In which I trash the ISG report
posted at 10:55 am on December 7, 2006 by Bryan
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
I don’t have much to add to what others have said in criticizing the Iraq Survey Group’s report. Much of my reaction can be summed up in short pithy words that I don’t ordinarily use. It’s a pile of this, it’s full of that, and the vaunted bipartisan Solons who met, achieved consensus and reported their solemn findings can do this or that to themselves.
But here’s a question: Since when did the United States or any country wage war by publishing its plans or suggested plans for all the world to see? Since when did the United States or any country let its enemies see internal deliberations and strategic pivots, and since when did we think our enemies shared our interests, either in one war theater or on a more broad strategic plane? Since when did we wage war by a geriatric committee of has-beens and shady Washington insiders? Since when has there been anything to talk about with the world’s two worst remaining terrorist states?
To me, the ISG report represents the end of the sole-superpower world. We’re not a superpower anymore, not if our so-called best and brightest think that this report represents anything useful, and not if we think it’s wise to put our war planning up to a body of old hands with no new ideas, and subject their findings to an international review.
I thought we voted against the international test when we rejected John Kerry? Guess not.
The ISG, with its “dialogue to consensus,” represents the worst about US policy deliberation and ultimately shows that we’re not serious about our own defense. It’s a dead end, and for the president to adopt its most ridiculous assumptions and vague suggestions means the end of his presidency, the end of the Bush Doctrine and the end of our pre-eminent place in the world.
We’re waging war in Iraq to defeat Islamic fascism, or Islamism or whatever -ism that our best and brightest can’t make themselves say today. You know, the people who attacked us on 9-11-01? Remember them? The best and brightest seem to have forgotten all that, and now want us to mitigate defeat in Iraq.
Well, how do you ask a man to be the last man to die so that we might mitigate defeat? You don’t. You honor his sacrifice by keeping your plans within your war council, by adjusting to the enemy’s strategies and turning his flaws against him, and using your strengths to win the war. Instead, we have let the enemy turn our worst flaws, our preening political class and our preening narcissism and our impatience and our gotcha politics, against us.
I’m sure the ISG avoided releasing their report today because they wanted to avoid associating their labors with the historic day of infamy. Well, they failed and have added to Dec 7 and 9-11 a third day of infamy, Dec 6, 2006. It’s the day America’s best and brightest failed our troops and our people. Of the three, yesterday may end up being the most significant over the longest slice of time. Our best and brightest gave our enemies present and future a reason to cheer, and to fight on against us. They know they can wear us down.
To me, there’s only one policy to pursue when you’re at war: victory. The ISG report should have contained some element of this:
You ask, what is our policy? I say it is to wage war by land, sea, and air. War with all our might and with all the strength God has given us, and to wage war against a monstrous tyranny never surpassed in the dark and lamentable catalogue of human crime. That is our policy.
You ask, what is our aim? I can answer in one word. It is victory. Victory at all costs – Victory in spite of all terrors – Victory, however long and hard the road may be, for without victory there is no survival.
But it didn’t. The ISG report only used the word “victory” in the context of handing one to al Qaeda. And in its spirit, that’s what the ISG report has done.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
We have brave men willing to die for their country. What we don’t have is real men to lead them.
Mojave Mark on December 7, 2006 at 2:29 PM
The chickenhawk draft dodger Clinton knew how to win a war. The way he annhilated the Christian Serbs on behalf of al qaeda was the way you do it.
1. Forbid the media from covering the war so as not to demoralize the public with images of war casualties. The media realized this themselves and since they were the ones who beat the drums to start the war, they weren’t going to sabotage their own work.
2. Bomb wrecklessly, even bomb a Chinese embassy and then publicy leak that your commander wants to pick a fight with the Russians. That will put an end to any bright ideas that enemies might have of supporting the opposing side and the enemy will be demoralized knowing that there are no safe zones. Imagine Serbs hiding in churches the way the terrorists find refuge in mosques, it’s laughable, Clinton would have bombed the churches for the fun of it.
I thought the war in Iraq was lost early on when the Democrats were caught aiding Saddam through their liaison Susan Lindauer. When there wasn’t any investigation and public executions over that incident, the Democrats realized that no one was willing to stop them from sabotaging the war effort. That realization was reenforced several times following Lindauer, such as when neither Mary McCarthy or anyone at the NYT ended up swinging from their traitorous necks.
Republicans should never begin a war unless they are willing to fight the enemy’s domestic allies with the same violence they are willing to bring to the enemy forces abroad. It’s unfair to send young men into a war that they will have no chance of winning.
Perchant on December 7, 2006 at 2:29 PM
Absolutely.
We are winning in Iraq because we are struggling to establish a democracy in the Middle East, and they’re not struggling to establish Sharia in Kansas.
We are winning because the military doesn’t care what the media says. And as long as we don’t allow our own enemies within our borders to set policy, we will continue to win.
The only necessary response to those celebrating our defeat is to say “No. We are winning, and we will continue until we’ve won.”
Jason on December 7, 2006 at 2:30 PM
There, fixed that for ya.
If you think the U.S. is an “empire” then you have no concept of the definition of an empire, you don’t understand the U.S. foreign policy, and you probably shouldn’t be displaying your lack of understanding for the viewing of others.
gekkobear on December 7, 2006 at 2:31 PM
Bryan, thank you for that thoughful post. It is the truth.
natesnake on December 7, 2006 at 2:36 PM
empire – see Roman; also Ottoman
LakeRuins on December 7, 2006 at 2:40 PM
a quote from Samuel Adams -
“Contemplate the mangled bodies of your countrymen, and then say ‘what should be the reward of such sacrifices?’ Bid us and our posterity bow the knee, supplicate the friendship and plough, and sow, and reap, to glut the avarice of the men who have let loose on us the dogs of war to riot in our blood and hunt us from the face of the earth? If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!”
AZ_Redneck on December 7, 2006 at 2:42 PM
BTW, Bryan, I
NTWR on December 7, 2006 at 2:46 PM
Perchant
You must remember that Premier Clinton’s war was morally imperative! There was an unfair impeachment looming and a dog needed to be wagged.
irishsquid on December 7, 2006 at 2:46 PM
urbancenturion,
Why, yes. I believe you did. And a mighty useful one at that.
Pablo on December 7, 2006 at 2:47 PM
…I luv U.
NTWR on December 7, 2006 at 2:47 PM
This War-By-Committee approach will ultimately lead to the decline of America if it becomes the gold standard.
It proclaims to the world that Americans lack the intestinal fortitude for war. Two aspects of society are large enough to constitute a majority: those ignorant of impending Muslim world domination and those who are too weak-willed to fight back.
If we remain on this course of appeasement, America will become a country in bondage. It won’t happen tommorow, or next year, or event 10 years from now. But I feel confident that in this century America will be reduced to a level below that of France.
It’s a race to the bottom.
natesnake on December 7, 2006 at 2:51 PM
Starblazer wrote: “we all know that GregH & other liberals in this country are anti-american & does want the U.S. to lose the War On Terror.”
“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear.” [Marcus Tullius Cicero]
georgej on December 7, 2006 at 2:52 PM
Hey, rednecks aren’t supposed to be intellectual!
dalewalt on December 7, 2006 at 2:54 PM
…which, if everyone will remember, Ol’ Bubba Bin Laden has said on more than a few occasions in heartening his fellow-travellers. He referred to Somalia and elsewhere to illustrate that all his side needed to do was focus the US on its casualties and we’d fold like a cheap card table.
…seems he was right.
Puritan1648 on December 7, 2006 at 2:58 PM
“Who the hell are you, or anybody else in here for that matter, to question the patriotism of anybody else? Who appointed you judge and jury of determinimg everybody else’s love of country? Drop your sanctimonious drivel and get over yourself.
Secondly, should we all just go along with what our leaders tell us in the spirit of patriotism? Since when did a skepticism of government equate to a lack of patriotism?
GregH on December 7, 2006 at 12:39 PM”
If you don’t like being called out, fool, then stop posting your leftwing crapola. YOU are what YOU are and we all know it, too.
“…go home and leave us in peace. We seek not your council, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.” Samuel Adams
georgej on December 7, 2006 at 3:03 PM
How does one tell the differnce between the willing traitor and the usefull idiot?
Liberals deal in feeling and not in fact. They deal in slogans and not in critical thought. I believe that their identity politics have clouded any ability to recognize themselves as the usefull idiots that they are.
And our impending Muslim Overlords love them for it.
natesnake on December 7, 2006 at 3:04 PM
Your opinions don’t jive with reality? I weep for you. Keep ignoring that Iraq has little to do with keeping us safe, and keep advocating more fighting as long as you’re not one of the people on the ground doing it. Join the military if you’re so frustrated.
This might be news to you, but we were going to have to leave Somalia (and elsewhere) eventually, and no matter what circumstances we left under, the jihadists were going to claim victory. Most of us don’t want a foreign policy based on whether the enemy says “Nyah nyah! Come back and fight!” All such a policy does is legitimize them.
Constantine on December 7, 2006 at 3:07 PM
America 1944 “Don’t tread on me”
America 2044 “Please use the vasoline”
natesnake on December 7, 2006 at 3:09 PM
fogw wrote:
You are of course correct, fogw, and I apologize for painting with too broad a brush. I just get frustrated because, while you will get crumbs for what you paid in to the system, I will get nothing. In fact, I will get exponentially higher taxes to pay for the entitlement that was none of your doing. It’s not your generation’s fault that Social Security for the Boomer generation will break the bank. It’s the government’s fault for not addressing the situation before it’s too late. And I hear too many in my parents’ generation who don’t seem to care about how hard their children and grandchildren will have to work to support this failing system that no-one has the guts to try to fix.
Again, I apologize to fogw and other right-thinking Boomers for implying that all Boomers are worthless entitlement hogs. I know they’re not all that way.
aero on December 7, 2006 at 3:11 PM
“I have been tender in raising the cry against these men, and used numberless arguments to show them their danger, but it will not do to sacrifice a world to either their folly or their baseness.”
Thomas Paine, December 23, 1776
georgej on December 7, 2006 at 3:13 PM
Excellent! The first chickenhawk post of the day!
Why don’t you stand between the soldier and jihadi if you’re so frustrate?
Constantine, that’s such a weak response that it bearly registers on the radar. On a scale of 1 thru 10, it rates a 2. Don’t sling that grade school level talking point $hit around here.
natesnake on December 7, 2006 at 3:14 PM
That’s assuming that there are actually any jihadists left breathing. To try to educate you; this is what many of us are worried about; we’re not going to FINISH the job, and when we leave with our tails between our legs, the ‘jihadists’ will be able to claim victory. If we would completely and utterly defeat them, however, then “The last man standing wins”. In war there isn’t a prize for 2nd place; there is no “Everybody wins, now let’s all go home”; there’s a winner, and there’s a loser. By quitting, we’re making ourselves the loser. What’s so difficult about that to understand?
dalewalt on December 7, 2006 at 3:16 PM
Constantine, the troll wrote: “Keep ignoring that Iraq has little to do with keeping us safe, and keep advocating more fighting as long as you’re not one of the people on the ground doing it. Join the military if you’re so frustrated.”
When you show us that you successfully graduated from West Point, then maybe you will have to right to comment upon military strategy. Otherwise, buzz off.
georgej on December 7, 2006 at 3:17 PM
Allahpundit, Bryan, Ian, Michelle:
Can we, please, have a twit filter? Pretty please?
georgej on December 7, 2006 at 3:21 PM
Puritan1648
You bet he was right. Looks like he learned a lesson straight from Ho Chi Minh. You don’t have to beat us militarily, you just need to outlast us.
Americans like to pride themselves as being a great warrior nation. Nothing could be further from the truth. The American Sheeple are gutless. If a war takes longer than a few weeks, they regard it as a quagmire and want to throw in the towel. Our Armed Forces are the finest in the world and more than capable enough to finish the job. It’s too bad we don’t have the resolve to let them do it.
irishsquid on December 7, 2006 at 3:26 PM
Yeah, don’t even try to compose an original thought. Just call people you disagree with names, and spam the thread with quotes from Marcus Tullius Cicero and Thomas Paine. Then follow it up with a plea to the editors to ban people for being a “twit”.
GregH on December 7, 2006 at 3:27 PM
aero,
I know this is off topic, so I’ll be brief.
I felt as you do when I was still in my 20’s. I was convinced social security would go bust before I reached retirement age. It was way back then when I decided to open a personal retirement account – long term, no-risk, low-yield, guaranteed ROI.
Be smart, open up an account, do it while you’re young. Look out for yourself, don’t rely on anything from the government.
Regards,
fogw on December 7, 2006 at 3:27 PM
GregH, the troll wrote: “Yeah, don’t even try to compose an original thought. Just call people you disagree with names, and spam the thread with quotes from Marcus Tullius Cicero and Thomas Paine. Then follow it up with a plea to the editors to ban people for being a “twit”.”
Get used to being bitchslapped, fool. You have it coming.
georgej on December 7, 2006 at 3:30 PM
Everyone that reads this should forward a copy to the White House, The Sec. of Def., Sec. of State and GOP Leadership in congress.
Great Post Mr. Bryan!
Sammy316 on December 7, 2006 at 3:35 PM
…aaaaaaaaah…Connie…long time/no see….
…don’t cry for me, Argen-tuff-guy….
Point One: Iraq has *EVERYTHING* to do with keeping us safe. If you’ll notice, we’re fighting jihadis over there…a lot like the jihadis who slammed those aircraft into our buildings…blah-blah…you’re familiar with the story. Jihadis don’t have borders because the Ummah doesn’t have a border…so the whole “you’re fighting in the wrong place” thing is hopeless naive….
Point Two: you may forget (or just didn’t notice), but I *DID* join the military…about 33 years ago and counting…and served for he better part of my adult life…earning a little green hat worn by trained killers and girl scouts the world over….
…and I have a wife serving her 26th and final year, deployable as we speak….
…and have two sons, one an Army medic and the other a Marine infantry rifleman, currently on active duty….
…so, when I speak as as an advocate of military action, you can be assured that I not only know what I’m risking by advocating action, but know what sort of action is required.
…national defense, you see, is our family biz….
…sure…we’re over 50 years into being in Korea, but we’ll leave eventually. You missed the point entirely.
The *WAY* we left — and thanks to Les “Lesser Evil” Aspin and Bill “Greater Evil” Clinton for “supporting” our troops — with 18 dead, some of ‘em “trophies”, was the point. Mind you, I’m sure that you’ll look back on the speedy “redeployment” of forces from the area with pride…but the folks who survived don’t…and those of us veterans who know what sort of men we lost don’t.
The point *ALSO* is, as you openned the door to this, look at the state of Somalia today. ‘Nuff said there.
…and, deny if you will, Bubba Bin Laden used Somalia as a “talking point”.
…who is “most of us”? You got a communist mouse in your pocket?
What? If we notice them — and you have to *NOTICE* someone to target them, even with “smart” munitions — then we “legitimize” them? I think that they’re legitimate already. They’re legitimate targets…lock and load.
You really should read up more.
Puritan1648 on December 7, 2006 at 3:35 PM
fogw wrote:
Already there, fogw. :-)
Respectful regards to you as well,
aero
aero on December 7, 2006 at 3:36 PM
Just read the last line first… if it’s GregH or Constantine, have faith that what is written is troll excrement and move along.
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on December 7, 2006 at 3:36 PM
All my thoughts are original unlike the tired old chickenhawk argument.
Besides calling some liberals “usefull idiots” and “willing traitors”, please tell me where I’m wrong.
Those who do not learn from history are destined to repeat it. But you’re right, Cicero and Paine were blathering idiots. You are much smarter than them.
Prove you are not a “twit” and we will happily retract it.
natesnake on December 7, 2006 at 3:38 PM
Ohhh, and GregH,
You are still a douche bag.
Sincerely,
natesnake
natesnake on December 7, 2006 at 3:41 PM
If only the world was that black and white. You seem to think withdrawing from Iraq is abdicating responsibility for protecting ourselves, and this couldn’t be further from the truth. We need to focus on protecting our borders and critical systems, and fighting in Afghanistan were the threat originated. The detour into Iraq was based on the longstanding ambitions of those in the administration, not on any real threat. That’s why it failed.
Jihadism will always be around; do you think we can kill an idea? By indulging in unnecessary invasive operations like Iraq, we give credence to the jihadi claims that we’re attacking the muslim world.
Constantine on December 7, 2006 at 3:42 PM
…actually, both of ‘em learned it — either directly or indirectly — from Sun Tzu. This stuff isn’t new by any means….
…actually, America is a nation of amateurs. Some of our most famous, most decorated soldiers have been amateurs, joining as the nation needed them, leaving when the crisis was over (if they survived the crisis).
Washington himself was a farmer.
This is a natural out-growth of the way America was founded, the way it was organized There were not “career politicians” at the 2nd Continental Congress or the Constitutional Convention. Most of our largest businesses and greatest inventions were the products of amateurs. Edison didn’t have a degree that I’m aware of. Nor did Ford.
The problem with amateurs is that only the best of them are stubborn enough to stick. The rest are amateurs, but could also be confused with being dilletantes.
Puritan1648 on December 7, 2006 at 3:44 PM
Republicans should never begin a war unless they are willing to fight the enemy’s domestic allies with the same violence they are willing to bring to the enemy forces abroad.
Perchant on December 7, 2006 at 2:29 PM
rockhauler on December 7, 2006 at 3:45 PM
Well said Puritan1648. Thank you and your family for your service.
s/ A Marine’s dad.
georgej on December 7, 2006 at 3:45 PM
Natesnake, thanks!
georgej on December 7, 2006 at 3:46 PM
See what I mean… grade A troll excrement:
Giving dear Connie the benefit of the doubt, and saying that this is true, what happens if we go ahead and leave?
Does that not encourage the Jihadi?
I have three kids, and if I encouraged their bad behavior by retreating every time they misbehaved they would miserable little brats. The same is true of your average Jihadi.
Once you come to realize that all these little Islamic Martyrs in training are just 2 year olds… it all becomes very clear.
Just spank them and put them to bed.
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on December 7, 2006 at 3:47 PM
expletive deleted
with egg on my face, let me reformat the above.
Sir, I respectfully protest your charge that it was ‘Republicans’ who started this war, and I suggest that Pres. Clinton seemed to be building a foundation argument for a war against Saddam Hussein, almost as though he anticipated the events of Sept 11.
I agree that we can not win any war until all of us agree to wage that war, contribute our best efforts, or at minimum do not obstruct those who are willing to fight.
Bravo to AZ_Redneck and georgej.
rockhauler on December 7, 2006 at 3:45 PM
rockhauler on December 7, 2006 at 3:47 PM
Puritan, we must be thinking along the same lines – i posted something very similar to this on the “books that Bush must read” thread today.
I totally agree – we’ve raised a bunch of losers who don’t know how to win because we haven’t taught them how to win. No scores in soccer, everyone gets a trophy or a ribbon, even if they suck. After all, we don’t want to damage anyone’s self-esteem.
excuse me while I throw up a little in my mouth.
pullingmyhairout on December 7, 2006 at 3:47 PM
It’s all good.
natesnake on December 7, 2006 at 3:49 PM
Constantine, the troll, wrote: “Jihadism will always be around; do you think we can kill an idea?”
No, but we can kill the men who practice it. And we can also deal with the traitors among us who enable them, comfort them and sustain them. We should do both.
georgej on December 7, 2006 at 3:51 PM
“GregH and “JaHer22″ = Dumb and Dumber; Constantine = probably Even Dumber than that
Please, do not feed the trolls. They are ONLY here to damage and distract and demoralize. You and I know that there are many worthwhile intelligent conservatives lurking out there, reading this site but unwilling to post bcause tey don’t want some useless asshole like the 3 noted above to insult and nit-pick at them
ALL of their posts are silly juvenile ignorant garbage, and not worth responding to. By answering them, you validate them and help to suppress the contibutions of potential contributors to this blog.
Please, ignore them. Like the warped pus-bags they are, they will eventually go away if not played with
Janos Hunyadi on December 7, 2006 at 3:53 PM
Why they already say 911 was an inside job. They made that argument before. Doesnt matter what happens they will always fall back on moonbatism.
William Amos on December 7, 2006 at 3:59 PM
As you may know, Janos, I’m one of those who repeatedly argues against feeding the trolls. But once and a while, they say something beyond merely obnoxious that requires a 2×4-level bitchslapping. And in that case, I’m happy to oblige.
georgej on December 7, 2006 at 4:03 PM
Of course not; but they are the same war. Inexplicably, the list of nitwits that don’t understand this seems to grow daily.
What you said…
Jaibones on December 7, 2006 at 4:03 PM
That ‘report’ isn’t a report.
ITS THE TERMS OF OUR SURRENDER
CrazyFool on December 7, 2006 at 4:21 PM
GregH,
I guess we shouldn’t “spam” the comment section with quotes from Cicero or Thomas Paine, ya know, smart people. We should instead sit around like 5 year olds while you tell us everything you don’t know.
So, Jihad is an idea and can’t be defeated. I guess the answer is retreating and letting it overcome us, then? Is that your solution? I say it can’t be defeated, so it can’t? That’s the difference between Democrats and Republicans. Democrats look at what appears to be impossible and say “Its not worth fighting, we may as well learn to live with it”.
But, you’re probably right. Impossible things can’t usually be done. I mean can you imagine what would happen if a bunch of colonists rose up against the most powerful military/navy in the world, declared themselves independent, and then this ragtag group of colonists won? Hah. Impossible. Could you imagine? I can.
amerpundit on December 7, 2006 at 4:22 PM
Puritan, it’s rare … but I have to disagree with you on this one. Bush has failed miserably, along with Rumsfeld. The management of this “chaos” has been non-existent.
Both Bush and Rumsfeld have completely ignored the wishes and requests of military Generals for MORE troops. We’ve conducted this war as if our soldiers are trick-or-treating on Halloween.
Contrary to the never ending cries that it’s impossible to win … I think it’s actually easy to win. It’s hard for me to imagine that with all of our technology, power, and numbers … we’ve been unable to stop the flow of weapons and insurgents into Iraq. Please!
And we’ve allowed al-Sadr to operate at will for what reason? Are we to believe we can’t locate this man? He’s not hiding in a cave somewhere.
Why does Maliki make a habit of releasing key aids of al-Sadr when captured? And somehow, there’s a never ending supply of weapons stashed throughout various cities that we’re unable to locate? Again … PLEASE!
If you want to win this war … you disarm the enemy. Period. You don’t allow Iraq and Syria to continually ship in weapons and ammo.
I truly believe that – for whatever reason – Bush actually wanted this war to drag on. Nothing else makes sense. He’s done absolutely nothing to indicate a desire to change or alter his initial plan based on the reality of the situation.
The argument usually used is that Bush is not able to do what he wants because of public opinion or world opinion ultimately caused by the traitorous MSM. If that’s true … it makes Bush a liar because it’s Bush who’s been running around for six years swearing that he doesn’t listen to polls or make decision based on world opinion. He’s stated on many occasions that he makes his decisions based on what he knows is right.
So, do you actually believe that Bush thinks we were going to win this war by training Iraqi soldiers? Especially when the soldiers we’re training are basically broken up into two groups, which is broken down as follows:
a) Those who can’t be trusted and are looting Iraqi homes, forwarding sensitive info to the terrorists, and other illegal acts.
b) And those who are motivated to help Iraq be free from terrorists and dictators.
Unfortunately, those in group “b” routinely end up being found be-headed in a mass grave in the desert somewhere, after being sold out by those in group “a.”
It’s obvious to pretty much everyone who’s paying attention that the only way to win this war is with absolute brute force and full military action. Bush has not done any of that, and he’s never even suggested it. In fact, he’s TURNED IT DOWN when it has been requested by Generals in the combat zone.
We are all correct in blaming pathetic, whining, wimpy, traitorous liberals for most of this country’s problems … but to not realize that George Bush is the person who had full command of this war plan from the very beginning is blind. There are some conservatives who seem to want to ignore everything Bush has done (or not done) and pretend he’s this great Texas gung-ho President.
He has stabbed us in the back on every chance he’s had. He’s failed us with excessive spending, wimpy battle plans, Harriet Miers, the UAE ports deal, the selling of our airlines to foreign investors, failure to take on homosexual marriage, failure to battle abortion, and a blatant disregard for our immigration laws and border.
Thank GOD we didn’t have Al Gore or John Kerry. I’ll give you that. But Bush has been a pathetic President and he is ultimately responsible for the GOP being in the shambles it’s in now. I only hope to God we have a better conservative candidate to choose from come 2008.
Not that it will matter. Once the current band of misfits gets through granting amnesty to 30 million illegals – and opening up the borders to the 100 million who will then attempt to be given the same favor … this country is finished. The HotAir trolls will have their wish granted. We’ll be a third world nation.
Gregor on December 7, 2006 at 4:37 PM
BTW, Polls show Obama trailing Hillary for ‘08.
amerpundit on December 7, 2006 at 4:42 PM
igen ( yes ), georgej, bitch-slapping is good for the soul, even if the femme-bitches never feel it due to being multi-wrapped in layers and layers of tin foil and B.S.
My main objection to trolls is their suppression of potential contributors. I read this site for months before reistering and posting comments, and most of the hesitation was due to not wanting some antagonistic half-wit biting my ankles.
This is a serious topic; these are Serious Times. Corrupt idiots have taken control of Congress, and already control the media. The ISG and their “report” are the evil mtant offspring of that control. We–reasonably intelligent conservatives–need to figure out what to do, while not letting ourselves be distracted by the Usual Assholes
Janos Hunyadi on December 7, 2006 at 4:43 PM
Iraq is a test case on Bringing Democracy to the Middle east. It is also, in some ways, a proxy of the US, just like the Jihadist are a proxy of Iran. if we won their, we would have been able to gradually export our values to the rest of the middle east. Not subjugating Islam, but bringing the moderate element over to our side. Winning in Iraq would strengthen our position and help to stabalize the are in the long run. Loosing will strengthen the Jihadist and strengthen them.
Winning in Iraq means less loss of life. Loosing means a death toll of imemnse proportions.
We are giving up the war and are deluding ourselves that their can be peace in our time. All we are really doing is strengthening our enemies. When Isreal is a glowing crater we will sit back here thinking “SO sad, but we are safe. now with Isreal gone peace can finaly claim the middle east”. But that won’t happen. The jihadist will be strengthened even more by our lack of response to the murder of Isreal. They will fully enable their pogrom of “Convert or Die” across Europe and eurasia. Eventually we will get involved, and hopefully we will win. But hundreds of Millions will die.
Perhaps this is too extremist a view of the future. But this is what I believe we are fighting for in Iraq.
BTW, loved the Quotes from Cicero and Paine. truly great minds. To read the words of those that created western civization is refreshing, even if the smell of troll dung wafts about on the breeze.
Wyrd on December 7, 2006 at 4:45 PM
The 56 amateurs and ordinary citizens that told a world super power they could govern themselves. Not a career politician in the lot.
Adams, John Lawyer
Adams, Samuel Merchant
Bartlett, Josiah Physician
Braxton, Carter Plantation Owner
Carroll of Carrollton, Charles Merchant/Plantation Owner
Chase, Samuel Lawyer
Clark, Abraham Lawyer/Surveyor
Clymer, George Merchant
Ellery, William Lawyer/Merchant
Floyd, William Land Speculator
Franklin, Benjamin Scientist/Printer
Gerry, Elbridge Merchant
Gwinnett, Button Merchant/Plantation Owner
Hall, Lyman Physician/Minister
Hancock, John Merchant
Harrisson, Benjamin Plantation Owner/Farmer
Hart, John Land Owner
Hewes, Joseph Merchant
Heyward Jr., Thomas Lawyer/Plantation Owner
Hooper, William Lawyer
Hopkins, Stephen Merchant
Hopkinson, Francis Lawyer/Musician
Huntington, Samuel Lawyer
Jefferson, Thomas Lawyer/Plantation Owner
Lee, Francis Lightfoot Plantation Owner
Lee, Richard Henry Plantation Owner/Merchant
Lewis, Francis Merchant
Livingston, Philip Merchant
Lynch Jr., Thomas Lawyer
McKean, Thomas Lawyer
Middleton, Arthur Plantation Owner
Morris, Lewis Plantation Owner
Morris, Robert Merchant/Land Speculator
Morton, John Farmer
Nelson Jr., Thomas Merchant/Plantation Owner
Paca, William Lawyer/Plantation Owner
Paine, Robert Treat Lawyer/Scientist
Penn, John Lawyer
Read, George Lawyer
Rodney, Caesar Plantation Owner/Soldier
Ross, George Lawyer
Rush, Benjamin Physician
Rutledge, Edward Lawyer/Plantation Owner
Sherman, Roger Lawyer
Smith, James Lawyer
Stockton, Richard Lawyer
Stone, Thomas Lawyer
Taylor, George Merchant
Thornton, Matthew Physician
Walton, George Lawyer
Whipple, William Merchant
Williams, William Merchant
Wilson, James Lawyer
Witherspoon, John Minister
Wolcott, Oliver Lawyer
Wythe, George Lawyer
AZ_Redneck on December 7, 2006 at 4:47 PM
Absolutely right. I wonder how they will react when the Imams bitch slap them for drinking a beer during Ramadan.
