The Autumn of our Discontent
The War at Home.
The pundits and politicians on the East Coast have really lost it, declaring the war in Iraq now over and lost—even as 140,000 American soldiers are not only still in the field, but fighting in the belief that they can and will win, and that such a victory leading to a stable government in Iraq will enrich millions in the region and make us safer at home.
Lessons from Farming
I would have hated to farm with any of this current bunch of pundits. In 1976 and 1978 we lost our entire raisin crops to unforeseen and unseasonable tropical storms—and with those disasters much of the ability to pay back thousands of dollars in crop loans.
I suppose our family could have turned on each other—Who decided to pick so late? Why didn’t you watch the long-term weather report more closely? Who was the genius that didn’t buy rain insurance? Etc.—instead of joining together, trying to salvage and dehydrate the rot, learning the necessary lessons to prevent such a reoccurrence, and remembering the age-old truth not just of farming, but of life itself: that it is often tragic and things are not always as we planned or wanted in this life—or lost just because they for a period seem bad.
The wonderful thing about farming is this need to endure when events go awry, both due to carelessness and to conditions “beyond our control”. In the end, as I look back at members of my family and neighbors who found success in this most brutal and cutthroat business of small farming in the age of corporate agriculture and serial natural, man-made, and global disasters all during the 1980s and 1990s, it seems it was not brilliance, nor luck, nor money alone that brought survival and sometimes success, although all those helped, but will, patience, and persistence—the very traits we as a society either belittle or ignore.
Pots and Kettles
What worries me most about this country is not the threat of Islamic fascism, but this strange new hysteria that erupts at any suggestion something has not gone quite according to script, or that perseverance and doggedness are needed for eventual success.
A reminder of that is to read of the attacks on Lincoln in the months before Sherman took Atlanta, or what Churchill heard in the late 1930s, and then after the fall of Singapore, or the madness that broke out in Washington after the Chinese crossed the Yalu when our troops had been promised to “be home for Thanksgiving.”
Reading the columnists of the New York Times might make one forget that the present managers of a venerable newspaper inherited a noble legacy and have nearly ruined it within a mere twenty years—losing readers, issuing as many daily retractions as news scoops, and still not fully recovered from the Jason Blair scandal.
Watching CBS news requires amnesia, since it is impossible to take it seriously after Dan Rather serially, almost nightly, assured millions that a forged document that had fooled him was real. When I see a Reuters photo I look instinctively for signs of photo shopping. AP dispatches from the Middle East I assume are primarily the impressions of bought Arab stringers, ghost written by sympathetic Western journalists.
How Soon We Forget
Listening recently to the pious homilies of Jimmy Carter on C-Span demands a bath in the waters of Lethe. How else to think away hundreds of days watching him like a deer in the headlights as a few students in Teheran paralyzed his administration, the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, he sent Mohammed Ali on a mission to boycott the Olympics, Central America seemed lost to Cuba-like communism, over a million died in Cambodia, the economy suffered double-digit inflation and interest rates, high unemployment, and low growth—before, then and afterwards punctuated by petty, snide comments about kicking Ted Kennedy’s ass, George Bush Sr. being effeminate, secret lusting in his heart, and vicious, swamp rabbits skimming toward the President in a pond attack mode.
The point of all this is to remind the most fierce critics of the present that they themselves are human, and could at least exercise some humility as they play god in judgment of other lowly mortals.
In the case of the changing role of Carter as President emeritus, perhaps it was the frustration of witnessing history’s harsh rebuke of his presidency that made him metamorphosize from the dutiful benefactor and carpenter of the 1980s into the snide and meanspirited gawker of the recent age who seems to have praised almost every dictator who invited him for a visit while demonizing democratic Israel as an apartheid state.
More troops or more action or both?
The ripples from the Iraq Study Group still emanate. They are like castor oil: the left thinks this nasty elixir must be swallowed to find a cure; the right believes that its bad taste proves it is no nostrum. For the latter group, there is an honest difference of opinion over sending more troops into Iraq. The arguments on both sides are well known.
Aside from whether we have the political will to deploy more soldiers, even those who support such an increase must at least brief us on the new tactics that will ensure we can secure the country—otherwise we just breed more Iraqi dependency and keep suffering losses to IEDs and suicide bombers.
