« Enemies to port? | Main | Carnival of the Trackbacks LII »

W.F. Buckley: Iraq Mission is a Failure

In William F. Buckley's recent article in National Review, he writes about why he thinks the American mission in Iraq has failed:

Our mission has failed because Iraqi animosities have proved uncontainable by an invading army of 130,000 Americans. The great human reserves that call for civil life haven't proved strong enough. No doubt they are latently there, but they have not been able to contend against the ice men who move about in the shadows with bombs and grenades and pistols.


The Iraqis we hear about are first indignant, and then infuriated, that Americans aren't on the scene to protect them and to punish the aggressors. And so they join the clothing merchant who says that everything is the fault of the Americans...

...A problem for American policymakers -- for President Bush, ultimately -- is to cope with the postulates and decide how to proceed.

One of these postulates, from the beginning, was that the Iraqi people, whatever their tribal differences, would suspend internal divisions in order to get on with life in a political structure that guaranteed them religious freedom.

The accompanying postulate was that the invading American army would succeed in training Iraqi soldiers and policymkers to cope with insurgents bent on violence.

This last did not happen. And the administration has, now, to cope with failure. It can defend itself historically, standing by the inherent reasonableness of the postulates.

I can't allow myself to concede that a democratic Iraq is an outright failure. The attack on the Golden Mosque was a devastating blow to the Shiites, which proved to be too much for them, and they reacted. However, the violence can still be brought under control and we need to let the Iraqi government, Iraqi forces, and American military do their jobs to get this done. The last thing our troops need right now is more Americans piling on.


If I write off the effort of democracy in Iraq, I am no different than Howard Dean.

Kim Priestap blogs at Kim Priestap: A Conservative Blog in Flyover Country


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference W.F. Buckley: Iraq Mission is a Failure:

» Below The Beltway linked with Is Iraq A Lost Cause ?

» Flopping Aces linked with The Buckley Philosophy

» Echo9er linked with The Monday after the Week Before

Comments (39)

Kim, I'm with you.... (Below threshold)
Peg:

Kim, I'm with you.

What was Buckley thinking? Getting rid of Saddam and turning Iraq into a free nation was gonna be easy? The insurgents and radicals wouldn't fight back? That we wouldn't suffer tremendous losses?

Makes you glad that these wimps weren't around during WWII - eh? My folks woulda been turned into lampshades, and I'd never had the opportunity to write this comment; there never would have been any "me".

" I can't allow myself to c... (Below threshold)
Semanticleo:

" I can't allow myself to concede that a democratic Iraq is an outright failure."

Of course you can't concede. It is unthinkable
that so many 'experts' were wrong on Iraq because
those who have a conscience will have to remember
the 25,000 american casualties(the admin keeps this
close to the vest, unlike the number of dead which
seems better because it's 10% of that)may
have made a sacrifice that wasn't worth the cost.

You have the temerity to mention Dean's speech
(only two months ago) in which he was pilloried
for saying the same thing as Buckley now writes.

You don't have to be a genius to know the Iraq
experiment was a disaster waiting to happen.

Christ! All you need do was watch "Lawrence of
Arabia".

So many people in our count... (Below threshold)
EXDemocrat:

So many people in our country have lost the ability to see hard won, long term benefits. We have become so accustomed to everything happening in a split second. This impatience has become a factor in regards to Iraq. Rather than getting the job done right over there, those who are trying to accomplish a monster task, are hampered by the impatience of many of here.

Doing something quickly can often end in a pourly done job.

It would do some of these impatient naysayers a lot of good to reopen their history books and re-read what "doing it right" has accomplished. And the fact that they were not accomplished overnight.

I'm so very tired of those ... (Below threshold)
cole:

I'm so very tired of those who think that democracy is freeze dried ... just add water ... including WF Buckley.

How long have we been working on our own democracy? It happens every day. Every meeting of any legislative or judicial body is a session in democracy tweaking.


<a href="http://english.pra... (Below threshold)
bryanD:
Hmmm.I still have ... (Below threshold)
ed:

Hmmm.

I still have hopes for Iraq but I think the real problem isn't the lack of democracy in the Middle East, nor the issues in Iraq. The real problem is the institutional ignorance in the Middle East of just how America works.

