Posted on 12/19/2008 5:07:23 AM PST by rellimpank
In his great Civil War history, "Decision in the West," Albert Castel describes the last Confederate hope of victory. If in 1864 the Confederate armies continue to exact a steep cost from the North, "the majority of Northerners will decide that going on with the war is not worth the financial and human cost and so will replace Lincoln and the Republicans with a Democratic president and Congress committed to stopping hostilities and instituting peace negotiations." He cites the resolution of the Confederate Congress that: "Brave and learned men in the North have spoken out against the usurpations and cruelties daily practiced. The success of these men over the radical and despotic faction which now rules the North may open the way to . . . a cessation of this bloody and unnecessary war." Plus ça change .
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
“Mark is just setting the story line that when/if we get attacked again under Obama, the blame should be layed at the feet of President Bush. The media hate Bush, Helprin is no exception, he hates him as well.”
Yes and more. He’s presaging what many believe to be true, i.e. that there will be attacks right here in the U.S. and there’s a growing consensus that the attacks will be in the form of a sustained, prolonged series of bombings of soft civilian targets nation wide. I’ve suspected that the Left which genuinely hates the U.S., what it stands for and the European-American population in the U.S., will then, through the MSM Propaganda Ministry declare that the attacks are the fault of the Neo-con policies under Bush and the fault of the American people themselves. With that backdrop, I would guess the “O” administration, rather than taking any heat for such attacks will take the stated position that Americans may as well get used to such things as payback for the U.S. bombing of civilians overseas and other such “war crimes” as commited in the name of the U.S. It’s going to get very messy.
To be fair. Bush didn't do much to counter that propaganda.
America is still a strong and steady ally in most cases, keep in mind we have a faction on the left which strives to undermine our commitments, and sympathizes with our enemies.
And we have a republican party that treats that faction with respect.
Best quote I heard refering to the public’s perception of the War in Iraq-—
” The US military is at war while the rest of the country is at the mall.”
...or watching Ameican Idol
...or readying about Paris Hilton....
...or playing video games...
Too many people think this war on terrorism is going to be like a hollywood movie; over in a couple of hours and then they can go back to their lives. Let’s call what this war really is-a clash of civilizations- and, sorry to be the messanger of bad news but the war will last a couple of GENERATIONS.
That’s not the fault of the public. That one belongs to the administration and the military.
The public was conditioned for years to expect victory at minimal cost in lives in a very short time. We thought it had happened again in both Iraq and Afghanistan.
I don’t know about you but I heard President Bush live on TV telling me to go to the mall and spend money.
I’ve never heard word one about sacrifice, or victory gardens, or anything else that indicates a national commitment to fighting and finishing this thing.
You’re SUPPOSED to defend the country against ALL enemies, “both foreign and DOMESTIC”—or at least that’s how the oath of office reads. That RINO President of ours has consistantly refused to deal with the domestic side of that equation, whilst trying to drown everything in newly-printed dollars.
None of the lies were EVER even answered, much less refuted. Hence, they become the new truth for the SNL body politic.
Fighting half the fight has cost us the war.
God help us now.
The cringing detour through the UN prior to the liberation of Iraq was a catastrophe. The Bush administration's feel good definition of our war aim in Iraq — to bring freedom and democracy to our Arab brothers — was embarrassing naive. The less said about all that “religion of peace” blather the better.
Our failure to proclaim, before sundown on 9/11, that we were at war with every state sponsor of Islamic terror was the root of all the political problems GWB has had since. Arabia attacked us and we desperately needed to teach Arabia (and Persia) the bitter lesson that messing with the Eagle gets your eyes clawed out. We failed. W failed.
Now with the advent of the Obamanation, we have shown our enemies that even President Bush is tougher than the nation he has led. All our rivals are sharpening their knives and sizing us up. Our leadership has served us very poorly and this problem is not confined to Democrats.
This is a bitter truth, but denial gets you nowhere.
The same with the economy. They tried so hard for most of eight years to talk it down that over the last two they succeeded beyond their wildest dreams.
“The Bush administration’s feel good definition of our war aim in Iraq — to bring freedom and democracy to our Arab brothers — was embarrassing naive. The less said about all that “religion of peace” blather the better.”
Yeah that will never happen. You will never see an Nation in the heart of the Arab World actually adopt a constitution and Democratically Elected, Civilian led Government with rights and liberties.
Oh wait...
“I don’t know about you but I heard President Bush live on TV telling me to go to the mall and spend money.
I’ve never heard word one about sacrifice, or victory gardens, or anything else that indicates a national commitment to fighting and finishing this thing.”
Exactly.
Yeah, all it’s Helperin’s fault if we all go to hell. The politicians, of both parties, will have had absolutely nothing to do with it.
No, you’re right. For some reason he did a terrible job making his case.
“The press apparently convinced the public that if we didn’t win the war in 15 minutes it was a disaster.”
The press alone? Gimmee a break. The administration fostered that perception and in fact seemed to believe it as well. Look how many years it took to finally put enough troops into Iraq.
Give you a break? Sure, go ahead and take a break! ;)
9/11 showed us we were vulnerable all ready, economically as well as physically, Bush didn’t do anything to cause that!
What a pantywaist.
“the country is.........exhausted.”
Plueezee!
Elections and constitutions are nice, but they won't do anything to resolve the age old competition between Islam and the (now largely) post-Christian West. The idea that we can make enemies into friends by giving them some shiny new democratic toys to play with was always nonsense, and nothing in current events makes it seem remotely plausible.
Iraq will do our bidding as long as we hold the balance of military power there. With the possible exception of the much abused Kurds, we have no Iraqi friends, only allies of convenience. That hasn't changed and it won't change.
Our military power is very useful, but there are limits on what it can accomplish. It's great for scaring the bejeezus out of people. It can't make enemies morph into friends. George W. Bush never could face this painful truth.
Mr. Helprin makes so many idiotic assumptions right off the bat that his credibility as a pundit is extinguished.
When you want to alter a cat’s behavior given his basic instincts you spray a little water in his face ... unfortunately with humans it takes a little more effort. When was the last time any planes were hijacked?
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.