Mr. President, the Long War Won’t End in 2010
To put it more colloquially, Mr. Obama, the bad guys have a say in when the war will be over. They decided it would not be over in 2003 or ’04, ’05, ’06, ’07, or ’08, and thus compelled us to stay in Iraq to fight on. In a perfect world, our military would not have had to secure Iraqi real estate. We would not have had to undertake nation-building efforts of this magnitude. We could have “brought the boys home” in late 2003, as was initially planned (according to General Tommy Franks).
Alas, the Iranian mullahs, the Syrian Ba’athists, and the Salafi al-Qaedists might not think the stroke of midnight on August 31, 2010, is the end of their war on us, or the end of their war on a free and sovereign Iraq.
Six years ago, during the initial invasion of Iraq, Lt. Gen. Petraeus posed a challenge to a reporter traveling with his 101st Airborne Division, in what would become a famous quote: “Tell me how this ends.” Five years later, as the leading commander in Iraq, Petraeus seemed to answer his own question during an interview with NBC: “We think we won’t know that we’ve reached a turning point until we’re six months past it.”
That is the correct, professional, and responsible view to hold, the most objectively accurate lens through which we must observe the war. The inherent nature of asymmetrical war is horizontal, not vertical. There will be no definitive date, no specific event, and no single declaration that will end this war. The simple nature of the enemy forces this unpleasant and unconventional reality on us.
Iraq is largely pacified today and the war on the wane, because the surge brigades and battalions secured Iraqi territory, the Anbari tribes flipped against al-Qaeda, cities and provinces were cleared of insurrectionists, Iranian proxies were targeted and defeated in the south, and political reconciliation amongst Iraqi constituencies picked up steam. The dual insurgency from al-Qaeda and Tehran has been quelled because of our counterinsurgency, because we crushed our adversaries and worked with our Iraqi allies — not because we merely wanted the war to end, even though we did; not because we declared the war over, because we didn’t; and certainly not because the jihadists wanted the war to end, because they did not, and currently do not want it to end.
Mr. Obama, certain people had to be defeated to get where we are today. As you acknowledge, many of these people will still be around 18 months from now. As with the ebb and flow of all wars, particularly insurgencies, these people — theocrats and fascists and neck-slicers of the worst kind — might not consider themselves defeated in 2010. The “Iraq War” might conclude, but the Long War with Islamist fanaticism — of which Iraq will be a central part — will not conclude in 2010 or even during your presidency (be it four or eight years).
President Bush and Prime Minister Maliki signed the Status of Forces Agreement, a binding treaty which ensures U.S. troops will remain in Iraq until January 1, 2012. President Obama has acknowledged this and foresees 30,000 to 50,000 U.S. forces remaining in Iraq after 2010 for “advisory” purposes, a South Korea-like alliance. This is healthy, so long as President Obama also acknowledges the following: Iraq is the new Israel, in that its tyrannical neighbors will periodically attempt to liquidate it.
The war against Iraq ended in 2003. The war within Iraq is nearly over. But the war for Iraq, Mr. Obama, will go on for many years.
It is very obvious, President Obama has a certain “stigma” that simply says, if I say it, it’s true, settled, and done with. Just simply telling insurgents in the Middle East, as he’s done here, I won, you lost, get over it. If you’ll excuse the experssion, that ain’t gonna work! Islamist extremist have shown a tenacity of being able to wait, plan accordingly, and be patient. This, however, does NOT seem to be the current administrations greatest trait. To be redundant, in a way, time will tell!!
It’s the height of arrogance to declare a war over that was started by the other side. We perceive the war declared on us to have started in 2001 but in actual fact it’s been going on much longer and will outlive all of us. These religious extremists are in it for the ultra long haul – centuries if necessary. We have attention spans dictated by news cycles. We have yet to be really tested and find out if we have what it takes to fight. The past 8 years may likely be as nothing compared to what is yet to come.
Obama is still in campaign mode. That speech was mostly for his anti-war supporters. He does not realize that our enemies also have TVs and will hear and interpret his every word in a quite different manner. Furthermore, the spin his words get from foreign media will be quite different from that of US MSM, which carried a lot of water for him.
Did anyone else catch President Obama’s declaration of victory in the speech? He basically said the troops completed their missions.
As always, wise ol’ experienced Bambi knows all the right moves. Everyone knows that revealing your future plans to your enemy has no negative effects at all. None. Never.
His never ending egofest causes him to make these foolish ejaculations.
August 31, 2010? Hmm. Isn’t that the beginning of campaign season for Congressional mid-term elections. Oooo, looky, I wrapped the war up even earlier than projected. How wonderful is it to be me? Re-elect Dems! Just another campaign tactic. It’s all about power. He couldn’t care less about the eventual fate of Iraq. Like all Libs/Socs, he only cares about the domestic agenda. Who cares about foreign affairs, anyway?
The “war” will be over when people start respecting each other. Is that about 2050?
Vivo, there is a generation gap at work. My generation sees respect as something that is earned, yours sees it as a right.
Why should I respect anyone just because they can suck air thru their pie-hole?
While the left blames Bush 43 for everything, it is his fault that the War on Terror is not seen as the global war it is. If Dubbau had ponied up to the facts he would have called the War on Terror what it is, which is the 6th ( or 7th? I lost track somewhere in the 17th century) Crusade.