The idea that these people would think America would be behind this mosque bombing is idiotic, but it's also symptomatic of the widespread ignorance in the ME. Then there's the whole "invade Iraq for oil" nonsense. Can't these people do simple math? We've spent far more than $500 billion dollars on Iraq. At $50 a barrel that's 10 billion barrels of oil that would have bought. Iraq produces, at best, 2.5 million barrels a day. If we were even thinking of "stealing" Iraq's oil it would take, without spending any more money and taking all of the oil, 11+ years to just break even.

Which is ridiculous.

Frankly I'm worried that the combinatin of institutional ignorance in the ME coupled with an inability to reform Islam will mean that eventually this conflict will turn into one where the only possible victory would require the extermination of Islam itself.

If nothing else Iraq has shown us what will work, and what will not work. Perhaps the real answer is the mailed fist rather than the velvet glove. Perhaps what's needed is fear rather than love. If you look at the world map of violence you'll see that much of it is located in areas that weren't heavily involved in WWII. These areas didn't experience the effects of what Total War really means. Even in the Iraq-Iran War the effects were largely limited to the border areas.

Perhaps the real problem is that Islamic world doesn't understand what the West is really capable of if pushed too far. I think Iran wants the nuclear weapon because they think it's both a shield and a weapon. That they can use it without restraint in attacking their enemies, but that they can also wave it around to prevent being attacked. They don't realise that simply having a nuclear weapon automatically raises the potential dangers to the genocidal level.

*shrug*. Perhaps the best way to prevent a genocide is to implement a punitive massacre. To teach the Islamic world what the consequences really are for supporting terrorism. Because if this institutional ignorance continues it's very likely that Iran or another Islamic country will be involved in a nuclear strike on America or it's allies. In which case the response is blindingly clear; retaliation.

What set of dominoes that would set in motion I'm not sure. I have hopes but the ignorance and rank stupidity in the ME might be too great to prevent a world-wide conflagration. Perhaps we're set on a path that has no fork. That we're set into a trajectory that has no other conclusion. I'd like to think that's not the case but it all depends on just how much ignorance there is in the ME vs. the patience of the West. And I think it's very clear that the West's patience has eroded almost completely. We can hope that the ME won't be forced to reap the whirlwind and that Cairo won't become another Dresden.

But I fear all the good will and intentions won't be enough. That the level of ignorance is simply too great and that the consideration shown so far is simply being accepted by the ME as their due. That they don't really understand what sacrifices are being made on their behalf.

WF Buckley was against the ... (Below threshold)
S.:

WF Buckley was against the invasion idea in the first place, and likewise, was never enthused about the whole project of building Iraqi democracy. He's been very discrete about his opposition, but it's been there all along.
So, though this is his most outspoken piece on the subject, I'm not very surprised by it. It doesn't represent an arch-prowar-conservative cracking and turning, he's simply an anti-intervention "paleo-con" voicing a long held opinion.

It is impossible to imagine... (Below threshold)
Palmateer:

It is impossible to imagine Buckley in a uniform, serving his country.

Ifv there were a few more C... (Below threshold)
Jerry:

Ifv there were a few more Cohens and Abermoffs amoung those 25,000 casualties this war would have been over 2 years ago.

"What was Buckley thinking?... (Below threshold)
jp2:

"What was Buckley thinking? Getting rid of Saddam and turning Iraq into a free nation was gonna be easy?"

Funny, the administration told us it would be easy. And cheap, too!

-"My belief is we will, in fact, be greeted as liberators."
-"Mission Accomplished"
-"But the American part of this will be 1.7 billion. We have no plans for any further-on funding for this."

ED, Your blud... (Below threshold)
Saf:

ED,
Your bludy hilarious, the ignorance of the middle east is nothing compared to the ignorance of America, and you really think that you can wipe out Islam, you really are in a dream land, your army cannot defeat a bunch of rag tag fighters which represent barley 20% of a population of 24 million and you think you can wipe out several billion Muslims, their beliefs are not for you to reform, and your point about why cannot anyone work out that American has spent more in Iraq that what they would have got from the oil, well that's why people keep saying this was not thought through and no insurgency was expected. May be it would have been profitable if the insurgency was not so strong.

May be the whole problem is that the middle east does understand America and its history which is simply to look after its own national interest, the whole world understand that and the reputation of America is in tatters due to this war and your army no longer frightens anyone that's why leaders from Latin America are regularly having a go and just look how scared the Iranian leadership is of America they really are quaking in their boots ain't they.. not a day goes by without the Iranian leader having some sort of pop at the US....