By the way after this comes to pass I’ll be starting a coyote service to Canada if anyone wants in.
Trooper on December 7, 2006 at 4:49 PM
OK. Make a note. Tabs don’t post well.
AZ_Redneck on December 7, 2006 at 4:49 PM
…live in the world in which God put ya…and, for the jihadi, the world *IS* black and white…believers and kaffir…us ‘n’ them….
…they only think in rainbows when it comes to tactics and options to commit mayhem in support of their overall black them v. white us strategy.
…yes and no….
Yes, we really, REALLY need to focus on protecting our borders and critical systems — something which *BOTH* the Demagogues and Reptillians seem to be willing to barter away in return for votes — and it heartens me to hear you raise the issue.
No, the threat didn’t “originate” in Afganistan. Afganistan is where *ONE* facet of the overall Holy War parked for a time. It had many other homes, and still has a few which haven’t been bombed into their component parts yet. The war is a large, gangling, self-sealing, amorphous mass…rather like myself. You’re not going to stop me by cutting off my toe, and you’re not going to stop any offensive smells by corking…er…intimate parts of me.
The fight in Afganistan was the openning gambit, and was brilliantly executed…take that as unqualified praise from a qualified source. Brilliant.
…here, you’ve vered into your *OWN* ambitions — opposition to this administration — by laying out the ambitions of others.
Iraq was a logical “next stop” on the anti-jihadi “tour”. Syria would be a logical “next stop” after Iraq if we both had the will and could keep the traitors in our midst from queering the deal and giving the farm away…and if Iran can learn in time to spare itself a good thermonuclear spanking….
…and, it failed not because of how or why the war was fought, that it was fought out of order somehow, or that it was “unjust”. What war is ever “just”…Augustine wrote of “just” wars, but Machiavelli was more practical inasmuch as he noted that wars left too long were fought on the terrain chosen by the opposition…and Clausewitz wrote “war is a continuation of politics by other means”. It failed yesterday, when the ISG published their little missive…preceeded by Mr. Bush empanelling it, abdicating his executive and Commander-In-Chief’s responsibilities, which he did even if he doesn’t accept a single one of their recommendations.
…the babble about any day-to-day tactical failure is nothing more than believing boilerplate Leftist ideology and jihadi propaganda…or, rather, publishing it as news and profiting by it…take your pick.
…no, but you can kill enough of ‘em so that jihadism looks like a *BAD* idea. Right now, cutting and running, it looks like a costly but an ultimately fruitful idea.
Your “unnecessary invasive operations” line leads me to think that you’ve some background in geopolitics or military strategy. Is that the case? I ask this because earlier you discounted my views and those of others safe at home because we, in your opinion, needed to be out fighting if we were so fired up. I was wondering if, so fired up about “invasive operations” (the current buzzword is “distractions”, by the way), you were as qualified to opine as you feel we must be to oppose you.
…and, we are fighting the muslim world…until they decide that the whole idea of fighting us is too costly. Remember who drew first blood.
Puritan1648 on December 7, 2006 at 4:49 PM
…I was referring to the troops…managing chaos on a theater level.
I would agree with you wholeheartedly about Messers Bush and Rummy. I think that the Republicans — voted in in 2004 in part to handle the war — have had marital relations with the proverbial diminutive canine, while the Democrats have shot right past incompetence into the murky realm of treason. I know that I over-use the word, but so *FEW* people are even considering the use of the word — which is now an objective fact — that I feel the need to over-use it to make up.
No…by “we” in “we’ve been managing”, I don’t include the president who gave us the ISG…not by any means. He was handed a war and an military ready to fight it…and has squandered the opportunity.
Puritan1648 on December 7, 2006 at 5:00 PM
…see…I love to be proven right….
…give you an A- for this one (formatting)…for your next assignment, show us how many of them lost their businesses, farms and plantations, family members, and were driven to penury and early death for their amateurish belief that they were better judges of their own destinies than a man in London whose qualifications were bestowed upon him at birth….
Puritan1648 on December 7, 2006 at 5:03 PM
All this is true but the point is that if Democrats can create the perception that it’s a Republican war, and therefore naturally set out to undermine that war to score political points, then it is as necessary or more so to make war on that fifth column as it is the other columns.
Perchant on December 7, 2006 at 5:06 PM
We’re already at war with liberals. It just hasn’t become physical … yet. I vote we pass out uniforms.
Gregor on December 7, 2006 at 5:13 PM
Three points Pinky:
1. Check out http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/bl_black_jack_pershing.htm
2. The million or so uniformed service members would never consider doing something like that because they consider themselves professionals, not thugs. People may not like the law of armed conflict and Geneva Convention rules our military follows and may also feel it unfairly restricts our options. But the fact that our armed services do follow those is what separates the principles so many people want the military to protect from the principles of the tyrants.
3. Please check your facts first.
Bradky on December 7, 2006 at 5:15 PM
Niiiiiiice…
At least any war that lasts longer than a presidential term…
The trick is to ignore the difference. Either way the enemy is being aided and comforted. Either way, that individual needs to be dispensed with. When the well being of the nation/society/community/tribe/whatever is in jeopardy, you simply purge that which is causing damage to your people.
Actually, you can. You start by cracking some terrorists’ skulls. Then you show the rest of the muslim world just how similar Jihadism/Sharia/etc. is to any classical tyranny. Then you show them how the people who have been in control of them have been exploiting them for centuries.
We’ve given the terrorists a thrashing. They are almost at their death rattle. If we let up now, then they will heal/recuperate/rebuild/resume the attack. It seems the trolls/libs/press don’t have any problem with that possibility–or they are so short-sighted that they aren’t able to realize what is really happening.
