Is the War Really "Lost?"
In the Associated Press on April 19, 2007, Senate Majority Leader is quoted as saying "the war [in Iraq] is lost." It definitely has not been won by either the U.S. and its Iraqi government allies; nor has it been won by the coalition of insurgent and anti-government groups fighting the U.S. In history, we call this a stalemate. What does Reid declaring the war "lost" really mean?
Over the entire issue of the war funding bills before both houses of Congress, Reid and the Democrats, but no less than the Republicans (who are equally guilty), are trying to scheme partisan politics into the war issue to their advantage. Declaring the war "lost" is a sound-byte, plain and simple. Wars are only won and lost in basic two ways: Either in the total destruction and occupation of an enemy and their homeland by its adversary, or the political capitulation of one side (or both sides--in a stalemate) of a belligerent. Are the U.S. or its armed forces destroyed? Absolutely not. The U.S. effort in military terms could continue indefinitely up to the point of losing its military-aged citizens or in complete financial bankruptcy of the government.
Reid is signalling the other type of defeat: voluntary capitulation. He is showing that American politics, on the left and right, in both parties, have admitted their bankruptcy of ideas and moral certainty. That is not to say that the war in Iraq was not an extremely short-sighted and arrogant policy by the Bush Administration, or that genuine genocide is not happening to the Iraqi people, (more from the insurgent than the U.S.-Iraqi-Coalition forces--but that is open to honest debate as well). The whole invasion, occupation, and counter-insurgency effort in Iraq may have been the right war in the larger picture of history, but it was definitely fought at the wrong time. I firmly believe that in, say, the next five or so years, U.S. intervention in a post-Saddam Hussein Iraq would have been inevitable, if the Iraqi dictator had died or been overthrown. There should be no delusions about that. Iraq was a political mass destructive bomb that would have exploded eventually. Yet, under such an inevitable need for some sort of military intervention in the Persian Gulf, the timing would have been better and a true "coalition" of the many would have come forward, including France and Russia.
Throughout the last four years, the Bush Administration and its agents have committed grotesque incompetence, and perhaps more, in prosecuting the war. No war is lost "until the big one drops," the escalation to nuclear extermination at which war ceases as a practical and often effective tool of political policy. To declare the war "lost" is a failure of politics and the failure of the entire political leadership who have done one of the worst jobs in American history at managing a conflict (i.e. the entire war against the terrorists). It is not lost as long as America is not destroyed. On the other hand, the harder reality, losing political will in this war is tantamount to an eventual, larger looming threat from Islamists radicals. Just as when the Israelis were forced to leave Lebanon in disorder in the summer of 2000, radical political Islam will smell the American fear in our "politics as usual." Surrending in Iraq enables the terrorist.
This is not "just like Vietnam." Vietnam was in a time and world of its own, and was relatively insignificant in the larger geo-political game between East and West in the Cold War. NO! Iraq is a genuine theater of the war that will save or end independence for America, and save or end liberty in the entire world. It is in the most strategically important region in the 21st Century world of globalization. Just remember, when the Middle East and its oil no longer matter, the war against the terrorists will be irrelevant and it will end. Until that time, until Americans individualluy (This means you and I) make better choices about our way of life and our future, we will only be bringing the consequences of our selfishness and greed upon us with the vengence of fate.
In the meantime, instread of empowering the Bush Administration or the Democrats in Congress to continue their self-centered, greedy behavior in every aspect of the politics of this war, the American people need to demand better leaders across the spectrum of power.
The war is not lost. It is not won. It can be won, but only by using a political grand strategy far different, something along the lines of The Cepia Club's "Libertarian Internationalism" (Find out more on www.cepiaclub.com/Strategy_Gazette.htm under Vol. I, Issue 4). That is the beginning of a victory plan. The second part is use the power of personal liberty, economic freedom, common security, and community action to wedge out the radicals, in America and the Middle East. The third part of a victory program is to use America's tradition of a maritime strategy to fight smarter with less resources. Stay tuned to further writings from The Cepia Club on the "maritime strategy" for winning the wars of the 21st Century.
To win the war we must use liberty and cunning as our prime tools. If not, it will surely be lost and we will lose all.
Over the entire issue of the war funding bills before both houses of Congress, Reid and the Democrats, but no less than the Republicans (who are equally guilty), are trying to scheme partisan politics into the war issue to their advantage. Declaring the war "lost" is a sound-byte, plain and simple. Wars are only won and lost in basic two ways: Either in the total destruction and occupation of an enemy and their homeland by its adversary, or the political capitulation of one side (or both sides--in a stalemate) of a belligerent. Are the U.S. or its armed forces destroyed? Absolutely not. The U.S. effort in military terms could continue indefinitely up to the point of losing its military-aged citizens or in complete financial bankruptcy of the government.
Reid is signalling the other type of defeat: voluntary capitulation. He is showing that American politics, on the left and right, in both parties, have admitted their bankruptcy of ideas and moral certainty. That is not to say that the war in Iraq was not an extremely short-sighted and arrogant policy by the Bush Administration, or that genuine genocide is not happening to the Iraqi people, (more from the insurgent than the U.S.-Iraqi-Coalition forces--but that is open to honest debate as well). The whole invasion, occupation, and counter-insurgency effort in Iraq may have been the right war in the larger picture of history, but it was definitely fought at the wrong time. I firmly believe that in, say, the next five or so years, U.S. intervention in a post-Saddam Hussein Iraq would have been inevitable, if the Iraqi dictator had died or been overthrown. There should be no delusions about that. Iraq was a political mass destructive bomb that would have exploded eventually. Yet, under such an inevitable need for some sort of military intervention in the Persian Gulf, the timing would have been better and a true "coalition" of the many would have come forward, including France and Russia.
Throughout the last four years, the Bush Administration and its agents have committed grotesque incompetence, and perhaps more, in prosecuting the war. No war is lost "until the big one drops," the escalation to nuclear extermination at which war ceases as a practical and often effective tool of political policy. To declare the war "lost" is a failure of politics and the failure of the entire political leadership who have done one of the worst jobs in American history at managing a conflict (i.e. the entire war against the terrorists). It is not lost as long as America is not destroyed. On the other hand, the harder reality, losing political will in this war is tantamount to an eventual, larger looming threat from Islamists radicals. Just as when the Israelis were forced to leave Lebanon in disorder in the summer of 2000, radical political Islam will smell the American fear in our "politics as usual." Surrending in Iraq enables the terrorist.
This is not "just like Vietnam." Vietnam was in a time and world of its own, and was relatively insignificant in the larger geo-political game between East and West in the Cold War. NO! Iraq is a genuine theater of the war that will save or end independence for America, and save or end liberty in the entire world. It is in the most strategically important region in the 21st Century world of globalization. Just remember, when the Middle East and its oil no longer matter, the war against the terrorists will be irrelevant and it will end. Until that time, until Americans individualluy (This means you and I) make better choices about our way of life and our future, we will only be bringing the consequences of our selfishness and greed upon us with the vengence of fate.
In the meantime, instread of empowering the Bush Administration or the Democrats in Congress to continue their self-centered, greedy behavior in every aspect of the politics of this war, the American people need to demand better leaders across the spectrum of power.
The war is not lost. It is not won. It can be won, but only by using a political grand strategy far different, something along the lines of The Cepia Club's "Libertarian Internationalism" (Find out more on www.cepiaclub.com/Strategy_Gazette.htm under Vol. I, Issue 4). That is the beginning of a victory plan. The second part is use the power of personal liberty, economic freedom, common security, and community action to wedge out the radicals, in America and the Middle East. The third part of a victory program is to use America's tradition of a maritime strategy to fight smarter with less resources. Stay tuned to further writings from The Cepia Club on the "maritime strategy" for winning the wars of the 21st Century.
To win the war we must use liberty and cunning as our prime tools. If not, it will surely be lost and we will lose all.
Powered by ScribeFire.
posted by Scipio Cepicanus @ 10:40 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home