[email protected] Saf<b... (Below threshold)
ed:

Hmmm.

@ Saf

Your bludy hilarious, the ignorance of the middle east is nothing compared to the ignorance of America, ...

You're an idiot.

America firebombed Dresden until the stonework in the buildings flowed like water. America bombed German and Austrian cities until there was barely anything left. America firebombed Japanese cities, incinerating hundreds of thousands of civilians in the inevitable firestorms. America dropped two atomic bombs on Japan, and would have dropped even more.

At that time America was willing to eradicate the Japanese race from the face of the world.

"Before we're done with them, the Japanese language will be spoken only in Hell!": Admiral William "Bull" Halsey

The only thing your comment reinforces is the perception of utter ignorance you have of America and it's history. Moreover you have no concept of what Total War would be like if applied to the ME. Tell me, what modern weapons are actually manufactured in the ME outside of Israel? The tanks you buy from China, India and Russia. The aircraft from those same suppliers or from manufacturers in Europe. Other than small arms and ammunition, there's nothing of note that is produced in the ME by arabs or muslims.

As for your "ragtag" nonsense, it's exactly that; nonsense. If arab fighters were so accomplished then you wouldn't have to rely on IEDs. The over-reliance on IEDs shows your weakness, not strength. The Viet Cong used IEDs, but didn't rely on them as their sole weapon. Instead they fought pitched battles in Vietnam, and fought hard.

But if you want to believe that "feel-good" idiotcy then go right ahead. The simple question still stands; can Islam be reformed.

If Islam cannot be reformed and we're to expect murdering terrorists in every generation of muslims, then the time will come when the line is crossed and Islam dies. Because while some cannot imagine the death of 1.2 billion muslims, there are plenty of jihadists that can and do contemplate the murder of 5 billion infidels.

And that last is the greatest danger that muslims face. That the line will be crossed and there will be no going back. No half-measures. No party tricks. Total War applied fully and without reservation; death on a wholesale basis.

I am with you ... we can't ... (Below threshold)
10ksnooker:

I am with you ... we can't abandon the Iraqis. The golden mosque bombing may be just what was needed to wake them up and get on with the government thing -- I am betting it will. The terrorists cannot be allowed to win.

It is impossible to imag... (Below threshold)

It is impossible to imagine Buckley in a uniform, serving his country.

Then you need to familiarize yourself with the biographical details of Buckley's life, and quickly, too, before you make any more ignorant statements about him. As a matter of fact, when he was a young man right out of college, WFB served his country in the CIA out in the field, i.e. doing covert operations. I think it is safe to say that this is not exactly a risk-free occupation.

"WFB served his country in ... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

"WFB served his country in the CIA out in the field, i.e. doing covert operations. I think it is safe to say that this is not exactly a risk-free occupation".............YEAH! He could've been outed by White House!

Zinger!... (Below threshold)
jp2:

Zinger!

ED, I'm not ... (Below threshold)
saf:

ED,
I'm not from the Middle East I am from the UK, and over here even the majority of white non-Muslim population looks at most Americans as totally ignorant of the rest of the world, after all less then 10% of your population has a passport. As for Arabs being totally useless idiots I totally agree with you there, this is what happens when you got oil flowing out and people getting paid for doing jack shit.

I think you aint got the intellect to grasp the point of what would happen if America went round nuking different nations, obviously you lack knowledge to have a serious debate so don't think there is much point debating with you, buy the way you do realise that to wipe Islam out America will have to nuke virtually every nation on earth...Even America is the second largest religion in America is Islam...boy aint you a clever lad.

Ed-Comments such as:... (Below threshold)

Ed-
Comments such as:

At that time America was willing to eradicate the Japanese race from the face of the world.

Total War would be like if applied to the ME. Tell me, what modern weapons are actually manufactured in the ME outside of Israel?


Clearly prove the intentions of America and Israel.

From what you have said it is very clear who really are the barbarians and the warlords. It is clear who the attackers are and who are the defenders. We have seen in the past America failing miserably- Vietnam, and we are seeing that now too -Iraq.
The situation in Iraq has become much worse after the American invaders attacked it.

Now they are thinking about attacking Iran. They need to learn from their past mistakes.

