The War

In recent days, the conversation on Iraq seems to center around 'how are we going to get out', rather than what should be the obvious question, 'how are we going to win'. Some Americans from both political parties have decided that getting out is the goal. They are wrong. That has never been and never should be the goal of America. Winning this war is the only end we should be working toward.

Many don't believe that Iraq is part of the total war on terror, but it is. It's one battle that must end in victory for all who are serious about defeating Islamic terrorism and keeping that terror away from American soil.

Fred Barns talks about the receiving line at the White House Christmas party. Oh to be a fly on that wall and listen to the comments offered to the President"
23

"Don't let the bastards get you down." Bush, slightly startled but cheerful, replied, "Don't worry. I'm not." The guest followed up: "I think we can win in Iraq." The president's reply was emphatic: "We're going to win." Another guest informed Bush he'd given some advice to the Iraq Study Group, and said its report should be ignored. The president chuckled and said he'd made his position clear when he appeared with British prime minister Tony Blair. The report had never mentioned the possibility of American victory. Bush's goal in Iraq, he said at the photo-op with Blair, is "victory." source

Fred Barns continues, "Bush is ready to gamble his presidency on a last-ditch effort to defeat the Sunni insurgency and establish a sustainable democracy in Iraq. He is prepared to defy the weary wisdom of Washington ..." We can only hope that Fred is right.

The Pentagon's most recent report is pretty gloomy. In 'its most pessimistic report yet on progress in Iraq, the Pentagon described a nation listing toward civil war, with violence at record highs of 959 attacks per week, declining public confidence in government and "little progress" toward political reconciliation.' It would seem President Bush has some hard decisions to make and his Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has been extremely quiet on the subject.

Fred Hiatt of The Washington Post believes Secretary Rice 'thinks that former secretary of state James Baker just doesn't get how the Mideast has changed since he last plied the peacemaking shuttle 15 years ago.'

Of course she makes it clear in characteristic Rice fashion: polite, correct, not personal -- but also forceful and eloquent and unmistakable. Start with democracy, a word conspicuously deemphasized by Baker and co-chair Lee Hamilton in their Iraq Study Group report. They want Rice to talk with Iran and with Syria, which is busy undermining democracy in Lebanon

Rice says. "The United States has always been most effective when it is leading both from power and principle," she said. And: "I don't see how the United States of America can ever back off of that commitment in the search somehow for stability -- which I am quite certain will be a false stability." The false stability, she implies, of accommodating dictators in Syria and Iran. source

Politicians are divided into two camps, (1) send more troops and (2) get the troops out. The latter believes our troops are the problem and sending more would just make things worse. The former believes, like General John Abizaid, 'who told students at a Harvard lecture, "This is an Army built to achieve victory with speed and precision. This is a short-war Army fighting a long war."

Robert Gates, who is planning a trip to Iraq, said he was "open to the possibility of an increase", the ISG stated "America's military capacity is stretched thin", and Gen. Peter Schoomaker told Congress that the Army is prepared to add up to 7,000 soldiers per year to its ranks if authorized. With the potential for future conflict in the world today, America does not need a military that is stretched thin.

We need a robust military, able to supply soldiers and equipment at a moment's notice to anywhere in the world and still have troops to spare. We need to let the troops we have in Iraq do what they are trained to do ... win by defeating the enemy. Years ago Rush Limbaugh said the purpose of the military is to kill people and break things. In a war where your future may be determined by the outcome of that war, you must defeat the enemy. If that means killing them, then so be it.

Let our military do their job. If they need more boots on the ground, then give them what they need. Don't hold them back, don't expect them to be mamby-pamby and politically correct. This isn't a board game, this is WAR.

Mr. President, take off the kid gloves and get the job done. Please.

____________________________________________________________________
If you are not already familiar with the great site Webloggin, I would like to introduce you to a great group of bloggers. You will notice their image and blogroll in my sidebar. I am happy to be associated with this fine group of folks and suggest you go visit their place and read some of their very informative and thought provoking articles.

TIME to Award the Lie of the Year, at Blue is Beautiful
Colin Powell: 'U.S. is losing', Cop the Truth
North Korea Wants Sanctions Lifted, Right Wing Guy
Food Dhimmitoode, Woman Honor Thyself
A Bad Week for Ahmadinejad, Wake Up America
The Dollar Wars, The American Israeli Patriot
Why believe them?, Biga's Rants
123Beta, Oh Yeah, Go Elf Yourself, Handicapped Parking, and Polls

Comments

[Debbie]

You are all right, of course. We need to wipe out the enemy, Sadr City sounds like a good place to start.

[Mushy]

America is afraid to use its power anymore. We're too afraid of what the rest of the world will think. We should never have stopped McArthur, the bombing of North Vietnam, or Swartzkopf.

Our only solution now would be to withdraw, let the factions kill each other and then go back and kill what's left.

They don't want us there - they don't want each other there, so, bring'em home if they can't have full power to KILL.

[James Biga]

Debbie,
I just posted an article about an upcoming piece in THE NATION. I provided a link. I think it would be of interest to you. I'm a little spun up right now.

[Layla]

Great post as always Debbie. Right on!!!

I sent a Trackback to this post too. You might want to read this one on how more Americans are killed by illegal aliens than casualties in both Afghanistan and Iraq. It is truly appalling.

[Rastaman]

Some agree with this, some don't. I agree... that Iraq provided a convenient excuse for Cheney's Halliburton and other well-connected corporations to make a fortune as they drained our treasury and plunged us into debt. I don't believe that this war has been fought to win it and there's a surfeit of evidence to back this up.

We're there, now, and now the pressure is on Bush in earnest to either make real progress toward victory or get the hell out. I agree that victory is far more preferable than defeat, and if he seriously wants to pull this one back out of the fire, he's going to have to flatten Sadr City. This will mean killing a lot of non-combatants along with al-Sadr and his militia, but by allowing that fanatic to live and grow in power, there is now no other option.

Additionally, serious measures are going to have to be brought against Iran. That choice is up to the generals. I hope they make it and implement it soon before many more of our military are killed.

If Bush doesn't plan on winning it, then yes, there's no point in staying and we should leave. Do it or get off the pot.

Rastaman
www.islamanazi.com