Over two years ago I wrote the following in June 2004 on the topic for the New Republic, and see no reason now to change my mind:In our current postmodern world, we tend to deprecate the efficacy of arms, trusting instead that wise and reasonable people can adjudicate the situation on the ground according to Enlightenment principles of diplomacy and reason. But thugs like Moqtadar Al Sadr’s Mahdi Army and Saddam Hussein’s remnant killers beg to differ. They may eventually submit to a fair and honest brokered peace–but only when the alternative is an Abrams tank or Cobra gunship, rather than a stern rebuke from L. Paul Bremer. More important, neutrals and well-meaning moderates in Iraq often put their ideological preferences on hold as they wait to see who will, in fact, win. The promise of consensual government, gender equality, and the rule of law may indeed save the Iraqi people and improve our own security–but only when those who wish none of it learn that trying to stop it will get them killed.
A year ago, we waged a brilliant three-week campaign, then mysteriously forgot the source of our success. Military audacity, lethality, unpredictability, imperviousness to cheap criticism, and iron resolve, coupled with the message of freedom, convinced neutrals to join us and enemies not yet conquered to remain in the shadows. But our failure to shoot looters, to arrest early insurrectionists like Sadr, and to subdue cities like Tikrit or Falluja only earned us contempt–and not just from those who would kill us, but from others who would have joined us as well.
The misplaced restraint of the past year is not true morality, but a sort of weird immorality that seeks to avoid ethical censure in the short term–the ever-present, 24-hour pulpit of global television that inflates a half-dozen inadvertent civilian casualties into Dresden and Hiroshima. But, in the long term, such complacency has left more moderate Iraqis to be targeted by ever more emboldened murderers. For their part, American troops have discovered that they are safer on the assault when they can fire first and kill killers, rather than simply patrol and react, hoping their newly armored Humvees and fortified flak vests will deflect projectiles.
This is the context for the current insistence on more troops. America’s failure to promptly retake Falluja or rid Najaf of militiamen demands more soldiers to garrison the ever more Fallujas and Najafs that will now surely arise. In contrast, audacity is a force multiplier. A Sadr in chains or in paradise is worth more, in terms of deterrence, than an entire infantry division.
Whenever I see a prospective read in the ‘new books’ section at my library, immediately I look at the back cover page to read the “About the author”. Whenever it says journalist for the NY Times, I put it back more quickly. My response to AP and Reuters is similar, “Oh, it’s the AP. They can’t be trusted.” And I read no further. Long ago I abandoned the dinosaur media. In my mind they appear in a two panel cartoon. Above grazing duckbills is a Yucatan swamp an enormous asteroid closes with the earth. The caption reads, ‘Yucatan peninsula, 65 million years ago’. The second frame reads 65 million plus one week. The dinosaurs are looking up and saying, “What was that flash of light in the sky?”
You probably know the Isvestia, Pravda remarks. Literally they mean “News” and “Truth”. The cooloquial was, “There is no news in the truth, and no truth in the news.” Of the dinosaurs, faster please.
Mr Hanson,
Your own writings provide the proper conclusions. The attack on the enemies will to fight, not on the fighting capabilites are the foundation of insurgent warfare. As you have written it was the method of Sherman’s success. Please understand that more soldiers deployed offers more targets to the enemy. Only by stiffening the will to resist and participating in political resolve will our enemy be beaten.
Our fight is with ourselves and our vacilliating politicians. The troops we have are sufficient.
Regards
Essential VDH. Essential reality.
In the end we will be fighting Muslims in America (Killing them) to insure that none of them are suicide bombers loaded down with A-bombs. The PC crowds will have “disappeared” waiting for others to do the needed dirty work. To insure our “rights” survive. PC won’t.
That will be the final injustice but it will be needed due to the PC correct “morality plays” that are going on now and in the last act. They (most Muslims) appear to be fence siting, wouln’t anyone that could be turned Anti American sit on a fence if listening to American MSM and the politicians that are now in “leadership” of America.
Their (Muslims) only salvation unless they to want to become “martyrs” will be internment when it gets bad enough–That means if they are successful enough and do enough damage and we– America will no longer be PC and fuzzy headed but will be vicous and lethal. Survival will be the stakes.
The greatest tragedy is that the psychotic liberal left wing idiots and some psychotic conservatives that are playing PC politics for short term political gains–that now seem to be providing leadership to a rudderless president are just that–psychotic.
A major American city going up in a vapor cloud will clear everyone’s head. Many anti Amerian nation’s leader would like to provide that sender unkown “letter”. Saddam won’t unless we let him out. It wouln’t surprise me baseed on the ISG idiots’ thinking.
Where is the leadership that we need? Begining with JFK’s Bay of Pigs fiasco, leaving Cuban freedom fighters to die on the beaches and LBJ’s cut and run we have had none except for Reagan. We now need to win to survive. Does anyone doubt that? Apparently.
In Vietnam our cut and run policy and the Democrat controlled Congressional betrayal (cut funding) of the South Vietnamese simply cost the lives of millions of innocents in IndoChina.
Maybe that is why we will reap what we have sown in the past. Millions are crying from the graves of our perfidity.
We(most Americans)do not even know what happened in Vietnam in the aftermath or our pull out. Was it reported? Not by ABC, CBS, NBC, or CNN to clear up the mess.
Now it will cost the lives of more Americans in America. It already has for all who have amnesia or think that if we can “communicate” our “love and understanding” of them and why they hate us—it will be OK and all this fuss will just”go away”. Oh I forgot!– we will also sell out Israel.
Our “needed public debate” (during a fighting war after the decision has been made to commit our blood) as described by Democrats and a leaderless president is also costing daily the lives of American soldiers,(our best, not those in Harvard or any other East Cost liberal Anti American bastion filling their heads with cobwebs and beer TGIF*ing) in Iraq simply because like jackels baiting a chained lion the Muslims know the length of the chain. It’s been published by the New York Times and their flock of “MSM chicks” and their defacto anti American, anti military editors. It has been called “needed” debating by left wing Democrates who pronounce judget on American Soldiers–Their judgement–Americans are worse than the enemy–we are the enemy. They do it with impunity under the cover of freedom of speech. America, the light of “Freedom” in the world, is being torn down from within by its very “leadership”. While doing so they assert their right to debate and free speech and make speeches on how patriotic they are.
The description “Muslim” is not lightly used. That is what they are. Eventually we will all know it. Not Terrorists, not extremists, simply Muslims believing in the “Teaching”.
Given the apparent collaps of the Bush Presidency and leadership—one can only hope that America will survive and prevail–that there are enough “non victim” Americans left who will be willing to pay the price needed to preserve freedoms fought for by better men and women than we now have leading us.
I remember a poignant letter from the father of a marine who was killed near the Parrots Beak area of Cambodia. The father found out that his son had been on a fire base which was subjected to repeated attacks from VC sanctuaries in the Parrots Beak area. VC could sneak into Vietnam, atttack and kill a few Americans and run back to Cambodia. As long as they got back they were safe from harm. This continued for several years.
The father had been Marine during WWII and regretted not preventing his son from joining the Marines during the Vietnam war. The Marine Corps he had been a part of would never have allowed that kind of situation to occur. They would have attacked the enemy and never allowed a sanctuary. He felt that his son’s life had been wasted.
I see a similar condition in Iraq. Iran and Syria are responsible for killing a lot of American soldiers and we have given them sanctuary. As a Vietnam veteran and the father of two teenage boys in college, I will regularly and continually talk against them joining the military, especially the Army or Marines. The life of one Marine should, at the least, be worth the Syrian or Iranian military. If we won’t protect our soldiers with all of our might then I don’t want my sons to be soldiers.
I too watched Jimmy Carter hawk his books on C-Span two weekends ago. I tried to call in but it was busy.
Here’s the question I wanted to pose, “Everyone agrees that Islamofascism is the greatest problem now facing the world. And it all really started when the “students” seized the American Embassy in Tehran. Credible media reports have stated that one of the “students” is now the President of Iran; the same guy who wants nuclear weapons and wants to wipe Israel off the map. ”
“Will you now admit you completely mishandled the capture of the American Embassy and apologize to the American people? And would you also tell us how you should have handled this matter?”
Point 2: VDH is right. The only thing those primitives in the Mideast understand is force of arms.
Dear Professor Hanson,
Thank you for your brilliant exposition.
I would like to remind all that according to Shelby Foote in “The Beleaguered City,” it took Ulysses Grant 7 tries to take Vicksburg and with success on the 8th. I would hazard a guess that his campaign strategy to take the city laid the conceptual foundation for Sherman’s march, i.e., an army living off the land.
Again, 7 failures before he took the city and at what a cost! For peace from Islamofacism and indeed all “isms”, this country is going to have to pay the “butcher’s bill.” Until the world knows for certain that this great country is not afraid of making this payment, it will not stop challenging us. As a Marine Corp combat veteran of the Korean War with pronounced PTSD symptoms told me, “the only thing worse than a failure is not trying.”
“Reading the columnists of the New York Times might make one forget that the present managers of a venerable newspaper inherited a noble legacy and have nearly ruined it within a mere twenty years—losing readers, issuing as many daily retractions as news scoops, and still not fully recovered from the Jason Blair scandal.”