Let's be careful about pili... (Below threshold)
Steve:

Let's be careful about piling on Bill Buckley. I may not agree with him on this one, just as I didn't agree with him on legalizing drugs, but there is probably no American that the conservative movement owes a higher debt of gratitude to than Buckley. Puerile comments like "I can't imagine Buckley in a uniform" evince the same kind of shallow and ignorant thinking displayed by the same liberals who are blissfully unaware of anything that happened prior to 1990. Buckley served his country not only in the CIA but in the many years spent toiling in the idealogical vineyards for little or no return, when he could have simply coasted on his family's money. Without William F. Buckley, there would have been no Ronald Reagan presidency. How about keeping the criticism respectful?

Hmmm.I'm ... (Below threshold)
ed:

Hmmm.

I'm not from the Middle East I am from the UK,

Did I say you were from the ME?

and over here even the majority of white non-Muslim population looks at most Americans as totally ignorant of the rest of the world, after all less then 10% of your population has a passport.

And why should we have a passport? America is a huge country. We don't need passports to travel within America. We don't need passports to travel to American Territories like Puerto Rico. We don't need a passport to travel to Canada. I don't think we need a passport to travel to Mexico. In all these cases all we need is a driver's license.

So unless I have a burning desire to visit Europe or some other shithole there's no reason to have a passport.

As for Arabs being totally useless idiots I totally agree with you there, this is what happens when you got oil flowing out and people getting paid for doing jack shit.

*shrug* that's your opinion.

I think you aint got the intellect to grasp the point of what would happen if America went round nuking different nations

And you obviously don't realise that there's nothing that anybody could do about it. If America is attacked with a WMD then it's an automatic protocol that America *must* respond with a nuclear retaliation. It doesn't matter who is in the White House. It doesn't matter which party is control of Congress. Any politician that doesn't immediately demand a nuclear response will never hold office again. And I'll point out that this policy is a holdover from the Cold War years.

We were prepared to implement this policy for 50 years. What makes you think that we aren't capable of doing so now? Because we've been so extremely gentle in dealing with muslims? It won't last. And if there is an attack with a WMD on American soil then I can definitely assure you that gentle treatment won't last.

obviously you lack knowledge to have a serious debate so don't think there is much point debating with you, buy the way you do realise that to wipe Islam out America will have to nuke virtually every nation on earth

You are a fool. There are considerable populations of muslims in many different countries but the prime population centers are all located in the Middle East, Africa and Indonesia. The vast bulk of the estimated 1.2 billion muslims on Earth are located in that rather narrow strip of land extending from Kashmir to Morroco and Indonesia.

And if America is driven to do such a thing, do you think that the many other countries that have suffered at the hands of muslims would hestitate themselves? Do you really think that India would hesitate to exterminate Pakistan once and for all if America no longer cared about Pakistan's continued existence? Do you think the muslims in Thailand would survive without the complementary threat posed by militant muslims around the world?

You think it's not possible. But the reality is that you haven't thought about it at all.

, ...Even America is the second largest religion in America is Islam...boy aint you a clever lad.

And I wouldn't give odds on how long those people would survive if America got pushed past the line in the sand. Sure it would be a bloodbath. But do you really think Americans would put up with muslims terrorists in our midst?

Even after 9/11 Americans still have a great deal of hope and patience for the effort to reform Islam. Once that patience is gone, it's gone permanently. And if you knew anything about American history is that once a decision has been made on a national level, regardless of what it is it will be carried out to absolute completion.

This is why I support the work being done in Iraq even as I lose hope that Islam can be reformed.

In any event who would stop America? Europe? Europe barely spends a few percentage points of it's collective GDP on it's military. Most European militaries don't even stock precision guided munitions. Frankly the European militaries are approximately 25 years behind America, and falling behind even more each and every year. About six years ago there was an deal made to purchase heavy lift military aircraft from Airbus. That deal has still not been completed and most of those aircraft have not been delivered. This is why European militaries still have to ask America for transport.

This is why the Portugese Army units chose to travel to Bosnia on an USAF transport rather than the French chartered civilian *ferry* that they would otherwise have to use.

Good luck with that.

William F. Buckley, master ... (Below threshold)
Phoenix:

William F. Buckley, master of periphrasis, should observe the tenants of his retirement and drop his laptop overboard from one of his fine sailing vessels.

