While Losing The War…
I’m not quite sure what happened to the United States since the end of World War II, but we’ve definitely forgotten how to effectively fight a war and how to completely defeat an enemy.
Even in WWII we screwed around and let communist Russia continue to fester rather than adding them to the list of victories along with Germany and Japan. General Patton wanted us to keep on rolling east into Russia from Europe and had the politicians and the media allowed him to get his wish, imagine how much quieter the next forty years would have been? And think of the money we would have saved on defense?
Next look what a stupid, time consuming, waste of money the concept of having an East and West Germany was. For some reason, which is beyond my understanding, we allowed the Berlin wall to exist when we had in fact defeated the Germans and could have (and should have) told them “hell no” when they wanted to make half the country a Soviet supported communist state.
Again, there you find the product of our lily livered politicians (Democrats AND Republicans) and the leftist members of the mainstream media. They want us to treat our enemies like a bully on the school playground—punch them in the nose, knock them down, and make them all yell “UNCLE.” Instead of finishing the fight, we always let our adversaries back on their feet; dust themselves off, “save face,” only to allow them to come back another day to start picking another fight with the world.
We pushed the communists out of South Korea in the 1950’s and then settled for a “demilitarized zone” along the 38th parallel. What did we get as a country out of that “police action’s” non-victory? We get to fool around with the little troll dictator (Kim Jong Il) fifty years later while the citizens of North Korea stave to death and he threatens the world with nuclear bombs.
Then along comes the Viet Nam conflict. I seem to recall that we inherited that war from the French. President Kennedy jumped in with both feet, Johnson waded in hip deep and even being a Democrat he couldn’t save his political career as a result. Then Nixon was elected to finish the battle, but the media was dead set against him AND the war and the American people got tired of twelve years of fighting (what I call pussy footing around) and we pulled out leaving Saigon to become Ho Chi Men City.
What a waste.
Continuing in our ever developing long line of (non)victories, we have the Gulf War—Chapter I staring President George H W Bush. We pounded Saddam’s “Republican Guard” and had the country on it’s knees in a matter of weeks, but the media and the United Nations and our pansy assed Congress decided to let Saddam cry “uncle” (with his fingers crossed behind his back.)
Talk about “snatching defeat from the jaws of victory…” We then have to spend the next ten years watching President Clinton and the UN inspectors play peek-a-boo with Saddam, even allowing him to push the inspectors out for the last FOUR years before Bush “mislead America into the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time."
Now we’re BACK in Iraq and have spent the past two and one half years doing what Bush 41 should have been allowed to do in 1992. And since Americans are afraid of casualties and a big ground war we’ve allowed the media and the politicians to once again “armchair quarterback” us into the current “quagmire.”
I guaran-damn-tee you that IF our military had been allowed to enter Iraq and fight this war the EXACT way it needed to be fought, with the troop strengths we REALLY needed, WITHOUT at the same time listening to polls, conducting a PR campaign, and worrying about what would be printed on the front pages of the NY and LATimes, there would have been fewer American deaths and much less “insurgency.”
The reality is that the Iraqi people would still be about where they are in creating a new government. You do remember that it took us ELEVEN years to write our constitution?
That’s right, we declared independence from England in 1776 and we wrote the constitution in 1787.
So what’s our hurry in Iraq? How can Senator Kennedy and the media call the situation a “quagmire”?
What really pisses me off is how the media and the “political doves” tell us how to fight a war, and then step away from the outcome if it is negative. They tie our hands, trumpet the death of each and every soldier, publish false accounts of war atrocities from liars like Staff Sgt. Jimmy Massey (a John Kerry wanna be), and generally make the proper, brutal, devastating execution of the war impossible.
Last time I checked, fighting a war involved activities like breaking things and killing people. War is not a tea party. War is not a Debutant ball. Somebody (I forget who) once said that “War is Hell…”
This brings me to the point of my story today: Ohio Congressman John Murtha’s call for the immediate withdrawal of our troops from Iraq. I wrote about him on Thursday.
What a useless, partisan, insincere asshole Murtha is. Of course the media has played this story like Murtha is some kind of War Hawk because he is a decorated ex-Marine. Ex-Marine he is, but he is suffering from a severe case of Democratic partisan induced cirrhosis of the brain causing him to deliver massive quantities of “Kerryisms” in front of TV cameras, microphones, and his fellow congressmen.
I found myself laughing my rear end off last night when Dennis Hastert and the rest of the Republicans called Murtha’s bluff.
It turns out that the Democrats didn’t really want to actually have to VOTE on leaving Iraq as Murtha and Kennedy and Dean and the rest of “the usual suspects” have so publicly demanded. The idea of demanding a "plan and/or date for withdrawal" and all of the associated hooplah is apparently a publicity stunt designed to undermine President Bush and the war effort.
Gee, can you imagine that?
Their actual reasons didn’t matter because the Republicans decided to give them their way, put a nonbinding resolution on the floor. Funny thing, Murtha and his fellow Dem’s suddenly had a change or heart or a case of amnesia or something because they didn’t want to have to actually VOTE on pulling out—they just want to talk about and demand that we pull out of Iraq.
In the end, the Republicans shoved the issue down their throats and forced the house to vote on an immediate pullout from Iraq.
The bill lost 403-3, with a number of congressmen not voting or only voting as “present.”
I haven’t used these words so far in writing today, so here goes…CHICKEN SHIT.
It seems, in my somewhat limited Redneck mind, that this issue—pulling out of Iraq before we’re through fighting and defeating our enemy—should now be a moot point.
Yet I know that it won’t be, because the media is biased and disreputable and the Democrats are just plain too worried about regaining their power at all costs to let the president finish what we have started. Things should be very interesting over the next few weeks as the congress takes their end of the year break and the media plays ping pong with the War on Terror.
I have just two final things to say on the subject of demanding an “exit strategy.”
First, the president and our military leaders need to be allowed to fight and finish this war based on their knowledge and experience, not advice delivered from the mouth of Ted Kennedy and written by Paul Krugman on the editorial page of the NY Times.
And Second, I’d like say to John Murtha…”SHUT THE F**K UP, YOU DODDERING OLD IDIOT.”
3 comments:
I've been saying it for some time now, we've forgotten how to prosecute a war. It's a skill that we need to relearn PDQ, as the upcoming war with China is gonna make T.W.A.T (the war against terror) look like a nice sunday drive through the desert. The pending Sino-American war WILL be a war for oil...
General Casey of the United States armed forces submitted a timetabled plan for withdrawal to the Pentagon the day before Murtha spoke. You can bet DOD didn't ask them for it.
Murtha is generally and correctly percieved to be a direct dial-up to what the JCOF brass are thinking.
The army itself thinks this war is pointless bleeding. Generals aren't making speeches about it, because they have a job to do, but General Shinsheki tried to tell Rumsfield that we would need 400K troops to do this job and got shitcanned for it. That's because we don't have 400K available troops, regardless of what our active duty stats say. In other words, the message was that this war can't be done, at least not without really shaking up the homeland. Which Bush, from your POV, wimped out on, but again, realism is that he never had a political hope in hell of instituting a draft.
It should also be mentioned that The American people did not write their constitution over 11 years under the saturation presence of troops from a foriegn country. The US hasn't fought a war of that timetable ever in its political life. That may have something to do with its ability to survive as a first-rate power, unlike, say, Imperial Spain or colonial France. Long wars suck countries dry.
Iraq's regional environment and political history dooms it to be a violent, chaotic, repressive regime for the near future. Whatever marginal changes we can make to that dynamic have already been made. We're dying with no victory in sight, and it's not because politicians are holding gloves on the soldiers. This is a fantasy you use to express your hatred and disdain, no more, no less. The US is using exactly as much force as can be used while trying to establish a liberal, stable democratic government. You can't build a western democracy while acting like the Khmer Rouge.
If you were capable of disinterested thought on the real nature of these situations, you'd be able to put forth a civil response to these statements of fact. But I don't think you're up to it, so I expect you'll respond with a wild-eyed bundle of insults.
Do your country a service, and stop letting dumb-ass machismo and thinly veiled bloodlust compensate for some real awareness of America's abilities and limitations.
See my posting called "An Intelligent Comment" for my answer to the above anonymous comment...
Post a Comment