Finally, let me say something about trolls. They are silly, sure. They are wrong, sure. But by having them here, we become better. They denouced SDI (Star Wars). Now, we are about to have it actually working–unless the treasonous Dems cut off funding in time. They denounced Welfare Reform, but many people are no longer on welfare, and are that much Happier for it. They denounce police, like this recent New York matter last week; but the stats on how well the police there are doing are astounding–deaths down, police shootings down. (Where did I see that Heather McDonald article?) Etc, etc, etc, etc, etc. This is why a two-party system is a good thing to have.
The conservatives are better at formulating arguments than the libs because we have been having to do so to counter the influence of the treasonous, libelous press. We accept the challenges, face them, and find solutions. The Lib response to any problem is to devolve into tyranny, censorship, emotional appeals, and every logical fallacy available. They are intellectually lazy. If they weren’t they would be conservatives.
urbancenturion on December 7, 2006 at 5:30 PM
Regarding ordinary citizens;
A Note on the Signers of the Declaration of Independence
Beware this one.
AZ_Redneck on December 7, 2006 at 5:37 PM
Constantine,
We sure can. Do you see mush Nazism or Japanese imperialism these days? Hell, when was the last time you ran into a Druid?
History is replete with failed, forgotten ideas. Killing those who hold them is just one way of eliminating ideas.
Pablo on December 7, 2006 at 5:37 PM
urbancenturion,
You make a blade sharp by working it on a dull stone.
Pablo on December 7, 2006 at 5:39 PM
WRONG. Every time the United States of America, the greatest nation to have ever existed, succumbs to Islamic attacks and fails to defeat lesser Islamic enemies, the jihadi claims that God is on their side are demonstrated to be correct. Who but Allah could have managed a 9-11 attack so successfully with only 19 men? Who but Allah could be behind the retreat of 150,000 troops holding vastly superior armament when faced with fighting only a few thousand Muslim resistors?
The main reason that so many jihadists have been so willing to die for their cause is that recent history supports the perception that the war on the infidel is going to be won as a matter of course. They are absolutely sure of their reward, having witnessed great nations getting their “rewards” at the hand of Muslim extremists.
Sadly, this once-great nation has become defined in the eyes of our enemies in terms of our limitations (many self-imposed), not our potential. We are a predictable and a comfort-loving people.
Our failure to take this threat seriously has resulted and will continue to result in proving the existence of the radical Islamist’s Allah to even more Muslims. The real threat from these people comes from being defeated by them, and whatever we chose to call our withdrawal without victory will not change the perception of defeat in the hearts and minds of our enemies.
They live and die for the days America tastes defeat.
shuzilla on December 7, 2006 at 5:39 PM
Off Topic, but about trolls.
My post on this subject (see trackback above) got linked to by Salon today. Yea me!
I gotta tell ya, Connie, GregH, and all the other guys with lefty tenancies hanging out here just to annoy the other “hot heads”… ya’ll are tame.
I am getting hate comments like I’ve never seen before. It will keep my black little heart warm for a few weeks at this rate.
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on December 7, 2006 at 5:47 PM
Here’s an idea for how to dael with Iraq: We do withdraw–onto our aircraft carriers, battleships, etc. sitting in the Persian Gulf and our bases in Kuwait. And let the jihadists take over Iraq. When they think they have accomplished something, we bomb it to smithereens, assainate their leaders, level their mosques, slince their prayer speakers, jam their state-sponsored-TV stations, and generally obliterate everything they treasure. (Oh, we should already be doing that to Iran.) Will they give up and go home?
I know, it’s a silly fantasy.
urbancenturion on December 7, 2006 at 5:49 PM
BTW, what’s a trackback?
urbancenturion on December 7, 2006 at 5:50 PM
Amen Brian. Every day it amazes me how oblivious America is to the evil that threatens her. Even my close circle of friends, despite my incessant badgering, know nothing of this report, nuclear Iran, nuclear Korea, dirty bombs, polonium sushi, bananas with condoms, and a thousand other things that threaten our Great Republic. I remember as a teenager thinking that other great civilizations of the past like Rome for example must have been pretty weak to have failed in the end. Now, I hear the warning bells ringing. Our only hope is a correction. I thought 9-11 was it, a proverbial wakeup call to the citizens of our Great Nation that people are trying to kill us. It seems 9-11 only fanned the flames of inner turmoil. The wicked elements of the left have used the opportunity to further weaken our strength, our morality, our memory of the history that is America and most importantly, our collective will. Thank you for your comments. At least I know I’m not alone.
RobertCSampson on December 7, 2006 at 6:06 PM
Here’s an idea for how to dael with Iraq: We do withdraw–onto our aircraft carriers, battleships, etc. sitting in the Persian Gulf and our bases in Kuwait. And let the jihadists take over Iraq. When they think they have accomplished something, we bomb it to smithereens, assainate their leaders, level their mosques, slince their prayer speakers, jam their state-sponsored-TV stations, and generally obliterate everything they treasure. (Oh, we should already be doing that to Iran.) Will they give up and go home?
I know, it’s a silly fantasy.
urbancenturion on December 7, 2006 at 5:49 PM
I know, it’s a silly fantasy.
urbancenturion on December 7, 2006 at 5:49 PM
Bradky on December 7, 2006 at 6:12 PM
How deluded and paranoid can one be? Quite a bit, apparently. Few people opposed the war because it “felt” wrong, but rather because it was a diversion from the WoT and because invading and occupying a country is no small matter, even with competent leadership. They were right.
Constantine on December 7, 2006 at 6:12 PM
The Iraq war is like flypaper for jihadists, just like San Fransicko is flypaper for freaks and the US is flypaper for illegals looking for government handouts. The Iraq war is not a diversion from the WoT, it IS the WoT, and it’s a proxy for a war with Iran and Syria that we’ve already been fighting.
NTWR on December 7, 2006 at 6:31 PM
Constantine … please name a single war that you would have supported. And if you name World War 2 … would you have supported how we “won it?” I doubt it. And if I’m right … even back then, the likes of you would have eventually been whining and weeping about too many people dying. You simply lack the spine needed to defend your country, or your family.
