[MNJohnnie]

No it not hard at all. Been released to the public for over a year now. What IS hard is to get various self absorbed political dinosaurs, and their junk Media cheerleaders, on both sides of the political aisle to quit playing DC political games long enough to actually bother sit down and LEARN even a single fact about Iraq.

Iraq is an example where people, who formed their opinion based on the issue because of their domestically political views, simply project their opinions onto the issue rather then bother to learn even ONE fact about Iraq that does not validate their preconceived domestically political agenda


http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/iraq/iraq_strategy_nov2005.html

[MNJohnnie]

National Strategy for Victory in Iraq

http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/iraq/iraq_strategy_nov2005.html


Actually that is in the plan from 2003 that was made public in 2005. So rather then a change, it actually reflects the constant policy pf the Bush Administration since the start.

Be nice if people would simply sit down, shut up and actually learning some things about Iraq rather then continually trying to cheery pick data from Iraq to validate their preconceived political opinions

[MNJohnnie]

Well as usual hysteric drama queen and perpetual whiner John
Podhoretz has utterly NO clue what he is talking about when it comes to Iraq.

Here the plan
http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/iraq/iraq_strategy_nov2005.html

Here the facts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_Security_Force


http://icasualties.org/oif/

http://icasualties.org/oif/IraqiDeaths.aspxs


Pod gets both wrong yet again. Maybe he should simply shut up on a topic he clearly knows utterly nothing about.

[MNJohnnie]

The Russians followed your and John P's dogmas in Afghanistan during the 1980s, How did they work then?

[wtc911]

Nevertheless, I was concerned that the President's main motivation seemed to be "He tried to kill my Daddy.", and the VP's motivation seemed likely to be linked to his links with Halliburton.

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

How long have you been delusional?

[MNJohnnie]

You should actually try learning something about the issue instead of posting commentary that seems to consist of regurgitating slogans from Jon Daly's Comedy Show.

Why Iraq

One of the really infuriating things in modern politics is the level of disinformation, misinformation, demagoguery and out right lying going on about the mission in Iraq. Democrats have spent the last 3+ years lying about Iraq out of a political calculation. The assumption is that the natural isolationist mindset of the average American voter, linked to the inherent Anti Americanism (what is misnamed the "Anti War movement") of the more feverish Democrat activists (especially those running the US's National "News" media) would restore them to national political dominance. The truth is the Democrat Party Leadership has simply lacked the courage to speak truth to whiners. The truth is that even if Al Gore won the 2000 election and 09-11 still happened we would be doing the EXACT same things in Iraq we are doing now.

Based on the political situation in the region left over from the 1991 Gulf War plus the domestic political consensus built up in BOTH parties since 1991 as well as fundamental military strategic laws, there was NO viable strategic choice for the US but to take out Iraq after finishing the initial operations in Afghanistan.

To start with Saddam's Iraq was our most immediate threat. We could NOT commit significant military forces to another battle with Saddam hovering undefeated on our flank nor could we leave significant forces watching Saddam. The political containment of Iraq was breaking down. That what Oil for Food was all about. Oil for Food was an attempt by Iraq to break out of it's diplomatic isolation and slip the shackles the UN Sanctions put on it's military. There there was the US Strategic position to consider. The War on Islamic Fascism is different sort of war. in facing this Asymmetrical threat, we have a hidden foe, spread out across a geographically diverse area, with covert sources of supply. Since we cannot go everywhere they hide out, in fact often cannot even locate them until the engage us, we need to draw them out of hiding into a kill zone.

Iraq is that kill zone. That is the true brilliance of the Iraq strategy. We draw the terrorists out of their world wide hiding places onto a battlefield they have to fight on for political reasons (The "Holy" soil of the Arabian peninsula) where they have to pit their weakest ability (Conventional Military combat power) against our greatest strength (ability to call down unbelievable amounts of firepower) where they will primarily have to fight other forces (the Iraqi Security forces) in a battlefield that is mostly neutral in terms of guerrilla warfare. (Iraqi-mostly open terrain as opposed to guerrilla friendly areas like the mountains of Afghanistan or the jungles of SE Asia).

Did any of the critics of liberating Iraq ever look at a map? Iraq, for which we had the political, legal and moral justifications to attack, is the strategic high ground of the Middle East. A Geographic barrier that severs ground communication between Iran and Syria apart as well as providing another front of attack in either state or into Saudi Arabia if needed.

There were other reasons to do Iraq but here is the strategic military reason we are in Iraq. We have taken, an maintain the initiative from the Terrorists. They are playing OUR game on ground of OUR choosing.

Problem is Counter Insurgency is SLOW and painful. Often a case of 3 steps forward, two steps back. One has to wonder if the American people have either the emotional maturity, nor the intellect" to understand. It's so much easier to spew made for TV slogans like "No Blood for Oil" or "We support the Troops, bring them home" or dumbest of all "We are creating terrorists" then to actually THINK. Westerners in general, and the US citizens in particular seem to have trouble grasping the fundamental fact of this foe. These Islamic Fascists have NO desire to co-exist with them. The extremists see all this PC posturing by the Hysteric Left as a sign that we are weak. Since they want us dead, weakness encourages them. There is simply no way to coexist with people who completely believe their "god" will reward them for killing us.

So we can covert to Islam, die or kill them. Iraq is about killing enough of them to make the rest of the Jihadists realize we are serious. They same way killing enough Germans, Italians and Japanese eliminated the ideologies of Nazism, Fascism and Bushido.

Americans need to understand how Bin Laden and his ilk view us. In the Arab world the USA is considered a big wimp. We have run away so many times. Lebanon, the Kurds, the Iraqis in 1991, the Iranians, Somalia, Clinton all thru the 1990s etc etc etc. The Jihadists think we will run again. In fact they are counting on it. That way they can run around screaming "We beat the American just like the Russians, come join us in Jihad" and recruit the next round of "holy warriors". Iraq is also a show place where we show the Muslim world that there are a lines they cannot cross. On 9-11-01 they crossed that line and we can, and will, destroy them for it

[gleeaikin]

"Regurgitated slogans from Jon Daly's Comedy Show."

Were do you get that there are regurgitated slogans? I actually SAW and HEARD the President say "He tried to kill my Daddy" on national TV. Moreover the disgraceful record of Halliburton's financial activities in Iraq raises serious questions.

Also, no one has been saying anything about the fact that there is tremendous rivalry and even violence going on between various Islamic factions which is similar to the conflicts within Christianity centuries ago. In fact it was just the horror of those conflicts that determined our enlightened early American leadership to enshrine religious liberty as a basic doctrine of our democracy.

Also, I have never even seen the Jon Daly Comedy Show. Can you tell me where I would find it? My son continues to serve in the military, and has just come back from a very frustrating 8 months in Afghanistan. Before the war in Iraq was begun I asked him how many troops we should have going in. His thought was 450,000. Now many in the Republican sphere also agree that 150,000 simply was too few. I have been paying attention to the issue for a long time, even to some extent as far back as 35 years ago when my mother started ranting about the evil Bathists, and Saddam Hussein.