It’s not just that they are hiding facts, distorting the ones they do profide, creating phony sources, supplying photoshopped photos…they are also complicit in giving away sensitive intelligence to the enemy.
The “old media” has long since thrown off the shroud of even pretending to be objective. And they have thrown down the gauntlet, after 40 years of slapping our faces with it.
The “old media” has an agenda. And they have placed a stranglehold on our information stream. Where we obtain our “facts” and “evidence” to make up our minds on important issues of the day, no longer comes from hardworking, dispassionate and objective gatherers and hunters, but rather from Ministries of Media branches in print, on the airwaves and on stage.
Properly cleansed of any and all divergent thought, it is brought to us filtered through the prisms and lenses of World Populists. And if the facts and evidence happen to be inconvenient, then giving us what we “need”, rather than what is…is certainly the wiser course of action.
After all, Jimmy Carter’s buddy…Michael Moore…says we Americans are too stupid (anyone who doesn’t agree with the World Populist playbook, is, by definition too stupid to know better)…so why not “give ‘em the facts as we want them to be, who cares how they really are”.
You can’t hardly get a tenured job at a campus in the humanities if you are not a member, you can’t become an anchor on the alphabet airwaves if you are not a member, you can’t become a leading actor or director if you are not a member….the places where our information and opinions are shaped…has been suffocated, strangled and held in a vice grip for 40 years.
The reason we don’t have the wind in our sails to press on….is because we get the hands around our throats of the press…off.
Watching CBS news requires amnesia, since it is impossible to take it seriously after Dan Rather serially, almost nightly, assured millions that a forged document that had fooled him was real. When I see a Reuters photo I look instinctively for signs of photo shopping. AP dispatches from the Middle East I assume are primarily the impressions of bought Arab stringers, ghost written by sympathetic Western journalists
Today I ventured beyond the confines of my study, crowded though it is with the textual endowments of Western culture, and drove in search of a meal. Not just any meal, of course, but a meal that stirred my primordial emotions and stripped away the thin veneer of civilization, exposing the true, raw and bloody vigor of life. The sort of meal I wanted was, of course, the sort of thing that today’s postmodern, urban gentry are unable to savor as they pull from the dry, groaning breast of political correctness. No, our cultural elites are unable to stoop to enjoy the ordinary pleasures of life. The warm, soft weight of a half-pound cheesy bean and rice burrito, for example, available as part of Taco Bell’s new Big Bell Value Menu, or a crispy, chewy Chalupa shell filled with ground beef, sour cream, shredded lettuce, and a blend of three cheeses — cheddar, pepperjack, and mozzarella, and diced ripe tomatoes. At Taco Bell, we find the simple elegance of true cultural diversity. Beans and cheese, I hardly need remind my readers, who probably tire of my repetition, but we may as well admit it — beans and cheese, elements of the earth and its domesticated livestock, thrown together by Mexican, Filipino, Chinese, Black and Punjabi workers, striving for the freedoms available only here in our land, with its traditions of virtue. Anywhere else in the world, they’d be slitting each other’s throats. Here, they ladle the beans and cheese. Is it any wonder that we defeated fascism in the 1940s? Why are we unable to tap this reservoir of determination today?
Mr. Davis, you might be interested to know that no U.S. Marine units fought near the Parrot’s Beak of Cambodia.
You might also be heartened to learn that the enemy “sanctuaries” in question were subjected to B-52 bombing missions and cross-border raids by MACV-SOG.
Further, when President Nixon thought the tactical situation advantageous, he invaded the Parrot’s Beak with ARVN troops and the 3d Bde, 9th Inf Div during the Summer of 1970.
Those (including Dr. VDH) who chalk up the disaster in Vietnam to enemy “sanctuaries” and the cut-off of funds by Congress might do well to study the inefficiency of the ARVN, the corruption of the various regimes in Saigon, and the incredible stamina of the VC and NVA.
For what it’s worth….
Perhaps there are glimpses of hope. As I note HERE, nothing speaks to the ingenuity of our military–and how it fuels the “western way of war” that VDH has taught us about–than this story about a US soldier’s request to his dedicated mom:
STRATFORD, N.J. — In an age of multimillion-dollar high-tech weapons systems, sometimes it’s the simplest ideas that can save lives. Which is why a New Jersey mother is organizing a drive to send cans of Silly String to Iraq.
American troops use the stuff to detect trip wires around bombs, as Marcelle Shriver learned from her son, a soldier in Iraq.
Before entering a building, troops squirt the plastic goo, which can shoot strands about 10 to 12 feet, across the room. If it falls to the ground, no trip wires. If it hangs in the air, they know they have a problem. The wires are otherwise nearly invisible.
Now, 1,000 cans of the neon-colored plastic goop are packed into Shriver’s one-car garage in this town outside Philadelphia, ready to be shipped to the Middle East thanks to two churches and a pilot who heard about the drive.
We should remember that even the legendary Ronald Reagan fled from the Islamists. In 1983, 241 American servicemen (220 Marines!) were murdered by a truck bomb in Lebanon. Reagan vowed to stay, Caspar Weinberger rejected retaliation and by February ’84, we pulled out.
On another topic, I wonder if the Iraq situation would have been better handled by a Curtis LeMay-type military leader. If the USA had been “cruel to be kind,” I suspect many Americans and even more Iraqis would still be alive.
Jack Marcotte’s comments have been “filtered” and deemed appropriate by the “moderator”?
Oh-kaaaaay.
Who are you people? Yeeesh.
Wake up and smell the coffee. Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld lost the war.
It’s over.
The American military can do nothing there any longer to create a “stable, secure, democratic” Iraq which respects the rights of religious minorities and women, and which will be an “ally” in the war on terror as well as a “beacon of freedom” to its neighbors.
It…ain’t…gonna…happen – pace raisin farming analogies.
It’s pretty telling that all the “victory” dead-enders *never* offer a plan for victory.
Hey Paul,
The “you people” you refer to go by many names. Try some of these for a start: patriots, humanitarians, freedom lovers, historians, warriors, and supporters of victory. Beats the labels I might apply to the opposition: defeatists, appeasers, cowards, faux pacifists, and utopian idealists. Come victory or defeat, I’d rather stand with the former.
As far as Bush, Cheney, et. al. are concerned, give it time and let history decide. But I’ll make a prediction: If Iraq is lost, a hostile media that has offered America a daly litany of defeat, just might be held accountable. The war will be lost through lack of resolve, and the press has done everything possible to undermine our determination as a nation.
The one institution that has not thrown in the towel is the American military. The various services take casualties everyday. But not once, not ever, in this entire conflict, have we suffered a military defeat. The Jihadists lose every confrontation where they are forced to face the American military.
Can Iraq build a civil society? Therein lies the question. We don’t know yet. But a premature abondonment means certain failure. Personally, I don’t have a yogi to instruct me how to be an enlightened soul. The only Yogi I know is an old ballplayer who once said, “it ain’t over till it’s over.” Good enough for me.
Wow, Mr. Pietrowski, I was all up for continuing the war for as long as it takes, but now that you’ve asked that all-important question — “Who are you people? Yeeesh.” — I can now see the error of my ways.
“It…ain’t…gonna…happen” was also particularly convincing. Your incisive prose and methodical reasoning powers should make our host hide his head in shame.
“Autumn of our retirement”. How about a nation of quitters? It troubles me to be so negative and perhaps even harsh, but reality begs as much. This is nothing new. I made the observation that we seem to be a nation either no longer concerned with solving problems or plain incapable of doing so many years ago. Which is the less desirable of the two, indifference or incompetence? There are some environmental factors that have fed this growing monster, chief among them 24 hour news-cycles. Certainly prosperity has played a major role, allowing a malaise and complacency to fall over the general public. Arrogance is aslo a factor. Not in the way some folks lament, but in the way that makes some believe that there are problems inherently un-american. One example of this is the second amendment. England and Australia have severely restricted if not banned all together the private ownership of firearms. Yet some Americans believe this to be but a pipe-dream for this nation for cultural reasons. In their minds the wild, wild west is still the predominant mind-set. They make the mistake of ignoring or perhaps they may not even be aware that the same forces that produced those results in those two nations are preparing that very scenario for the U.S. In this day and age, truth and result have very little to do with what is to become policy. What becomes policy these days is a strong PR campaign pushed by advocacy groups. The advocacy group that manages the most hype with the loudest voice wins. Of course a big check book helps to seal the deal, see George Soros.
We have a tax system that was built for the Middle Ages. This same system also manages to punish achievement. But the biggest sin of the old system is it’s use by politicians–to buy votes. Our solution? Blue-ribbon panels(see the ISG)that offer more of the same, only more of it. The solutions these panels come up with are even more redundant than the tax-code. What is the result? Good plans are demonized and bad plans are hailed as reform. Net result, the status quo.