The truth is that with a Republican in office … there’s absolutely no amount of evidence or facts that would convince you to support this war. Your hatred for this situation has nothing to do with the war. It’s about your sissy little liberal feelings.
Gregor on December 7, 2006 at 6:34 PM
NTWR, me too (love Bryan), unabashedly, even if he blushes.
On a serious note, Bryan, thank you for saying what so many of us know in our fiber. You also know how to write eloquently.
GregH, I don’t question your patriotism, ever. I question your wisdom, while I think you’re a smart guy. But, eh, you’re free to be whatever, still, anyway.
Pablo nailed it on the ‘ideology’. I’d add that communism is also an ideology – though, our 3-4 adorable trolls might not wish that one to go away either…even though they pretend to like socialism better. I lived in communism. Talk to me before you embrace it again. Socialism is not far behind.
Janos, igen, igen – I left the link to the town, on the same thread you mentined it.
fogw, love your fixns, always. Thanks also for sharing your story a bit. Agree with you 100%. Would love to meet you some day.
We’ll look back at these times as very perilous, these very times, of right now, these weeks and months.
Entelechy on December 7, 2006 at 6:41 PM
…I don’t know…what you got?
Puritan1648 on December 7, 2006 at 6:50 PM
Kudos on your Article Bryan!!
I agree with everything that you wrote except I would added Puritan1648’s bit on Sandra Day O’Connor.
I too think his wife should have been selected to be the “woman” on the panel. She would have been the only panelist with any military experience or keen insight.
ScottyDog on December 7, 2006 at 7:32 PM
Entelechy, ( who I thought was Magyar but is román ) thanks for the link, which is different from the site which they told me about the last time I was home. The webcam on the town square is a great idea, except that usually nothing happens–exept fog until noon or so
On topic, more or less, last month was the fiftieth aniversary of the “Hungarian Uprising”, when men with old rifles stood up to Soviet tanks in the streets of Budapest in a vain attempt to end the rule of a Russian puppet–and the Eisenhower administration, for all its talk, did nothing.
It would have been dangerous for Nato troops to cross the “Iron Curtain” and engage Warsaw Pact forces in 1956: it could likely have triggered a nuclear war, but the rhetoric coming out of Washington in those days was taken at face value by people who lost their lives–or had to flee their country with their two children, Mila and Janos
Janos Hunyadi on December 7, 2006 at 8:03 PM
PLUS , I did NOT know all of this:
more here.
shooter on December 7, 2006 at 8:11 PM
Janos, but I’m not Gypsy (román-német :)
I’m so glad your parents made it with the two children. I assume Janos and Mila are you and your sister. Could be wrong.
In 1968 I was on a trip by train to then East-Germany, via Budapest and Prague, as we couldn’t travel anywhere else. I came home one week before the Russians moved into Csechoslovakia. The Romanian tanks were moving rapidly toward the border because Ceausescu had criticized the USSR for attacking another communist country and they had warned him to be quiet or to be next. I was very, very young and scared. We came very close…Many Csechs left at that time to Austria.
Entelechy on December 7, 2006 at 10:57 PM
…so it is…I’d forgotten.
From the few refugees and children of refugees I’ve met, America got the best of the deal. It was a sad, shameful episode. NATO proved that it wasn’t good for much…a record it’s kept spotless….
Hungary won out in the end. You can’t keep a good people down for long.
Puritan1648 on December 7, 2006 at 11:35 PM
igen, Entelechy, román is the Magyar word for Romanian.
A Gypsy is a cigány; Gypsies as a group are cigány módjára élni
…and thus concludes tonight’s lingo-seminar; more later, eventually
Janos Hunyadi on December 7, 2006 at 11:45 PM
Egy ka het negy, I can’t take it anymore ;)
Bryan, it’s all of that – everything you laid out above – PLUS a betrayal of Israel, a gratuitous one, going out of their way as they did to link Iraq unnecessarily to Israel’s security situation.
And, to add insult to injury, they took a highly tendentious view of the Palestinian jihad against the Jewish state that wasn’t necessary either and is tantamount to blackmail.
That Iraq would now be “allowed” – in polite company and official circles – to be tied directly to the “settlement” of the Palestinian-Israeli and other “disputes” outside of American control attempts to pile on the kind of leverage against Israel that says, if you don’t settle your disputes with your adversaries (or their disputes with you), no matter how outrageous their demands, then not only are you preventing your own security dilemma from being resolved, now you’re preventing ours as well.
How dare they? Just who the he– are these characters – Abu Baker, Leon Pancetta and the rest – to even suggest this, let alone stipulate it? Just putting the idea into circulation is dangerous because it makes it more acceptable to talk about it, and thus more likely for someone down the line to try it even if the current administration rejects it.
RD on December 8, 2006 at 3:14 AM
–ÉN nem tud fog ez többé– is what you meant to say, RD?
Or like Anne Heche, former Lesbian and Canadian, you’ve made up your own language? She did so to talk to aliens, and in the high point of her career babbled on TV to Babwa Walters. Turns out that aliens only speak Yiddish, with a Polish accent, so…….
and I agree with all that stuff you wrote in English about the Usual Suspects
Janos Hunyadi on December 8, 2006 at 3:34 AM
And, to add insult to injury, they took a highly tendentious view of the Palestinian jihad against the Jewish state that wasn’t necessary either and is tantamount to blackmail.
The blackmail being, “If you people don’t make peace with your neighbors – on their terms – then we can’t be held responsible for the consequences. Consequences not just for Israel, but for the entire Middle East.”
RD on December 8, 2006 at 3:36 AM
Yeah, yeah, that exactly… :)
Not so fortunate I’m afraid. No aliens here, just some mangled Bela Bartok-ese. I think it’s actually supposed to be “egy-ket-ha-negy”, and is used as a kind of rhythmic one-two-three-four count. (At least more rhythmic than egy-kettot-harom-negy anyhow…)
Glad this is the middle of the night or else the WTF comments would be flying right now -
Thx!
RD on December 8, 2006 at 3:54 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2