No matter how you spin the situation in Iraq, one thing keeps rising to the top: The people, themselves, are not used to being in control. They do not have the American mindset of empowerment and self-determination. We believe we can do anything. We've grown up, generation after generation, believing free will, character and hard work will determine our destinies. Iraqis have not grown up with the luxury of that beneficent psychological legacy. It will be generations before they can begin to believe and trust that each individual has a say, that each individual has rights under the law, and that they can succeed on their own power.

It will be a long time before they come to trust that which we take for granted: Freedom is related to the rights of belonging - citizenship, voting rights, etc., and that liberty is linked to the rights of independence.

Hmmmm.Cle... (Below threshold)
ed:

Hmmmm.

Clearly prove the intentions of America and Israel.

Yeah because I speak for the Bush White House.

Dumbass.

Everything I've written is logical, even if it's abhorrent. I hope we won't be driven to this, but that hope is very very thin.

From what you have said it is very clear who really are the barbarians and the warlords.

The "barbarians" are muslims who behead little girls walking home from school. Who behead people who work hard at improving the lives of muslims. Who bomb people who's only "crime" is that they care about others.

If you want to discuss what constitutes a "barbarian" I suggest you look at the muslims in the world and the crimes that they commit on a regular basis.

It is clear who the attackers are and who are the defenders.

After 60 years of constant acts of terrorism by muslims. Yes we do know.

We have seen in the past America failing miserably- Vietnam, and we are seeing that now too -Iraq.

You're incredibly ignorant. Obviously you don't know a thing about Vietnam. It's really amusing that all you can do is parrot the liberal revised history of the Vietnam War. Perhaps you should do some studying of that War like I have. Ignorance can only be pitied.

Here's a clue for you. In miltiary terms America won the Vietnam War. Even after we withdrew our soldiers from Vietnam, the South Vietnamese Army was fully capable of defeating the NVA in a series of pitched battles. Won so decisively that General Giap, the hero of Dien Bien Phu, was cashiered and driven from his post. The Tet Offensive, overly promoted as an American defeat, saw the utter destruction and immolation the Vietcong. And without the Vietcong to act as a Fifth Column, the NVA was incapable of defeating South Vietnam.

No. The only thing that "defeated" America in the Vietnam War was the fact that defeatist Democrats in Congress at that time chose to cut off all funding for the South Vietnamese government and it's Army. Without funds, fuel, food or ammunition the South Vietnamese Army collapsed. But had the defeatist Democrats chose to continue support, the North Vietnamese would be the ones who were defeated.

Perhaps you're hoping for a similar scenario in Iraq. Good luck with that. The Democrats of today are far weaker than those in the 1970's.

The situation in Iraq has become much worse after the American invaders attacked it.

Completely false. The situation in Iraq has become worse because of militant muslims, and nothing else.

Now they are thinking about attacking Iran. They need to learn from their past mistakes.

And you need to learn from WWII. It's only been two generations since that global War. Things haven't changed as much as you may suppose. Ultimately the America you need to deal with is that America that doesn't come to you through the television set. What you see on tv comes from a very small segment of the American population. The reality is that much of America is like an iceberg.

You only can see 10% of what is really going on. It's the other 90% you need to fear. And if you think Iran would provide more resistance than a fart in a snowstorm, then you're kidding yourself. Do you really think we'd go in on a ground war? Why would we bother? With precision guided munitions, particularly the JSOW with a 70km range after release, we could take out every target of worth in Iran, and continue destroying them.

America has the ability to not only drive a nation into the stone age, but to keep it there. And that doesn't even cover the next generation in weapons design. The USN's DD(X) program is predicated on a naval railgun capable of firing a 5kg projectile approximately 350 miles with enough energy to dig a 40' deep hole. And to fire 15 of these rounds per minute with sustained fire whilst the ship carries over 10,000 such munitions.

The generation after that will be the intercontinental railgun capable of launching precision guided GPS munitions from Colorado to anywhere on the planet via suborbital mechanics.

And Iran is going to do what compared to that? Pretty much all Iran can do is really piss America off.

Hey saf,Don't prea... (Below threshold)
audrey:

Hey saf,

Don't preach to us... less than 10% of the people in the UK brush their teeth

"Oh noes! Bad stuff happen... (Below threshold)
Robin Goodfellow:

"Oh noes! Bad stuff happened! This is supposed to be a war and wars don't have bad stuff! We must have lost!"

This kind of stuff just parodies itself. Same ol' same ol' tactics and battles vs. logistics and strategy (or "strategery").