Social Security has been bankrupt for a generation now and yet we pretend there is a surplus. I’m often reminded of the scene out of the movie Dumb and Dumber when the two main characters(broke losers)tell the kidnappers that even though they spent all the money, the IOU’s they wrote were “as good as money”. We also know that the coming baby-boom retirement is going to severely strain an already stressed-out failed govt. program. We know the truth about SSI but can’t come to grips with the fact that we have to radically change how we do business. Again, good ideas are demonized while the status quo is called reform when it can’t even serve as a band-aid for the problem let alone be called a cure.
These two domestic problems are but two of many, many problems we face in the coming years and decades. There was a time in this nation when bold was gold. Not anymore. Dare to propose a bold, new idea and prepare to feel the wrath of the victicrats and those who now make a living with their vote. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. This insanity now stands for what is reform…do more of the same only more.
The most dangerous of dangerous indifference is occuring in the area of national security. Yes, tax-reform and SSI reform are vitally important but pale in comparison to the lurking danger that is Islamo-Fascism. In fact, lurking is not the accurate term. Our enemies can no longer be said to be lurking. Thirty years ago yes, but not today. They couldn’t be more out in the open and obvious about their goals and plans. Again, we can see the problem. We all know what has to be done. Bold action is required…but when is the last time we were bold? What did the last thirty years bring us? Slow death. Today some advocate those same policies. This tells me they are prepared to live with a certain amount of death and destruction. How else to read this attitude? Anyone advocating a bold, strong response is said to be a “neo-con”, a “chicken-hawk”, a war monger. Those advocating appeasement? Oh, these people are “realists”. Really? What reality do they represent? The reality of the status quo, the throngs of timidity, the crowns of cowardice, the road-map of cut and run. The art of war has been replaced with the technique of talk, the special-ops of speech to be commanded by the Vicars of verbosity….better known as blow-hards. Negotiate for our right to live free. Is this what our founing Fathers fought and died for? Our right to negotiate our right to live free? Wasn’t it live free or die? Don’t tread on me, give me liberty or give me death. We are too fat my friends, fat on wealth, leisure, and convenience. The arrogance is the belief we can ignore those things which may inconvenience us. If it’s not affecting our wealth or leisure, then we can negotiate with it. What a dangerous time we live in my friends. Will we return once again to the nation that solves problems? Or continue down the path of least resistance……….
You gentlemen are certainly welcome to fling the insult “coward” at Mr. Pietrowski, but doing so while ducking his main objection (that you can’t smell the coffee, and don’t have any real answers)certainly isn’t very enlightning.
Bush, Cheney, etc., took a gamble when they invaded Iraq. If they were welcomed as liberators, then history would celebrate their decision. If the country instead became bogged down in a sectarian/guerrilla war, then their gamble would explode in their faces for the American public does not have the stomach for long, nasty, drawn-out wars on the other side of the world. (See: Vietnam.)
Anyway, it seems rather clear that the gamble did indeed blow up in the face of Bush and Cheney.
Why go ugly and imply that Mr. Pietrowski is a “coward” because he sees what is happening in Iraq through what I believe is a more realistic lense than VDH and his fan club here?
Incidentally, James Webb (no “coward” he, not with the Navy Cross and Silver Star) warned before the invasion of Iraq that we would become bogged down there with no exit strategy.
Blame the media for this turn of events, if you find that comforting. Or blame Howard Stern, as VDH did in a previous article.
But, victory or defeat, this is Bush’s war. It’s his to win or lose, not the media’s or all us doubting “cowards” out here.
Anyway, just thought someone out here should speak up for Mr. Pietrowski.
When three hundred Spartans marched out to stop two million Persians at Thermopylae, there were many who were crying for surrender before the battle had even begun. Oddly enough, those who had the most to lose materially were most reluctant to fight, yet those who had little, as the Spartans did, were most willing to fight, because all they had was their freedom, but it was worth fighting for.
Despite all the defeatism, the Spartans went and stopped the Persians, and made them pay so dearly that the Persians finally had to pay a Greek traitor, whose name is not remembered by history, but it might have been “Paul”, to show them how to bypass the Spartan position in the mountain passes so they could surround them. Two million couldn’t defeat three hundred face to face, and had to surround them, and finally use archers.
When the battle was over, all three hundred Spartans were dead, along with their King, Leonidas, as they knew would happen before they left home, but they had bought enough time for the rest of the Greeks to assemble and prepare, and the Persians were routed and defeated, and few made it home, despite the efforts of traitors. Will history repeat itself once again? Will those who prefer freedom, however uncertain, prevail over those who
would rather be kept in comfortable slavery?
