“O bury me not on the lone prairie Where the wild coyote will howl o’er me Where the buffalo roams the prairie sea O bury me not on the lone prairie.”
Bush called Maliki today, only after calling the yard guy on the ranch who waters the uterus I….

Is the U.S. finished as a serious military power? Steyn raised this point in his interview with Driscoll yesterday and it’s worth considering. I don’t mean versus conventional armies, none of which would face us given our track record. I mean versus guerrilla armies.

Well maybe. I think it’s impossible to look at guerrilla warfare outside of specific political context. If the guerrilla warfare is a manifestation of the political will of the overall population–Cuba, Algiers, Indochina/Vietnam–then it’s tough to beat.

“At my signal, unleash Hell.”

That’s how you conduct a war.

I also think that the Iraq war has become a war with Iran by proxy. It’s a perfect wedge, and it’s working just like flypaper to attract militants to the war zone. Unfortunate for the civilians who live there…

It’s getting annoying hearing the dem operatives say things like “we should’ve been dealing with the REAL threats, NK and Iran, the past 6 years…”
There’s some major short term memory loss among those folks, apparently.

Oh come on! 655,000 dead Iraqi’s since the invasion? Who would believe this drivel except a hard-core liberal who hates every single thing America stands for. As Gateway Pundit stated, this would mean upwards of 770 deaths PER DAY!
To give t…

I don’t suppose it’s overly rude to post the link, though, in case anybody is interested. If it is, please feel free to remove it, Allahpundit. It’s your house and your rules, after all.

We Need To Stop Playing At War

Misha I on October 11, 2006 at 12:03 AM

Thanks for posting the link, Misha.

People, you need to read this gem of unvarnished truth.

Not exactly, and from a military point of view, quite incorrect. In point of fact we won the war on the battle field at least 3 times: The Idrang Valley in the central highlands, 68 Tet, and after Linebacker I&II. And maybe one or two more besides these.

Each of these battles was a knockout blow to the NVA and/or the Viet Cong. The first two would have resulted in the North’s surrender had we aggressively dealt with Ho and the North the way we did with Saddam’s regime — outright invasion. In both cases, the NVA has stretched too thin and redployed too far south, or too badly broken to resist a US invasion of the North.

The Johnson administration, with McNamera as SECDEF pissed away these victories, being more interested in “sending messages” than in victory. And the North rebuilt their army and resupplied it in the south.

Linebacker (ordered by Nixon) did result in the Paris peace treaty, signed in Paris by the USA and the government of North Vietnam. Why? Because at the end of Linebacker, North Vietnam had no anti-air defenses, their main shipping port was blockaded, trapping shipping and preventing reinforcement, and their army would have been incapable of resisting a US invasion, had Nixon pulled that particular trigger — AND EVERYBODY AT THE TALKS KNEW IT!

The treaty required the United States AND North Vietnam to withdraw their forces from South Vietnam, but the United States retained the right to re-intervene with military forces and reinforcements upon any further agression from the North.

We “lost” Vietnam when the McGovernite doves, having a majority of DEMOCRATS in Congress, *prohibited* any US reinforcement, or resupply, of the South in December 1974.

We watched, with our hands tied by the DEMOCRATS, as the North Vietnamese government blatantly *VIOLATED* the Paris Peace treaty and invaded the south in 1975. Our hands were *deliberately* tied by the McGovernites running DEMOCRAT PARTY in Congress because they had wanted all along the North to prevail.

So, for lack of ammunition for their artillery, and spare parts for their armor and aircraft, and even small arms ammunition, the ARVN was effectively disarmed and unable to repell the invasion.

THAT is why the sacrifice of 58,000 men for South Vietnam’s freedom was wasted, and it is all thanks to the COPPERHEADs running the Democratic Party.

That is how we lost Vietnam.

And if we allow useful idiots like GregH have his way, the Democrats will repeat their mistaken ways and sabotage THIS war if they get control of the government, the way they sabotaged the Vietnam War.

Which is why I take strong objection to your and Michelle’s comments the other day to SIT OUT THIS ELECTION because you didn’t get the “perfect” immigration bill, or for whatever.

If people like you and Michelle sit out the election, America’s Copperhead surrender monkeys will piss away the liberation of 52 million people in Iraq and Afghanistan, just like their “fathers” pissed away Idrang, ‘68 Tet and the treaty obtained in Paris at the cost of 58,000 Americans.

It really IS up to you and Michelle and the rest of us to vote and insure that the Democrats do NOT get control of Congress.

As to the contents of the video…

Lt. Zirkle is exactly correct about the importance of this war. Fools and useful idiots like GregH are working overtime to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory. Leftists like him have taken over the once proud party of national defense that the Democrats used to be.

About Lt. Zirkle’s main point: He calls for 30,000 more troops. I think that number should be 50,000, with at least half being dedicated to dealing with the sectarian militias and remaining dedicated sealing the borders.

Interviews, and polls that can be found at the Brookings Institution’s Iraq Index, as well as statements by the Iraq government, all converge on the idea of retaining American troops in Iraq until the Iraq Army is fully capable of putting down the insurgency AND the sectarians cease trying to forment a civil war. That is, IMHO, at least 10 months away.

Within 2 or 3 months, Sen John Warner promises a review and a strategy beyond “stay the course” or “cut and run” if the situation is not under control. Well, I can’t imagine any scenario that doesn’t devolve into one or the other.

Advocates of cut and run, like GregH, do not want to see America succeed. They have been working overtime since 9/12/01 to lie, give aid and comfort to our enemies, and to do everything short of armed insurrection to sabotage the war.

They throw up bullshit excuses such as “Iraq is just making more terrorists” and “Iraq is the terrorist’s boot camp” — as if Al Qaeda wasn’t recruiting America-hating jihadists long before we invaded Afghanistan, and training them there long before they attacked America on 9/11/01.

Author, blogger, former Army Lt. Col. Austin Bay, who helped develop the operational plan for Operation Iraqi Freedom, wrote:

The essence of strategic art is to force an enemy to fight on your terms, not his, and ideally in a fight he cannot refuse. The U.S.-led attack on Iraq changed al Qaeda’s battlefield. Sunni-extremist al Qaeda has had to fight in a predominantly Shia country. Arab elitists in al Qaeda snubbed the Afghans and ticked them off; Kurds know the feeling.

Zarqawi’s al Qaeda clan accepted the battle. Zarqawi’s network has been hit and hit hard. We’ve learned a lot about al Qaeda funding and recruiting, but Zarqawi hasn’t been destroyed. Something that has been destroyed is the notion that al Qaeda’s extremism dominates Islam. The idea that waging jihad against the West is easy has also been exposed as a lie. These are ideological defeats for al Qaeda…

…two strategic aims that will take years to mesh: (1) engage al Qaeda on a battlefield it did not choose in order to destroy its eschatological claims, and (2) plant a modern, secular Arab state in the Middle East that will ultimately seal al Qaeda’s defeat. (Austin Bay, The Millennium War, Weekly Standard. 1/3/2005 at http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/005/076blgjq.asp)

This is the only way out of Iraq (and ultimately Afghanistan) and the only way to stop Islamofascism and end the GWOT in our favor; that is to complete the destruction of Al Qaeda whenever and whereever we find them.

Misha, several months ago you wrote a blog post entitled “We need to quit playing at war”. You should post it here becuase that sums it up perfectly.

Thank you, thirteen28, I appreciate that.

It’d be quite a chunk of a post to put here, though, not to mention that it would be rude and against even the most basic foundations of blog etiquette.

I don’t suppose it’s overly rude to post the link, though, in case anybody is interested. If it is, please feel free to remove it, Allahpundit. It’s your house and your rules, after all.

We Need To Stop Playing At War

The webmaster’s blog-within-a-blog.Continuously updated, newest items at the top. The Blog Of War, Blackfive’s new Best From the MilBlogs book,is now available for free download to enlisted military personnel. Destitute Dog — Please read this and he…

There’s no doubt in my mind that there is not an enemy on this planet that they can’t destroy, if they’re allowed to.

Problem is, the American Idol generation here at home are so thoroughly emasculated and pussified that they won’t ever BE allowed to.

We truly have an army that we’re not deserving of.

Misha I on October 10, 2006 at 9:15 PM

Bullseye.

It’s not that we can’t win – it’s that our leaders, left and right, won’t let us win. Adding 30,000 or 200,000 or even 1,000,000 more troops won’t do a damn bit of good if we’re not willing to use the requisite force required. We cannot expect our military personnel to win when we continue to place overly restrictive rules of engagement on them and thus cause them to always look over their shoulders not for the enemy but for the media and the next Jack Murtha smear campaign. Our soldiers have almost as much to worry about from the their own country as they do from our enemies.

In the end, this really isn’t a difficult question, and there are thousands of years of recorded history that show us how it’s done. But we are too timid to do it.

Misha, several months ago you wrote a blog post entitled “We need to quit playing at war”. You should post it here becuase that sums it up perfectly.

I spoke to an Army Captain (Mountain Ranger)serving in Afghanistan. He patrols the Pakistani border. He is returning on Thursday to finish the last 4 months of his 2nd tour.. I asked him many questions but I walked away with this…
1. The 1st time he was shot at was by our “friends” the Pakistanis.
2. The Taliban is not coming back to the degree that the MSM wants us to believe..yes they are there, but it is under control.
3. NATO is in the process of taking over operations right now.
4. Although many of his fellow soldiers feel they are fighting the forgotten war, they still believe in the mission and what they are doing. They know OBL is in Pakistan, but they need to play nice with our “friend”

So from this I offer that maybe it is Gen. David Richards that is not up to the task before him.

They’ll be too busy pissing themselves with laughter at how we destroyed ourselves because we thought that it was better to be popular than to be alive.

that sums it up.

Allah, I don’t think we’ve lost YET. But, we’re damned close.

And GregH, enlighten us:
Please explain to us how “leaving Iraq” is going to make this go away. Should we just hole up within our borders, stick our heads in the sand and say “la la la la la la???”
Honestly, Honestly, Honestly, do you REALLY think that would WORK???? HOW can you truly believe that the war will just “end” if we leave Iraq? You amaze me with your naivety.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

.

They need to unleash our troops on the bad guys.

don’t be so quick to dismiss the herosim of my brothers and sisters in uniform, in harms way.

Wouldn’t dream of it. We have the best soldiers in the history of mankind, and they have the best tools ever known to man.

There’s no doubt in my mind that there is not an enemy on this planet that they can’t destroy, if they’re allowed to.

Problem is, the American Idol generation here at home are so thoroughly emasculated and pussified that they won’t ever BE allowed to.

We truly have an army that we’re not deserving of.