"It is impossible to imagin... (Below threshold)
Toby928:

"It is impossible to imagine Buckley in a uniform, serving his country."

As I recall, Buckley not only worked for the CIA, but was in the army in WWII although barely (or not yet) out of boot when the war ended. Can't blame the guy for trying though.

Tob

Ed, Your hilar... (Below threshold)
saf:

Ed,
Your hilarious and your providing real good entertainment for people over here, I mean I have come across many stupid idiots before but never one on your level,

Your right America has the ability to wipe out a series of nations around the world with nukes, as do the Chinese, the Russians, Israelis, the Indians and many other nations who hold WMD, so your nothing special in that sense, however the difference is that responsible nations don't go around the world doing that. Your ideas are so stupid so that not even an idiot like bush would never contemplate them.

As for India wiping out Pakistan I think that would have happened a long time ago if they had the ability to do that, look at the history of the wars in west Pakistan every time India try to take land they were repulsed and now with both sides holding nukes Indies large army advantage is neutralised but as I said your just an ignorant American what the hell do you know about what happens around the rest of the world.

As for terrorism non muslim people have done it too, does the IRA ring any bells, check your history you may learn a thing or two.

And as for wiping out Islam, bring it on shit head, cannot you see your boys getting their asses kicked day in day out in Iraq just give it another two years and they'll be running with the tails wagging.


Audrey,
More than 50% of Americans don't wipe their arses cuz their too busy chating from them and yes it's the Republican 50% of the population.

after all less then 10% ... (Below threshold)
mesablue:

after all less then 10% of your population has a passport

Wrong.

Assuming that everyone who's been issued a passport over the last ten years still has it, that's 60,884,784 people with US passports. Given the US population is around 280 million, that gives us 21.7 per cent owning passports. Taking into account some of these will be five year passports, we have a figure that's probably a little under 20 per cent.

That under ten percent figure is an ignorant talking point for people to try to justify biased opinions about Americans.

Like most other lefty talking points it is simply not true.

Stop drinking the kool-aid.

Also,<a href="http... (Below threshold)
mesablue:

Also,

the Economist has a subscriber-only article that states 34% of Americans over the age of 18 own passports

Compared to Canada at 41%.

saf, your arguments lose their validity when you base them on "facts" that aren't even remotely close to the truth. Especially since your "fact" is a made up figure that was created to intentionally distort the truth for a purpose.

You wouldn't happen to be a Danish imam, would you?

Dear Ed,We ... (Below threshold)

Dear Ed,


We all agree that America is the best country on Earth. Nobody is as good as it.

In fact we all should worship it, eat at Mc. Donalds and drink Coke and wear Nikes.

I hope you don't nuke the rest of the world now.

And yes the Whole world loves George Bush.

Really I am not joking.

Happy? You wanted to hear that didn't you?

Hmmm.Saf and Musli... (Below threshold)
ed:

Hmmm.

Saf and Muslim Unity.

Do you really think that Iran isn't going to use it's nuclear weapon the first chance it gets? Do you really think that America won't retaliate? What do you think would be the response by the Islamic world to the retaliation nuking of say Tehran? If the Islamic world stays true to form then probably every single Islamic country will then declare war on America. What do you think America's response would be to that?

You go ahead and continue living in your dream world. But here's clue for you:

Nowhere in the non-Islamic world have muslims made themselves welcome. Instead in nearly every single instance muslims have instead shown intolerance, racism, militantism and a tendency to kidnapping, assault, rape and murder.

You really think that's going to last? Good luck.

Hmmm.And ... (Below threshold)
ed:

Hmmm.

And as for wiping out Islam, bring it on shit head, cannot you see your boys getting their asses kicked day in day out in Iraq just give it another two years and they'll be running with the tails wagging.

As an aside, this is a truly ridiculously idiotic statement. But that's representative of muslims all the world over. Unsupportable arrogance coupled with utter ignorance.

OK sorry then edd i guess y... (Below threshold)
saf:

OK sorry then edd i guess your winning in Iraq i guess the 2500+ deaths and the 25,000+ injured is just something the media made up and i guess the continuing insurgency is just something i have imagined , your pathetic army cannot defeat an insurgency from one ethnic group which only represents 20% of the population of barely 25 million what if the 60% shia joined in you thihk your bozy will stay or run with the tails wagging as i said before. Thats why it makes me laugh when people talk about the US invading Iran, i mean you must have seen just how you have got the current Iranian leadership quaking in their boots.....lol...America dont freighten anyone now the only thing your good at is bombing from 30,000 ft above aint got the balls to do anything else.

