In Their Own Words
Hypocrites is exactly the right word.
Posted by CKO86
10/29/2006 at 04:38 PM
Saddam needed to have his ass kicked. We did a piss poor job of policing the country after we summarily kicked his ass, in record time, with a minimum amount of troops.
At this point however, we either need to ratchet up the troop levels to a sufficient level to quash this civil war, or partition the country and get out.
I am with Ben Stein on this one:
Times are very tough in Iraq and if I was still a speechwriter for the President, like I was for Mr. Nixon and Mr. Ford, this is what I would suggest he say:
My fellow Americans, I have some sobering news. It is my duty, above all, to protect the nation. I sincerely believed I was doing that when I ordered the invasion of Iraq. I still believe Saddam Hussein was the most dangerous man in the world. But it is clear to me now that things are not working out well in Iraq. Despite the incredible confidence, bravery and sacrifice of our men and women on the ground there, Iraq is still a violent, largely out of control nation. We may be making more terrorists than we destroy. “Quagmire” comes sadly to mind. It is clear that change must be made. Therefore, I have this morning accepted Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld’s resignation with sincere thanks for his service to the nation. He will be replaced by a truly heroic American, Senator John McCain of Arizona.
Despite my best intentions, I made mistakes in Iraq and mine is the responsibility. Good men and women died and hard-earned tax money was lost. Fine young men and women are crippled and disabled, which is a tragedy. It is time for a change. Therefore, I am convening an official, national, bi-partisan, blue ribbon commission composed of Democrats, Independents and Republicans, civilian and military, to start meeting at once and give me a recommendation in one month as to what our Iraq policy should be. All options are on the table. All.
I want to close with this thought. I am just a man. I have no miraculous powers. I have no special pipeline to God. Like all presidents from Jefferson and Lincoln onwards — and believe me, I know I’m not in their league — I make mistakes and sometimes good people die because of them. I am deeply sorry. As we re-examine our policy, I would ask that you all pray for us to make the right decision. May God continue to bless us all. Thank you.
AMEN, STAN!
I’ll go along with every word of that. Think Dubya is big enough to eat a little crow and do it? Would the Democrats shut up long enough to go along? Would Rummy go quietly? Perhaps Dubya cound send him on a hunting trip with Cheney? Maybe invite Hillary, Teddy, Kerry, Dean and Schumer to go along for the fun? Many possibilities.
Something’s gotta give though. And soon. Stein is right.
As much as I love Ben Stein, I think he’s dead wrong here. His little proto-speach sounds like it was written for Jimmah Carta. Didn’t Stein write Nixon’s resignation? Sure sounds like it.
Replacing Rummy with McCain is akin to instant surrender. There would only be one strategy on the table at Stein’s proposed meetings, and it would be made up of scissors and sneakers.
Yes mistakes were made. The main one was that Washington, like Israel this past summer, let the press, the lefties, and the euro-wimps sap their will, and didn’t have the backbone to actually fight a WAR. This was obvious to lots of people more than two and a half years ago.
You fight a war to win, or you don’t fight at all. That means you choose one of only two goals ahead of time - either total subjugation of the enemy population or complete annihilation of the entire country, and you do everything and anything necessary to meet your goal in the shortest time possible. If you don’t want either of those goals then you don’t fight a war. It IS that simple.
W should have had Basic American Government In A Box ready to go before the first bomb dropped. A 20 year plan that would train Iraqis to be NewAmericans. My plan would have started by renaming the place Babylon and turning the whole country back into the terraced farmland it was 3000 years ago. Well fed people who make good money from their own efforts don’t run around bombing things. Let’s not forget that Iraq is the land of the garden of Eden. Want the other moosies to behave? Lookie here ... paradise on earth. Wanna slice? Then play things our way. Turn Iraq into paradise and turn Syria into glass. Two simple object lessons even a camel could understand.
It is not likely to happen before the election. The Republican Party seems to be out of ideas at this point (other than to declare war on Mexico).
