We won Viet Nam?
We're winning Iraqinam?

Bush and brethren pissed away military equipment, overextended troops and reserve, and supporting civilian resources without any long term plan for the war, it's aftermath, or reconstruction. Hence they say we're 'winning', but not militarily vulnerable as hell, running out of resources, and having to go out 'on the street' to restock.
I support the cause from the beginning.
If you still believe the spin from Bush and brethren about this war, you can probably spin, believe, and explain how 76% industrial capacity means our economy is growing, too. And, don't forget that now the food service counts for some of our real industrial jobs sent overseas.

Bubba you are a F*&^&$# idiot. No where does it say that we won the Vietnam war. RTFP.

The longer the U.S. has forces in the field, killing Jihadists at rates that far exceed their own casualties, the greater the probability that the Jihadists have difficulty in sustaining their operations.

This is idiotic. We are helping them recruit jihadis at a rate that exceeds both.

Not to mention we are killing innocent civilians at rates that far exceed the rates of dead jihadis and setting ourselves up as torture chamber experts in front of the world, our enemies and the growing number of our former allies.

Beyond that, U.S. occupation of Iraq has removed all Arab leverage on the U.S. with regards to basing troops in the region, and has put about 1/5th of known oil reserves under the physical control of the U.S.. Again, decreased Arab leverage in the long run.

Now that is laughable, how long do you think that will last? I give it a year.

This is not the same Bubba that used to frequent here.

Kelm, are you the most intelligent creature in your family?

Dumbass said, "This is idiotic. We are helping them recruit jihadis at a rate that exceeds both."

I say, "Hey, you are one sharp sob. How did you get into the jihads books to know how many recruits thev've had volunteer to be killed by the coalition?"

Dumbass said, "Now that is laughable, how long do you think that will last? I give it a year"

I say, "Not only a 'sharp sob', you're one with a really positive attitude. Bet you're a hit with the chicks and a blast on a date."

Recruiting Jihadists. That is Total Bull shit. These are cowards, so who gives a damn about those in Saudi or Pakistan, etc.

The alternative to our long term basing and success in Iraq is the elimination of Iran's Mullahs, Syria and Saudi among others.

Which will you choose?

This meme, that we are helping Al Qaeda recruit due to the action in Iraq stands the truth on its head. Al Qaeda had over 20,000 recruits run through its training camps in Afghanistan in the 1990's. They didn't need the action in Iraq to draw recruits.

Quite the contrary, the number one inducement for Al Qaeda recruitment prior to 9-11 was the sanctions against Iraq which OBL credited with having (and every Arab believes) killed over 1 million innocent Iraqi citizens. In Arab eyes, this was a genocide perpetrated by the US and blithely dismissed by the insouciant Madame Albright who, in a television segment broadcast throughout the region, when asked if the sanctions were worth it given the death and devastation, cavalierly replied "Yes, no question", inflaming sentiment throughout the Islamic nations.

Americans were ill served by their media in the 1990's, which ignored overseas problems in service of their man in the White House. And, so we had the WTC I, and the Khobar Towers, and Somalia, and the bombings in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam, and the bombing of the USS Cole, and bin Laden's fatwah declaring jihad in 1998. And the hatred ballooned and festered while confidence grew that we could not, would not strike back effectually, culminating in the 9-11 atrocity.

What we have done in Iraq is to lance the boil. And, like treating a boil, it may be a little painful in the near term but, in the long term, it is the only way it would ever have been possible to restore the region to a state of health and stability.

More and more Iraqis are joining the battle beside us against the Jihadis. That is the answer. A free Iraq will provide the rest of the Mid East an alternative to the oppression offered by bin Laden, the Baathists, and the mullahs. We are winning, Ask anyone on the ground over there. Fallujah is calm, and the Mehdi Army is no more. If the anti American Left can buck up and realize we are doing some good here we might effectively change the world for the betterment of future generations.

Well written, but the complete opposite of any semblance of reality. If what you printed was true, then every mainstream conservative pundit would be singing this piece from the highest mount.

But they aren't. Because this piece is the equivalent of seeing a broken glass on the floor and saying it's full of Dom.

This war has been a disaster. Comparing it to Vietnam isn't doing it any favours.

