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

To: JohnHuang2
Of course, will you see these pings in order to get the link? LOL!
5 posted on 08/17/2002 5:21:03 AM PDT by Miss Marple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]


Have yet to take a position regarding Iraq? Haven't made up your mind yet where you stand? Still not quite sure if you're for or against toppling Saddam?

Well, let me help you.

The roster of opponents to action in Iraq reads like a who's who of the finest, most brilliant military thinkers today. Take it from me, these people are pillars -- indeed, the creme-de-la-creme -- of the national security community, unparalleled paragons of winning war strategy, tactics -- you name it.

Take Gen. Maureen Dowd.

For those of you in Palm Beach county, Gen. Dowd unquestionably stands among the world's most preeminent thinkers -- a venerable authority not just on military affairs, but on darn near everything you can think of. Whether it's brokering peace in the Middle East, to the sex lives of Hollywood apotheosis Michael Douglas, Gen. Dowd has the answers.

Heck, my motto is, 'when in doubt, just ask Gen. Dowd -- she's the sage'.

Not impressed?

Okay, I'll toss out another name.

How's about Gen. Bill Press?

Not familiar with him? Ha! Shame on you.

Look, he may be a political commentator, but don't let that fool you. Beneath that goofy, geeky, dorky, cartoonish facade, lies a military genius, a true oracle on war and peace.

Okay, okay, so he's not exactly a General.

So what? Let me tell you, the man is battle-hardened, a veteran of combat like few men have ever seen.

Remember the Monica wars and the battle of impeachment? That's when he earned his metals and honors, courageously defending his commander-in-briefs, Der Schlickmeister, directing the tanks and artillery, heroically fending off Republican fusillades of mean-spirited allegations.

Battle-hardened, indeed!

Huh? Still not impressed? Sheesh. You're one tough customer, aren't you?

Does the name Chris Matthews ring a bell?

Some swill-spewing, silly, giddy TV talking-airhead, you say?

Think again.

Talk about intellectual fire-power! Maxine Waters -- step aside.

The Hardball host once worked in the White House of one of history's greatest successes -- Jimmy 'Killer-Rabbit' Carter!

Yes-siree, Bob.

Sure he was wrong about Reagan and the Soviets and the Cold War and 'Star Wars' and the military and Bush and the Taliban and Afghanistan and the 'axis-of-evil'......

...okay, okay, never mind. You're still not impressed, I see.

Of course, if VIPs as towering as Dowd and Press and Matthews won't jolt you off the fence, well then, what about foreign policy savants like Barbara Streisand?

Or Madeline Albright?

Or Sandy Burger?

No? Still not impressed?

All right. I've got just the name: Gen. Brent Scowcroft!

Ah, yes! The media's flavor-of-the-week (it was Dick Armey last week).

Scowcroft was Bush-the-elder's National Security Affairs Advisor during Desert Storm.

In an op-ed piece for the Wall Street Journal, Don't Attack Saddam, Scowcroft warned the Bush administration to keep hands-off Iraq.

Basically, he offers the following:

1) Forget about being pro-active. Be reactive. Pretend 9/11 never happened. Bury your head in the sand. Wait till the enemy strikes first, then, and only then, strike back. Wait till he hits us with weapons of mass destruction -- then react.

The Scowcroft principle: Don't just do something, stand there!

2) The "coalition" is more important than the mission itself. In fact, it should determine the mission. As President, your first duty is to protect and defend the coalition. It says so in the constitution. The U.N. constitution, that is.

3) Forget about leadership. Go wobbly, George. Be a follower. Listen to the Euroweenies. Be an Angloweenie. Listen to the Saudis. Listen to the Syrians. Let them know you feel their pain. Listen to the people who danced and pranced and celebrated in the streets when the towers fell. Don't -- repeat: Don't -- do anything that might make them mad. They might not like us if we do. Make 'em mad, and they'll unleash Armageddon on you! Can't do that, wouldn't be prudent.

(Backing down now would shatter the credibility of the United States. Our reputation would be left in tatters, our enemies, emboldened.)

4) Forget about making a case. There is no case against Saddam. He's not a terrorist, nor is he connected to terrorism.

(Saddam is funding the families of homicide bombers in Israel, $50,000 each. Moreover, Iraq was behind the first World Trade Center bombing in February of '93. Saddam plotted the attempted assassination of President Bush (41) in Kuwait in '93. New Yorker reporter Jeffery Goldberg has extensively documented close connections between Iraqi intelligence and top al-Qaeda leaders. No link to terrorism, eh, Scowcroft? Nice try.)

5) Forget that Saddam is blatantly violating the terms and conditions of a ceasefire. No big deal.

6) Trust weapons inspections. We all know how good that worked for 10 years, right?

Wait a minute.....hmmmmmmm.....Gee, did you notice something? Scowcroft sounds awfully defensive, doesn't he? Why, come to think of it, he's really defending himself -- his harebrained advise to leave Saddam in power after Desert Storm.

In short, this is damage control, pure and simple. Big time C.Y.A. This is about ego. Scowcroft's ego. He just can't bring himself to admit he was wrong.

Scowcroft memo to Bush: Forget history. Don't learn from our mistakes. Repeat them.

To the American people, Scowcroft's message is:

Trust me. Don't trust Bush. Don't trust Rumsfeld. Don't trust Tommy Franks. Don't trust Condi Rice. No, I'm not in the loop, nor am I privy to high-level info nor high-level planning nor secret intelligence. Nor do I get any briefings. I'm completely in the dark. But trust me.

Uh, trust you, Gen. Scowcroft?

Gee, excuse me, but I see one itsy-bitsy problem with this: Your track record. According to you (circa summer 1990), Saddam would never invade Kuwait and the Soviet Union would never collapse.

Not exactly confidence building, now is it?

One more thing -- this is a big one:

"[Scowcroft] OPPOSED even toppling the Taliban in Afghanistan, which he thought would be, diplomatically, too difficult to do", Rich Lowry of National Review told Hardball Thursday night.

Trust you, Gen. Scowcroft? Ah, thanks, but no thanks.

Team Bush has earned my trust.

Anyway, that's...

My two cents...
"JohnHuang2"


10 posted on 08/17/2002 6:49:17 AM PDT by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

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