This election is a referendum on George Bush. I think that he is in way over his head. He is loyal to his friends, to a fault. He “stays the course” even when the course is heading over a cliff.
We are doomed.
Maybe the best thing that could happen for the Republican Party at this point is a sound thrashing at the polls. We need to be put on the bench for one election cycle and see if we can extract our heads from our asses.
I may not even bother to vote this time around. I live in Texas. Kay Bailey is a lock. Rick Perry is an Aggie. Voting for Kinky Friedman might be fun, but he has no chance of winning and would probably be a disaster as Governor.
Bull Moose Party eh???
Drew,
Babylon has a nice ring to it. If you were to partition the country, you would have to come up three different names. Maybe you could call one of them Babylon. I may vote for you for President next time.
Where do you go to buy that “Basic American Government In A Box” thingy? We should keep several of them in storage somewhere for future use. Castro is almost dead…
One wonders what would have happened, had such suggestions been put forward after Kasserine Pass, for example, or after Savo, or after a few months in Guadalcanal.
This is not the way to inspire confidence. It is tantamount to a confession of unfitness, which is precisely what would be welcomed by those subversives in our midst who have undermined our entire Iraq effort from the beginning. Stein’s article is littered with shibboleths straight from the donk playbook. “Quagmire” and “making more terrorists than we destroy” are two examples.
Suppose Dubya did eat crow, gave such a speech, and called for such a commission? There would be no cooperation from the donks. There would be only “told-you-so” catcalls from their side, and a renewal of calls for either resignation or impeachment. Not to mention more howling to cut and run! Having precious damned little humility themselves, the donks do NOT respect it in anyone else. And their presence on a so-called “blue ribbon commission” would be no different from asking the Copperheads (Democrats, incidentally) to help prosecute the Civil War. It would be simply giving them an inside track on sabotage, all in the interest of their own political ends. And we need not be reminded that such has been their policy from the beginning. Matters would only be worse after such a maneuver as Stein calls for, not better.
I agree that considerable corrective measures should be taken in Iraq. It should have been cleaned up long ago. Our mistake was in doing things by halves. What is begun must be finished, and in any event, we cannot afford to pull out until Saddam Hussein is dead. That much at least must be achieved, unless we want a first-class disaster on our hands.
Why? It is clear to see that there is no real enthusiasm for prosecuting him, let alone executing him. They are procrastinating at every turn, stalling for time in the classic Arab fashion. And if we do pull out before they finally get around to executing him? Do not be surprised to find him back in office within a month, as a symbol of Islamic triumph over the infidel!
Even if there is no love for him, such a maneuver could too easily be employed, in order to destroy our face and illuminate our failure in a blaze of light and glory for the entire Islamic world to see. And what then? They would regard our failure as their greatest success since they butchered their way from Baghdad to Bali and Barcelona, over a thousand years ago. Their confidence in opposing the West would be raised to levels unheard of, and anything we have seen so far would be peanuts to what would follow. 9/11 would become only a frontispiece to a great and tragic volume.
Tannenberg,
This is turning into a fine and lively discussion.
I am glad you are confident. I am not.
How do we get this situation under control without reviving the draft, building up the troop levels to 500K (not that I think that is not a plausable option, it just won’t win the election)?
I disagree that “What is begun must be finished.” It didn’t work too well for Japan.
Anonymous,
You should get acquainted with Tannenberg. You both have an interest in military history and a snappy writing style.
“Cut and Run,” also known as “Retreat” is not always a bad thing. It is a valid military response to certain tactical situations. A prudent General should always consider this as an option. Napoleon and Hitler would have been well advised to “Cut and Run” before finding themselves ass deep in a Russian snowdrift.
Sam Houston, our Texas icon, pulled a “Cut and Run” at the Alamo and Goliad before kicking Santa Anna’s ass at San Jacinto.
I am sure that even Zaphod Beeblebrox would understand this.
Sometimes, if you are not winning, it is appropriate to bench someone and try something different. Bill Parcells benched Bledso and started Romo this week and as of this moment, the Cowboys are up 21 to 14.
