Many looked at the experiences of postwar Germany and Japan as evidence that it could be done. Yet General MacArthur required the emperor of Japan to publically renounce that he was a God and that the Japanese were destimed to rule the world.

No such steps were taken in Iraq. Islam is a supremacist, triumphal idealogy, yet is is enshrined in the Iraqi constitution.

Saddam and his Bathist party are deposed and that is a good thing. If we keep the objectives to regime change, then we can veiw the mission as a success. Nation building is something else entirely.

Meanwhile, Kofi says his failure to stop the U.S. from invading was the single biggest failing of his tenure as secretary-general.

I might actually agree -if by “failure” he is referencing his total lack of ability to enforce UN resolutions regarding Irag since the liberation of Kuwait. Had he, and some of the more influential members of the UN (hello France and Russia) put their weight behind enforcing those resolutions, the current war in Iraq would never have been necessary.

I don’t blame GWB for the deaths of American soldiers on Iraqi soil. I blame Kofi and the UN for not doing the hard work when a better solution was possible.

Meanwhile, Kofi says his failure to stop the U.S. from invading was the single biggest failing of his tenure as secretary-general

Sure, it stopped his lucrative money-machine in its tracks.

His entire tenure was a failure. How conceited to think he could have stopped it.

This man is delusional and I hope he fades into oblivion soon. He won’t be remembered for anything meaningful.

The South Vietnamese with their peaceful religions and philosophies of Confucianism, Taoism, Buddhism, and Catholicism were, but not Iraqis. That is the big difference between the Iraq War and the Vietnam War.

The history books are full of insanely violent Confucians, Taoists, Buddhists and Catholics (admittedly, not all of this violence was religiously motivated). And anyway, we did not go into Vietnam because we liked their religions and philosophies: we went in to stop the spread of communism in south-east Asia. And we failed there for the same reason we seem poised to fail in Iraq, a huge loss of public will.

And when those same Shiites bring an Iranian nuke into NY? Then what?

Muslims are not worth American blood. That is the big lesson learned in this conflict. The South Vietnamese with their peaceful religions and philosophies of Confucianism, Taoism, Buddhism, and Catholicism were, but not Iraqis. That is the big difference between the Iraq War and the Vietnam War.

Let’s say goodbye and good luck to the Shiites!

A return to realpolitik will have predictable consequences. We’re choosing to accept an era of intifada rather than a shooting war. After the first city buses or pizza parlors are incinerated, Bush’s words about fighting them over there so we don’t have to do it here are going to sound prophetic.

Prediction: A major terrorist plot will succeed in either London, Paris or NY in 2007. If it’s here (God forbid) the MSM will fail to see any connection to the 2006 election and our retreat from Iraq, but will instead frame it as Bush’s greatest failure.

If anything we need to ditch the Powell “You break it you buy it” doctrine. The idea that we have to rebuild what we take out, just gives even more cover to our enemies. Now they’l say, “yeah sure you can beat us, but you’ll never rule us. Do you really want to pay?”
We need to go back to the total war model where every part of the enemies economy is a legitmate target. That’s how they jihadis are fighting us.

Iblis on November 21, 2006 at 4:15 PM

We pretty much need to ditch any and all of the Colin Powell doctrine, which is designed for political expediency and providing a temporary solution to longer-term problems. He was one of the chief architects of the end of the Gulf War when he urged letting Saddam’s Republican Guard off the hook.

Agree with everything else you said as well.

Hopefully, any swing back to paleorealism will be accompanied by a willingness to do what’s necessary militarily when it comes time to do it.

Not as long as the anti-war baby boomers run the MSM. The Vietnam paradigm holds as long as these schmucks exert influence. The New Media is a good start in undermining the baby boomer influence (I’m not blaming all boomers, just the New Left vanguard that took over the newsrooms and academia), but it will take much more. Sadly, probably another terrorist attack or two. Apparently people need to see time and time again that our way of life won’t survive unless we’re willing to carpet bomb Sadr City (to cite one example) into non-existence.

Hell, even my FDR democrat grandparents get it. I had to go back and visit them a couple of months ago after my mother died. They railed and railed against the evil Bush, but when it came to the war they understood that you need to fight to win. If that means killing thousands of women and children, you do it. If that means shoving bamboo shoots under some terrorist’s fingernails, you do it. No one ever won anything by fighting from a position of weakness. No one.

It’s so sad that a country that could absorb thousands of casualties in a single battle with a resolve to go foward despite the tragic loss it represented now reduced to panic with a similar loss spread over years. It’s so sad to see a country that could maintain simultaneous fights all over the Pacific, Africa, Italy and France now reduced to apoplexy at the idea of committing all of 200K troops in two places (Afganistan and Iraq) with the population nearly doubled and the economic might quintupled. If today’s attitude have prevailed during WWII, we would have capitulated to the Japanese after the battle of Midway, and the Germans after the Africa campaign.

Fine, let’s leave the middle east to fascist thugs, radical muslims and nuclear weapons. I’m sure we’ll be just fine here.

Please, Lord; don’t let this happen.

Alas, it is getting more and more difficult to find anyone who believes that this war aim is attainable by any methods we are actually willing to employ.

And there you have the crux of it.

You cannot achieve any goal if you are not willing to do what is necessary to attain it. I’m no longer so sure that attaining that goal is possible, but if it is, I am very sure we are not doing what needs to be done to get there.

Hopefully, any swing back to paleorealism will be accompanied by a willingness to do what’s necessary militarily when it comes time to do it.

We are trying to make a democracy out of a country that has never truly known it before, we haven’t managed it in a mere three years, and therefore we have failed and should pull out? Pathetic! If we leave now, we will probably be back to fix a bigger problem in the next ten or so years anyway.

It reminds me of the Romans and the problems they had in Armenia. They were always sending in legions to take care of leadership problems. How long has this thing been going on with Iraq? Almost twenty years? Something tells me it ain’t over yet.

Meanwhile, Kofi says his failure to stop the U.S. from invading was the single biggest failing of his tenure as secretary-general. Really?

I’d like to add my own “really?” to that…

Anyone have a link to an round-up on oil-for-food?

Say it with me… shale oil.

In other news, I hope that we will still support the Kurds even if this whole thing goes south.