After all, the moslims understand that the WoT is another crusade, even if the west claims it isn’t.
Once you look at the current crusade in it’s historical perspective, it becomes obvious that pushing the Jihadists from one bit of dirt to another isn’t doing anything to WIN the crusade.
The reason there have been so many crusades is because all the west has ever done is push the Jihadists off of a bit of dirt. Then after a few years, or centuries, the Moslims make a comeback. Look at Spain.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_Muslim_presence_in_the_Iberian_peninsula
The battle for Spain ( Iberria) went on from about 800 AD to 1500 AD.
At least that episode. It isn’t over yet, since Spain is in greater danger of returning to Islamic control today then it has ben for the last 1000 years. There will be no ‘peace’ until Islam is destroyed, or rules the world.
What’s it gonna be? I gotta know right now!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KwDInHYzQRc
8. typos_R_us:
“Vivo, there is a generation gap at work. My generation sees respect as something that is earned, yours sees it as a right.”
No, I agree with you. I’m just hoping that the expansion in world communications (Internet, TV, etc.) will open minds and bring reactionaries to grasp some understanding. I know it’s taken thousands of years with no change, but the circumstance are changing. 2050 seems optimistic, but who knows?
“There will be no ‘peace’ until Islam is destroyed, or rules the world.
What’s it gonna be? I gotta know right now!”
Destroying Islam would require killing millions of people: that’s not going to happen.
Islam ruling the World?
Islam 1.5 billion, 21% of world distribution
Christianity 2.1 billion, 33%
Non-religious 1.1 billion, 16%
Hinduism 900 million, 14%
Others 16%
You simply can’t rule over 80% of the world!
“I know it’s taken thousands of years with no change, but the circumstance are changing”.
Technology changes, People and circumstances don’t.
“Destroying Islam would require killing millions of people: that’s not going to happen.”
Actually, no. I didn’t express myself well. Islam is an ideology as well as a religion. Ideologies AND religions can be destroyed without killing the people that believe in them. Islam can be changed into a kinder and gentler religion. The Christians of 1000 AD were MUCH worse then the Muslims of today. And in the 21st century, it is safe to invite Christians into your home, so long as they don’t number more then 4 or so. A Christian from the 11th century would murder a 21st century Christian as a heretic. No questions asked, right to the stake for burning.
Where do you get your numbers? I used the UN and CIA population figures and got between 850 and 1 billion. That was back in ’98 or so. Muslims are like blowfish in that they inflate their size to appear more formidable then they actually are. The 7th century mindset of population equals military strength still prevails in the Muslim world. In the 21st century, large populations just means bigger body counts. As Stalin said, “One man’s death is a tragedy, a million men’s death is a statistic”.
I really should have used the word ‘convert’ instead of destroy. Both sides want to convert the other. In both cases, conversion would equal destruction.
Islam was spread by the sword. As religions go, it has nothing to offer that makes it superior to any other religion. So when the Muslims bumped up against the Europeans, they were stopped because they couldn’t defeat the European on the battlefield except in rare circumstances.
The Eastern Roman empire held out for a thousand years despite being outnumbered 20 or 30 to 1. It was Christians that finally put paid to the Romans. The Ottomans just feasted off the left overs.
The ‘war’ in Iraq was not one. It was an invasion started by a stupid, lying lttle cowboy from Texas to prove to himself that he had a dick. And he did. dick cheney. It was and is is outright robbery and rape of an entire nation which had nothing to do with the terrorists of al-qaeda. Now, it’s the only sensible thing to try and stop the killing by ending it. Not an easy task, but Obama has the strength to do the right thing.
EVEN THERE ARE SO MANY JEWS CONTROLLING THE MEDIAS, I STILL WANT TO SAY WHAT I WANT TO SAY! BECAUSE OF THE JEWS, BUSH SENT TROOPS TO IRAQ ( YOU DONT WANT ME TO GO INTO DETAILS AGAIN). THE REASON IS OBVIOUS ! THE AMERICAN TROOPS CAN PHYSICALLY AND PSYCHOLOGICALLY PROTECTING ISRAEL. NOW OBAMA IS TALKING ABOUT WITHDRAWAL. ANYONE EVER ASKED HIM WHETHER THE JEWS APPROVED HIS DOING?
BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, OBAMA CANNOT ALLOW ANOTHER 700 BILLION BUCKS FOR ANOTHER SIX YEARS, UNLESS HE DID NOT WANT TO BE REOELECTED !
THE ONLY REASON WHY OBAMA BECAME THE PRESIDENT IS BECAUSE HE WAS THE ONLY ONE WHO OPPOSED THE WAR IN IRAQ FROM THE BEGINNING!
THE POWERFUL MEN IN THOSE DAYS, NOW THEY ALL DISAPPEARED LIKE THE MICE,EVEN HAD GLOBAL PLAN FIRST IRAQ, THEN IRAN, NORTH KOREA NEXT AND MAYBE CHINA.
ALL ARE IN THE NAME OF THE SURVIVAL OF ISRAEL !
By 2010, the US will be so broke thanks to the O’holes crashing the economy, that it will be unable to afford a military capable of overseas deployment. The US ceased being a world power, and joined the rank of the dysfunctional ,impoverished third world,when it stupidly elected this Hugo Chavez wannabee. Poor, third world nations do not have effective,world-class militaries.