The problem of the West is that too many of us are rich, spoiled, and effeminate, and would rather surrender than fight, because fighting is dirty and dangerous. If we survive this Age of the Metrosexual, it’ll be a miracle; our forces are standing at Thermopylae now, and there are many who are willing to show the enemy the way behind their lines.
The plain and simple of it is that the people against the war in Iraq are determined to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. All this to justify their contempt for Bush and his policies, and any committments to allies, our supporters in the Iraqi people, or honoring the dedication, expertise, and sacrifices of our own military be damned.
Though I hate to say it, the U.S. government is beginning the slow process of abandoning Iraq. (They can’t even use the appropriate term for it: “redeployment” instead of withdrawal, or more precisely, retreat.”)I believe we are going to witness a repeat of the shameful evacuation of Vietnam in Iraq, so the anti-war liberals in the government can vindicate their broken record comparisons of the two conflicts.
I feel the need to repeat often the mission of the Infantry of the US Army, and by extension of the entire US Army. Close with and destroy the enemy or his will to resist. We have to recognize that all Army training is directed to this end or to supporting this end. This mission today, because we now have a volunteer Army, suits not only the past and present wishes of our government and citizenry but the spirit of those serving in the Army. To now ask them almost to a person to become merely instructors to the willing and unwilling Iraqis of their police and army, which seems what Baker et al are suggesting, is to ask, perhaps, too much. The war is not lost. We have prevented a lot of war-making in fact. No wonder it is taking so long. I’m not sure the new Sec of Defense is the right guy at the right time. We’ll see.
I have never responded to a comment, but I believe I must in regards to a Mr. Nolan post. Mr. Nolan, I must respectfully disagree with your main point. This is not a “Bush/Cheney” war. Whether one likes it or not, we have a political process in this country that allows the people to elect their government(unlike Iraq circa Saddam). This current administration was elected twice. Therefore they are our representatives, they are the face of America. This president is the commander-in-chief. He and his team made the decision in the post 9/11 world to change the regime in Iraq. Agree or disagree, this decision was made. We had a national debate and votes in Congress. The decision was made. The military in spectacular fashion dethroned Saddam in two weeks. This military was not there representing Bush/Cheney. It is not the Bush/Cheney military. It is the United States military representing the United States. This is the main problem I have with those who oppose our presence in Iraq. You don’t have to agree that it was the right thing to do, but for God’s sake at least understand this is OUR war. Get on board with the notion of victory, support our desire to win. You cannot believe that a defeat would benefit the U.S. I would hope that at the least you would want our situation to be improved, that our national security be stronger as a result. I also hope that you do not wish the military to lose. I believe you to be a man of integrity, I believe you are sincere in your beliefs. All I ask of you is what I asked of myself during the Clinton years. I didn’t think our national interests were served in the Balkans intervention, this was a problem for Europe to handle. I lost the debate, we got involved. Once this happened, my attention turned to the success of our military operation. I wanted victory, a solution to the problem. It didn’t matter to me that Clinton would get the credit, that was irrelevant. What mattered is that I’m an American and I want America to succeed in their military missions.
As for the media being to blame if defeat comes, well, they will certainly have a played a role. Will they merit the full brunt of blame? No. But the word complicity certainly comes to mind. I’m not going to go through the litany of true media bias, inaccuracies, intentional lies, and down-right laziness. This would be a waste of time for I don’t believe you would entertain even the possibility of media complicity. Cronkite certainly influenced Vietnam, just ask Johnson(yes you would need a para-normal contact to do so). It is difficult in Iraq, to say the least, but what operation of this magnitude wasn’t? Has there ever been a cake-walk in a nation’s transition to freedom? Did I miss my history lesson on this nations struggle for representative govt.? We had our sectarian violence in the 1800′s, our civil rights violence of the 1950′s and 60′s, what’s new? Iraq may never realize total freedom, this I understand. But one way to ensure that is by giving up and leaving them to suffer at the hands of the foreign terrorists. It’s 60 years later and we still have a military presence in Germany and Japan. We still have a force of 40,000 troops in S. Korea. We have bases and troops all over the world looking out for our interests. Are we always right? No. But more often than not we are. Spreading the ideal of freedom can hardly be described as an imposition. We have a real enemy out there Mr. Nolan and I just wish that those opposed to the Iraq war realized that enemy is the Islamo-Fascists, not the occupant at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave……..