Hmmm.your... (Below threshold)
ed:

Hmmm.

your pathetic army cannot defeat an insurgency from one ethnic group which only represents 20% of the population of barely 25 million what if the 60% shia joined in you thihk your bozy will stay or run with the tails wagging as i said before.

Like I pointed out previously: Unsupported arrogance coupled with utter ignorance.

OK sorry then edd, i guess ... (Below threshold)
saf:

OK sorry then edd, i guess there is no insurgency in Iraq, I guess it is all one big happy rosy picture over there,anytime now I'm going to wake up in the shower and realise all this is one big 3 year old dream.

MU & saf,I don't thi... (Below threshold)

MU & saf,
I don't think you get what Ed is suggesting. You keep comparing what he is saying to the War in Iraq, and that is not even a close comparison.

A war of nation-building, which is what we have undertaken in Iraq, is far more difficult than a war of destruction. In a war of destruction, we would not have to pay attention to rebuilding the country after the war, because there would be nothing left. America has never undertaken a complete war of destruction, although the bombings of Dresden and Tokyo are good examples of what it might look like.

It is much easier to just kill a man than to make him do something at gunpoint.

What Ed is talking about is a scary scenario, but not outside the realm of possibility.

Hmmm.What... (Below threshold)
ed:

Hmmm.

What Ed is talking about is a scary scenario, but not outside the realm of possibility.

Precisely. What I'm discussing has nothing to do with Iraq whatsoever except perhaps in the possibility that a free, safe, prosperous and democratic Iraq could positively influence Iran. It's this hope that keeps me supporting the current efforts in Iraq. Yet the scenarios I've outline don't really involve Iraq at all.

The concepts involve are very simple and combine in unfortunate ways. Across the board the public perception of muslims are that they not only condone violence against their host nation, but they actively support it. Since moderate muslims, whatever definition that is, aren't acting to restrain the more militant and radical members, it is assumed that there is a tacit approval. That this approval is in many cases no longer tacit but very very public only makes things worse.

Perhaps you'd rather this come from Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit?

link

I think that's unfortunate. Osama and the Islamists want to see an all-out war between Islam and the West. If this happens, Islam will rapidly become a tiny remnant of its current self.

The leadership of Iran hasn't shown that it realises just how dangerous it can be to have nuclear weapons. The Ukraine and South Africa both realised this and chose to abandon them. But Iran hasn't shown this wisdom. Sooner or later the leadership of Iran will make a mistake, and a mistake by a nuclear armed nation has much greater and terrible consequences than one by a nation without that power.

*shrug* I'd like for Saf and Muslim Unity to understand my point, but if not, then not.

Actually I do understand wh... (Below threshold)
Saf:

Actually I do understand what ed is saying, i guess he lives somewhere in the wild wild west and all he see's is white christan faces, which is why he aint got a clue about the rest of the world. Islam is a relgion in virtually every country of the world so you cannot just wipe it out, and if any of you understud anything about econmomics you will understand that America will not go round destroying a whole series of reasons one is that other powers will have an interest there and mostly of all for the repuation of the country. why does'nt India nuke the Kashmiries, Russia nuke chechnya, etc etc......amazing though on the one hand your talking about stoping evil and killing an evil dictator like saddam becauase he gassed several thousand kurds, yet yourself you want to go and wipe out hundreds of millions of people..but there is no reason to worry cuz these wild fantasies will never come true no mata how much people like ed wish for it because even bush aint that stupid

saf, I don't think Ed, or a... (Below threshold)

saf, I don't think Ed, or anyone else in the West, wishes for that solution. But if "moderate" Muslims fall in line with their more fascist brethren, what choice does the West have?

Left only with a "kill or be killed" option, the Muslims of the world lose. Certainly, many non-Muslims would also die. But in a war like this, nobody really wins. We just have survivors who continue to exist.

[email protected] Saf<b... (Below threshold)
ed:

Hmmm.

@ Saf

Actually I do understand what ed is saying

Sadly you don't.

And for the record I'm not a white Christian. I'm was actually born in South Korea and I'm a practicing animist.

As for the rest; *shrug* it's your ass if you're wrong.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy