Posted by
GLASSER on Saturday, December 23, 2006 6:13:37 AM
I cannot tell by our handling of the war in Iraq, so far, that we remember any of the lessons available from the disastrous ordeal in Vietnam. Obviously, politicians need to let the military fight wars. That is why we have a military. Politicians are for getting us in wars. They know very little about how to win one. It seems strange to me to tell someone's enemy every little detail of the plans to be used to try to defeat said enemy. In fact, that just may be stranger than letting anyone, who has a connection with a major media outlet, have a voice in deciding what the war plans are going to be. The reason it seems strange to me is, I do not see how such blabbermouths could beat their way out of a paper sack, with two holes already torn in it. Surely, America does not rate the the Moslem extremists' capability to fight that lowly. It almost seems that we want the people who are trying to destroy our way of life, if not our very lives, to have as good a chance, or better, to win this war as we do. In Vietnam, the commies knew when we were going to attack, what direction we would come from, where we would and would not drop bombs, and how to make us look like the bad guys, no matter how the attack turned out. The present war is being fought under pretty much the same, if not stricter, rules of engagement. Every move our military makes is under public scrutiny. It seems that the enemy has as much of an opinion on what our troops are allowed to do as anyone. Of course much of Congress and the media are fighting right alongside of the jihadists. Consequently, our military is pretty much handcuffed in what they can do to prosecute the war on terrorism. It was the same in Vietnam.
Take the discussion of why we are fighting in the first place. Never mind that many of the 'insurgents' are imported by Al Qaida, Iran, and Saudi Arabia, though one would never know that from watching the network news or cnn. How can anyone know, but maybe Saddam himself, or someone with extremely inside information (how much do you really know?), that there are no WMDS in Iraq. There are, obviously, lots of weapons in Iraq that our Freedom Fighters haven't found,yet. They seem to be getting killed by weapons every day. I realize no WMD's have been used so far, that we know of, but does that mean there are not any, anywhere in Iraq. Bio toxin is easily concealed in a country as big as Iraq. Too, it seems to be easy enough to smuggle men and weapons around Iraq, why not weapons as small as petri dishes or Mason jars attached to a pipe bomb. I do not understand why our government refuses to seal any( even our) border.
| I must have missed the downfall of deception as a vital tactic to win a war. It seems that, in this war that we are fighting to defend our very lives, every detail of America's proposed plans are discussed and critiqued in front of the whole world by, largely, people who have not only never touched a gun, but are trying to see that no other American touches one either, whether they want to or not. If our Commander in Chief were to present some mis-information about the war to give us any kind of advantage over the jihadists, he would be impeached for lying. I suppose that, because the libs are not even going to let our military defend us, we won't ever need a gun to defend ourselves (see latest crime rates as well as the rising likelihood of terrorist immigrants). |
In my opinion, such as it is, Russia is still very much controlled by the same party of people as always. They merely realized they could not afford to support the empire they acquired before, during and after WW2. Most of the countries they annexed were costing too much money for them to keep behind their iron curtain. The Commies noticed China's idea of using their endless supply of slave labor to use otherwise capitalistic methods of bankrupting America, much as America was using her seemingly endless supply of technological advances and money to bankrupt the Soviet Union. Consequently, Russia dumped the countries that were not profitable for them and consolidated their profit makers, one of which is weapons, including nuclear. It very well could be that a fringe benefit of supplying Iran everything they need to deliver (exploding) nuclear and, possibly, biological, warheads to America is, Iran will use them. Then, Russia would get what they wanted all along, because the lib's, who will soon be in control, will not respond militarily because no one will be able to prove in a court of law who was responsible for the millions of people killed by whatever wmd's "Iran decides to use on us first.. At the very least, both Russia and China are getting much satisfaction and profit from this war, so far.
Now, there is the Surrender proposed by the Fabulous Baker Brothers. Evidently they want us to hide in our living rooms and pretend the nightly news on TV is accurate and nothing will happen to us if we leave other countries alone, except when the liberals want us to intervene a little bit like Somalia, or too little, too late, like Bosnia. Then, when attacked, we launch a couple of missiles at an abandoned (because we will warn them)building or pasture. Stalin's blind eye towards Hitler comes to mind, but that only cost Russia a few million lives,and Stalin did not care. I sometimes wonder about the liberal demo politicians. They probably think they can talk the Islamists out of killing everyone who is not a radical Muslim, and they want Israel out of our hair anyway. The liberals act like they worry about any inconvenience imposed on any Muslim, anywhere in the world, yet they don't seem to care how many Americans die due to their tactics used to regain control of the American people. If we follow the "surrender report', not only will Israel be out of our hair, so will our heads. Baker and company must have studied the New York Times real hard to arrive at their conclusions (delusions).
They say there is nothing new in this world except the history we forgot. America seems to have the shortest memory about history, in history.