Not quite sure why I came out as “anonymous” in my post above, some computer glitch I presume, but I am perfectly content to be quoted as pointing at the media as a key problem in attempting to defeat our enemies.
Paul and Keith are entitled to believe that everyone who doesn’t see this as “Bush’s war”, or that we haven’t woken up and smelled the coffee… because we don’t “realize” that imported Iranian and Syrian provocateurs are “defeating” us militarily in Iraq.
Sorry, democracies in their infancy sometimes have hurdles to overcome. I seem to remember that it was CLINTON who signed into law,… regime change in Iraq. I seem to remember that it was Clinton, Albright, Cohen, Berger et al, who claimed that leaving Saddam in power was the greatest danger to America, Israel and the world.
So, please pardon me…(as a proud card carrying member of VDH’s fan club)…for not seeing this as “Bush’s war”, but America’s…and since our men and women are still over there…for not besmirching their ability to win it.
And, if I may ask…why are leftists so invested in calling an ongoing game in the top of the 3rd inning…a loss? Isn’t that a bit early? (although, I seem to remember most of them saying we lost, during the national anthem. Of course, none of them were standing, nor did they remove their hats).
We WON militarily in removing Saddam. Handily. Yet, do you leftists miss him and his woodchippers that much?
This ongoing contest of wills is about allowing freedom and democracy to gain a foothold for people who had been brutalized and kept under a horrific dictator’s thumb. Are you rooting against that? Why?
If your position is still…”we shouldn’t have gone there”…don’t look now, but that bus has left the station. Please…please…hop on another one and quit whining about the fact that you can’t get on the last one.
Are the Iraqi people less deserving? Not worth it? Should we bring back Saddam’s sons and the rape rooms for your amusement?
What, exactly is your issue? It can’t be that you don’t realize that soldiers die when in theater. It’s a terrible, tragic reality of triumphing good over evil…sometimes evil lands a punch.
Imported terrorists intend to create chaos and make it difficult to let freedom ring. Therefore what, …we should abandon our posts, because heaven knows…if it isn’t easy, it’s not worth it, right?
For my money, why don’t we put aside the leftist subliminal rooting for a loss and let the contest of good vs. evil progress, while you pretend that you actually would like it to turn out well,… at least for an inning or two longer.
Hmmm…after reading that last sentence about our dear leftists, NOW, I believe I should wake up and smell the coffee…
We continue to allow Iran and Syria to kill American troops by proxy in Iraq and they are getting help from Saudi Arabia (money and Sunni suicide bombers) Jordan (suicide bombers) and perhaps even Egypt. Bush is a republican but he has been fighting this war like a Democrat and getting a lot of American servicemen killed needlessly. If and when the Syrian and Iranian military ceases to exist because of heavy American bombing, the suicide bombings in Iraq will drop to a very small number and the Iraqi forces would be able to manage without a lot of direct US involvement. We are very good at destroying the military capability of entire countries and with us in the middle east Iran and Syria don’t need to have an Army, Air Force or Navy. The only purpose would be to kill Americans and Israelis.
Keith and Paul,
We consider people like you cowards because that’s what you are. The enemy wants to fight us whether we want to fight them or not, and despite whatever idiotic delusions one may have, this was was not started by George Bush or anyone else alive today; it was begun almost fifteen centuries ago by a psychopathic child molester half a world away, and the muslims have always been the aggressors, despite what apologists like you have to say. If you’re so sure they’re gonig to win, and you won’t help us fight them, then just get a ticket to Iraq or Afghanistan, buy an AK, and help them fight us. You clearly favor them over us, but if you won’t even fight for the side you’ve chosen, then yes, you’re a coward.
So it is fine for Mr. Pietrowski to ask, “Who are you people? Yeeesh” and label posters, “”victory” dead-enders” who “*never* offer a plan for victory.”; but not OK to respond and question his comments?
No one labled Pietrowski a coward directly, nor should they. For all we know he could be pro-war – but for the other side.
And as far as ducking the question goes, VDH lays out a blueprint for victory in the last 4 paragraphs of his post. Here’s a hint – they’re in Italics.
Finally, whenever I run into someone who discusses the “war” in terms of ownership by Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld I generally tune them out as “bumper sticker” pundits who have little or nothing to add to a mature conversation. Please refrain from engaging in that level of silliness.
PS: VDHs comment RE:Howard Stern was on the topic of cultural debasement and not the war. Do you have some sort of comprehension problem?