Jerry Jones will fire Bill Parcells pretty soon if he can’t win.
Jerry Jones sometimes will fire a coach who actually wins (not a great stratigic thinker, Jones).
I will take your exortation to “Vote” under advisement.
Stan, this is indeed a fine and lively discussion, and I wish we had more of the sort. And I very much appreciate your compliment on my writing style.
You suggested confidence on my part, and I am indeed confident that the proper way exists to be found. Whether or not we will find it is, of course, problematical. On the one hand, after all, we have a kennelful of dogs who want us to lose at all costs, simply in the interest of their own political gain. And on the other side, we seem to have puppies.
I stand by my claim that we must finish what we began. The reason that didn’t work well for Japan is that they started the game with little or no bench support, and once their team on the field was decimated, they had few backups. This was particularly true of the naval (and naval aviation) side of the war.
Our basic problem is doing things by halves, as I said. We won the war swiftly, but then we began to fritter away the occupation. It is not enough merely to beat an enemy into submission and occupy his turf. That merely shows the size of your club. It is ABSOLUTELY MANDATORY that you maintain NO doubt that if necessary, you will use that club again, with no holds barred. Maintain that certainty during an occupation, and it will go as smoothly as the Japanese occupation went for MacArthur. And heaven knows that Islamic kamikaze types are hardly more fanatical than the original model.
But Iraq? Since the very day we rolled into Iraq, what has the world seen and heard but catcalling and caterwauling about a divided America, an America without resolve, without direction, without the will to see things through? And thanks to whom??? If you want someone to thank for “making more terrorists than we destroy,” then thank the slimy likes of Kennedy, Kerry, Reed, Gore, Schumer, Shrillery and company, with special thanks to the Hollywood booboisie and the MSM propaganda ministry.
I fear that the only way to retrieve that situation now is to bring Thor’s hammer down so hard that the very grains of Iraqi sand split open. And that, unfortunately, is beyond the mice in Washington at the moment (and it was always beyond the rats who are trying to displace them).
I go along with our anonymous friend in exhorting you to vote. But PLEASE forget any Bull Moose fantasies. Remember the last attempt? Someone called Perot, who succeeded in inflicting Bill Clinton on us, while succeeding at little else?
And as I recall, the original Bull Moose attempt didn’t work out too well, either. It simply guaranteed the election of the man from whose fertile brain sprang the League of Nations, the original UN.
Tannenberg,
I think that we probably agree on more points than we disagree. We won the war and lost the occupation. We would need far more boots on the ground than what we have now to quash this civil war. I don’t think that the political will exists to do that. I would suggest a strategic retreat at this point.
As you well know, the map in the Middle East was created by drawing lines in the sand after the fall of the Ottoman Empire. That is why there are so many straight lines on the map. I believe that we should draw a few more. We need to create three areas. “Kurdistan” is a good name (that should make the Turks nervous), the Kurds can go there. It should be in the North. Drew suggested “Babylon”, I like the sound of that. It should be in the west, away from Iran. The Shiites can go there. The Sunnis should be allowed to retain the name “Iraq”. It should be in the east on the border with Iran. Divvy up Baghdad into three sections like the old Berlin.
At this point we retreat out of all the cities and go fortify positions on top of the oil fields and at the borders of Iran and Syria. Carnage on a massive scale will then ensue.
After a victor emerges, we negotiate with them to get their oil back.
What do you think?
Stan, we always agreed much more than we disagreed. I haven’t forgotten the discussions we had on illegal immigration a year or two back. Then it was more or less the two of us against all comers.
Yes, I know how the Middle East map was created. Frankly, the map of Iraq was largely drawn up in terms of what was left over from Turkey proper (where Kemal Ataturk was kicking fundamentalist ass into line), Syria (a Fwench mandate under the League of Nations), the Transjordan-Palestinian lands (under British mandate), independent Iran under the Shah, and the independent kingdom of Saudi Arabia, forged by Ibn Saud. A few independent sheikdoms like Kuwait, Qatar, and the so-called Trucial States were also recognized as such, and left out of consideration.
The British, it seems, were interested in creating a kingdom for T.E. Lawrence’s old associate, Feisal, to rule (yes, as a payoff for his services against the Ottoman Turks). His brother Abdullah had already set up shop in the Transjordan, another British mandate, and Feisal had ruled in Syria until the Fwench found him too uppity and kicked him out. These brothers were sons of Husein, the Sherif of Mecca, who was sent packing by Ibn Saud in his wars to unify Arabia, and the British at least recognized the value of a counterweight to Ibn Saud under a rival house. In Abdullah and Feisal, they got two such counterweights, and thus set the Transjordan and Iraq on their way.
You suggest dividing the country along ethnic and/or sectarian lines. Hoping for pacification, the Fwench tried that in Syria during their League mandate (Syria has, or had, an even worse ethnic and/or sectarian problem than Iraq). The result was something like six civil wars and/or revolutions between 1919 and 1942. And incidentally, Syria (loyal to Vichy) and Iraq (stirred up by Rashid Ali) damn near fell under Axis dominion during the war.
So your prophecy of conflict after dividing the country is very logical. But the division itself must be considered far more carefully than it was in League of Nations days. It is no longer a matter of penciling in leftover places on the map.
The Kurds are probably the only easy mark, living almost to a man in the northern provinces as they do. Separating Sunnis from Shias was once largely a matter of separating townsfolk from country folk. I do not know if that still largely holds true, or not. And time was when there were numerous small minorities, such as Chaldean Christians, a handful of Turks (mostly around Mosul), Yezedis (devil worshipers), Assyrians, wild tribesmen of the Euphrates, primitive Marsh Arabs and Bedouins, and as many as 70,000 Jews. One hears very little about these folk nowadays, and it may be that Saddam left nothing to be heard about most of them.
But it might be worthwhile, indeed, to borrow a shibboleth from Woodrow Wilson and call for “self-determination” for the various peoples of Iraq--and then let them go at it, while we quietly sidle aside and hold the ring. As far as the Kurds are concerned, we should certainly hear from Turkey about it, as you suggest, for an independent Kurdistan would be to Turkey’s Kurdish minority what Serbia was to the South Slavs in the Habsburg Empire. But that can be smoothed over, and as for all the others?
(sardonic smile) Why not?
Tannenberg,
How very good to hear from you again. I appreciate a man who can send me to the dictionary to look up “shibboleth”. I think I have since reconsidered the notion of creating three independent states, Kurdistan, Babylon and Iraq. Perhaps it would be better to create one Iraq with three semi-autonomous provinces; maybe Kurdistan, Babylon and, oh what the Hell, Jihadistan.
I agree that our best bet would be to back the Kurds. We let them get slaughtered by the thousands, by poison gas attacks, after the first Gulf War. We owe them a bit of a favor. We should see that as many of the oil fields as possible should be within their borders. Our retreat probably should be mostly into Kurdistan. The Turks are going to have a cow about this, but they are members of NATO.
We would still need to protect the pipelines and the port to the Persian Gulf.
The GOP is about to lose the House to the Democrats. We may retain the Senate. Even if we don’t, the Senate is the venue for an impeachment trial. You need a 2/3’s vote to impeach.
GW will be a lame duck President at this point. Declaring “Self Determination” for the Iraqis seems like a wonderfully magnanimous thing to do. “We are weary of the bloodshed…”, “Peace for the average Iraqi…”, you get my drift.
Then step back and let them have at it. Use our Air Force to keep Syria and Iran out of it. Let the UN a cow.
The Sunnis and the Shiites might just find a way to resolve their differences under such circumstances.
If GW were to have the cajones to do such a thing, we might lose the next Presidential election, but the die would already be cast in Iraq.
One big difference between this situation and Japan is that Macarthur wrote the constitution for Japan. We are way to PC to do that these days