Vince, how about just a hint of facts or reason to back up your assertions or analogies? On the other hand, consider this material linked on instapundit just today:

Meanwhile Peter Robinson echoes a point of Drezner's -- that the prewar situation was unravelling and something had to be done -- and notes:


Food in Iraq is everywhere available, clean water is flowing, electricity is being produced at levels higher than those before the war, hundreds of schools have been rebuilt and some 30,000 teachers trained—and whereas before the war Iraqi civilians were dying untimely deaths at the rate of 36,000 a year, now even an anti-war group estimates that in the last 14 months the number of Iraqi civilians to die unnatural deaths numbers at most about 11,000.

This represents a record of which George W. Bush is supposed to be ashamed?

(In a later post Robinson notes that the number of Iraqi lives saved is almost certainly much higher than the above number suggests.)This isn't really in disagreement with Drezner, who notes in his blog post that he thinks things in Iraq are better than generally believed. To this mix you might add this post from Iraqi blogger Mohammed, who seems happier with the situation than either Drezner or Robinson, perhaps because his expectations are lower: "the reason for this is that I have lived under Saddam."

Or consider these facts from that bastion of the neocons, the LA times:

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-oe-boot27may27,1,7228821.column

You people who just scream "disaster, disaster, Bush is an idiot" just make me sick. Not only is your argument devoid of facts or analysis, it's also just plain anti-American.

Quoth Reid:

the number one inducement for Al Qaeda recruitment prior to 9-11 was the sanctions against Iraq which OBL credited with having (and every Arab believes) killed over 1 million innocent Iraqi citizens.

First of all, not every Arab believes this. Most Iraqis understand that it was Saddam who killed so many innocent Iraqis. Those parades of dead babies were arranged by Saddam as a propeganda stunt, nothing more.

Not to mention that they are losing the qualified, experienced terrorists and replacing them with inexperenced and uneducated guys from the slums, literally thrusting a rocket launcher in their hands and pushing them out the door.

I'd rather face ten clueless losers then one smart bastard any day of the week.

gus3 - Almost every Arab believes this, from the Fertile Crescent to the Empty Quarter. Why shouldn't they? The UN itself is on record reporting that over 500,000 children alone died who otherwise would not have. I didn't say who they blamed for it, necessarily, though the volunteers flocking to Afghanistan in the '90's sure blamed us.

Now, what's second of all?

Posting phony numbers and stealing both?

And the world wants the U.N. back. Ha!

Man, do we have some real prospects there
for Louisiana swampland purchases.

"Beyond that, U.S. occupation of Iraq has removed all Arab leverage on the U.S. with regards to basing troops in the region, and has put about 1/5th of known oil reserves under the physical control of the U.S.. Again, decreased Arab leverage in the long run."

It's not about oil. It's about liberating the Iraqi people from a dictator that we had nothing to do with. Conservation, while a personal virtue, is not a basis for national policy.

I'm glad for all the good news out of Iraq, schools, hospitals, health care, and baptist missionaries, all the placards of the right wing. For $110,000,000 so far there had better be something to show for it.

This post was very articulate, but Iraq and the Jihadist didn't have that much to do with each other. The support for suicide bombers was synical manipulation of Arab sentiment, who reguard these people as freedom fighters. Saddam was a 'bad muslem' and in the Jihadist's cross hairs. A lot of this was rationalization in after thought presented as motive.

"is the expression of a Commander-In-Chief’s complete understanding of what was necessary strategically to enter the War On Terror under..."

Blind assertion.

Just as personal wealth is built slowly, we have been neglecting the ME 'portfolio' for decades and now we are paying back the catch up in blood. Jordon and Kuwait could have been nurtured into more democratic countries, some of the Gulf States are coming along on their own paths. The Iranians, once they get done with their religious madness, already have the shells of the democracy left from when we replaced it by the Shah. Their trauma might serve as a useful object lesson, but if we go in guns blazing, I don't think we will be safer from the Jihadist, us overthrowing an islamist state that way could breed even more terrorist than Iraq has (Oh, I know you guys will deny that this has happened so save it). The real devil is Saudi Arabia, but they are our friends, right? We have the luxury of saying that we haven't done anything wrong in the past AND anything else would be unpatriotic.

This article is the biggest load of crap ive ever read.
sure, theres good news coming out of Iraq, but earning the hatred of middle eastrn arabs by oppressing them and causing asymetrical casualties is NOT goint to win the war on terror. Thats only going to happen thru heatrs and minds.
Terrorist groups feed on a reservior of discontent ,an expression of pollitical feeling. Basically theyre political parties with bombs. Only by draining that discontent can a victory be acheived. The isrealis cant even stop hamas in gaza, despite the most sophisticated security apparatus in the world ,ringing whats basically a huge prison. We could NEVER hope to defeat terror if it truly gained ba powerful hold over the muslim or arab world.

mac23

Iraq and the Jihadist didn't have much to do with each other

Not true. They had common interests. The fact that Saddam was not a true Muslim is utterly irrelevant. After all, the Jihadis use American made weapons and communications equipment, and we are the enemy. Saddam had a strong interest in attacking the US - strong enough that he tried to kill a former president, a reckless act of war.

This "afterthought" is nonsense. It was one of the most important reasons for the war, and anyone who paid attention was aware of it from the start. The only thing that appears to be an afterthough is the "flypaper effect."

As far as the ME "portfoloi" - it has been worked hard for at least 30 years. Your assertions are certainly not supported by any facts. Nurturing Jordan, which is mostly Palestinian, into "democracy," with its tremendous sensitivity to Iraqi needs and behavior, would be very, very dangerous. Furthermore, the monarchy there is relatively benevolent. Iraq was another story.

The problem with Saudi Arabia is easy to describe and very hard to fix: oil. To change its regime could cause dramatic disruption to world economies (note that the US is putting extra into the strategic oil reserve and this may be one reason). SA must be forced to stop exporting Wahhabiism which is the greatest danger. But SA is a very complex place, so changing it is tough - look at all the trouble the Administration had from asshats for taking braq. Saudi Arabia would be much worse when oil goes to $100 per barrel.

In other words, the mideast is complex and requires different approaches to difference countries. Why should we force a democratcy on Jordan when Jordan is serving our cause, treating its people well, and the strategic cost of failure would be very high?

The real problem countries at the moment are:

Saudi Arabia
Iran
potentially Pakistan
North Korea
France and Russia (in a different way)

westcountry

Your post is so overly simplistic that I will only address one point: Many in the middle east will hate us no matter what we do. This is for the following reasons:

1) THe entire pan-Arab world has contributed almost nothing to science or though or commerce in the last 200 years. Europe has, and now Asia has. They resent us for their failures. They have money only because of the random luck of having oil, which we did all the labor to find and put into production.

2) Radical Islam is like communism - it is a utopian ideology (if you are a young man) that solves all the problems and lets you focus your frustratons.

3) The United States and the west export popular culture to the world. Much of it is very offensive (and yet very popular) to Muslims. Whenn they see our advertisements or watch our TV shows or listen to our music, they see a world they hate: One in which women are equal to men; sex is treated radically different; people are (to them) wealthy and happy.

4) We support the two democracies in the regioni - Turkey (non-Arab) and Israel (which is the biggest problem). If you can show how to deNazify Arabia and get rid of their antiSemitism (it's a lot more than anti-Zionism), good luck.

2)

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (Click here should you choose to sign out.)

As you post your comment, please mind our simple comment policy: we welcome all perspectives, but require that comments be both civil and respectful. We also ask that you avoid the extensive use of profanity, racist terms (neither of which we consider civil or respectful), and other boorish language.

We reserve the right to delete any comment, and to prohibit you from commenting on this site, if we feel you have broached this policy. As a courtesy, we will first send you an email noting a violation so you understand the boundaries. This will occur only once, however, and should we ban you from our comment forums we expect that ban to be permanent.

We also will frown upon those who suggest that we ban other individuals for voicing unpopular opinions, should those opinions be voiced in a civil and respectful manner. The point of our comment threads is to provide a forum for spirited though civil and respectful discourse … it is not to provide a forum in which everyone will agree with your point of view.

If you can live by these rules, welcome aboard. If not, then we’re sorry it didn’t work out, and thanks for visiting The Command Post.

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: