« Britney Delivers | Main | Rosie, Reid, Rudy and the Evil Rich »

How Do You Know When You've Lost?

The following was written by my good friend, and really smart guy, Bruce Kesler. Please visit Democracy Project to read the rest.

How do you know when you've lost? When you're dead or you've surrendered. Otherwise, you're in the fight.

How do you know that you're going to lose? When your death or surrender are certain.

If you're not certain, and the stakes are worth it, you continue to fight.

If you don't believe the stakes are worth it, then quit.

If those on your side don't recognize who the enemy is, they'll walk away or fritter away possibilities by turning on each other.

The Democrat leadership is certain that the United States, and those in Iraq who struggle to build, will fail. The Democrats don't believe the stakes there and consequent are worth having either an open mind or perseverance.

There is no one knowledgeable who agrees with the Democrats. Regardless of whether a critic or supporter of U.S. strategy and tactics, all those knowledgeable recognize that the consequences of bugging out would be even worse than what's there now. The Democrat leaders seek to cloak their irresponsibility in formulas for a small residual force -- that would be overwhelmed by the challenges -- or regional states' cooperation -- by sworn adversaries and accommodators with little record of being or incentive to be constructive.


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference How Do You Know When You've Lost?:

» Church and State linked with If Joe Lieberman Can See the Warning Signs . .

» Doug Ross @ Journal linked with Harry Reid through history

Comments (12)

I had a friend that was cer... (Below threshold)
dr lava:

I had a friend that was certain that he was not an alcoholic because he could drink a 12 pack of beer every night and still get up and go to work.He did it for 20 years. He is dead now, he never learned or accepted the truth.

This is the same type of delusion and inner fantasy that supporters of this war are suffering. To admit the truth is catstrophic to the ego. Its better to let young Americans die a wasted death in a lost cause than admit the truth.

I wonder what would happen ... (Below threshold)
SShiell:

I wonder what would happen to the morale of Al Qaeda or the Insurgency if our country was united in this war. If both sides stood shoulder to shoulder and told the Insurgency "Give it up or you are dead meat!"

For four years the Insurgency has lost 50-100 men for every American they kill in open combat. What little combat success they achieve is through the use of IEDs. Notice I said "combat success". If you want to call suicide bombers attacking civilians, "combat success" go right ahead. I call that terrorism - not combat.

Approximately 18 months ago, an estimated 300+ Insurgents attacked Abu Ghraib prison. They wanted to destroy the facility, kill the American guards and release the prisoners. The US troops fought off the attack without outside support. At dawn, when the Insurgents departed, they discovered over 100 dead Insurgents. An unknown number of wounded had been dragged away from the fight by their comrades. Two US troops were wounded - both of which were back on full combat duty within 72 hours. What a bunch of losers we are!

If the Insurgency had faced a united America, they would have given up the fight months ago. But, instead we have such stalwarts of Democracy as "Cut & Run" Harry Reid and "POS" dr. lava who believe we are a bunch of losers!

There are losers out there - and dr. lava you and your Defeatocrats are first among them! The only delusion here is your own:

If we only leave Iraq, they will like us again.
If we only leave Iraq, they will stop hurting us.
If we only leave Iraq, we can talk it over.
If we only leave Iraq, the war and the killing will be over.
If we only leave Iraq, then my 12-pack beer buddy would have understood he was a friggin' drunk!

How Do You Know Wh... (Below threshold)
Eric Forhan:
How Do You Know When You've Lost?

When dr lava declares it so.

I got nuttin'. The same argument that lava makes now was made a couple of years ago toward liberals, and how main stream media liberals secretly hoped that we would lose in Iraq to affirm their own feelings on the conflict.

Lorie: Keep up the good work. I'm predicting one nasty political season, and those who are better than I will continue to be political pawns.

So, if we've "lost" as Reid... (Below threshold)
Peter F.:

So, if we've "lost" as Reid, etc. proclaim, then there has to be a winner. Hmmm, now who would THAT be, Uncle Harry...

SShiell,Keep delud... (Below threshold)
groucho:

SShiell,

Keep deluding yourself that your little "If we only leave Iraq" mantra contains even the slightest connection with the reasons the majority of Americans want an exit strategy. It's your 12-pack. Drink up!

The "enemy" has fought US to a tactical draw for the last 4 years. Have we conquered any territory? Caused anyone to surrender? Do you honestly think they give a camel's behind whether or not we are united? They're in a fight to the death; we're in a fight for political and economic dominance of a region. How do you really expect it to come out?

The insurgents are the insurgents because we are there. We overthrew Saddam and eliminated the WMD threat that never really was. From that point on, it was straight down the road to nowhere. Boy George had no plan for occupation and has no plan for victory. Stay the Course! The only losers are those dwindling few who are still hoping for the day when all Iraqis throw down their bombs and live happily ever after, thanks to the benevolent intrusion of Uncle Sam, Uncle Dick, Uncle Rummy and Uncle Shrub. Talk about delusional.

Now could you please link t... (Below threshold)
Rance:

Now could you please link to a list of ways that we'll know that we've won?

Define "winning" a war agai... (Below threshold)
groucho:

Define "winning" a war against an ideology. What do YOU think?

Some possibilities:

-when Bush says so.

-when the terrorists/insurgents/Shia/Sunni/al-Quaeda ask for terms, to be signed at a table in front of the new $1 billion US embassy.

-right after the 29th surge.

-when the Iraquis stand up.

-when pigs fly.

groucho:Facism (Na... (Below threshold)
Peter F.:

groucho:

Facism (Nazis, Mussolini's Italy) was a war against an ideology, and we won THAT war. We also won the Cold War, a war against another ideology (Communism)--albeit in a less bloody way.

Islamofacism is also an ideology. So if we won two previous wars against an ideology, then it stands to reason and suggests that it's entirely possible to win another ideological war. Granted, the War of Terror is poorly named--one cannot really have a war against a "tactic"-but the War On Islamofacism can be won, but it will NEVER be in the classic sense of winning. That is, your country against mine, men in uniform, capital against capital. We've known this from the outset. This is a multi-faceted, multi-country, global war against a diseased and inhumane ideology.

By your "logic" if there is no clear winner, if we can't throw a parade and declare a winner, then the war should not be fought. And since we can never, ever fully eliminate terrorism that there is no point in fighting to stop it from spreading. That logic is just flat morally bankrupt.

This is a war unlike any other war mankind has ever seen. It is NOT just confined to one country (Afghanistan) as you would like to believe; it, yes, includes the likes of Saudia Arabia (source of 9/11 hijackers), Egypt, Jordan, etc. Each of these "fronts" will be and has been treated as a different; some through diplomacy, others by force (Iraq and Afghanistan). Make no mistake, this war will continue, like it or not, even when Bush leaves office.

So your cheap shots and lame attempts at being clever in denouncing the war and Bush, are intellectually deficient and morally corrupt at best.

Apparent Contradiction Mome... (Below threshold)
Peter F.:

Apparent Contradiction Moment #1,254:

The "enemy" has fought US to a tactical draw for the last 4 years.

What was that count of dead? 600,000? 300,000? Whatever arbitary number the left decides to cite. The majority of them are probbaly insurgents, fighters, etc. Just to be fair, let's cut the number in half and say those are innocent deaths. That leaves at least 150,000 dead bad guys.

That's 150,000 of their dead bad guys to our 3200+ men heroically fighting good guys.

A tactical draw? On what planet.

Groucho:Sorry, I p... (Below threshold)
SShiell:

Groucho:

Sorry, I prefer Scotch! You and your friend dr. lava can drink beer with his dead drunk buddy all you want. Meanwhile to your comments:

"The "enemy" has fought US to a tactical draw for the last 4 years. Have we conquered any territory?"

I guess when you play chess and you are down to only your King and your opponent has all of his pieces still on the board, you expect him to offer you a draw? Have we conquered any ground? Conquered, no - we took it all.

"Caused anyone to surrender?"

Sadaam did. Zarqhawi would have like to. And now you would like to do the same!

"Do you honestly think they give a camel's behind whether or not we are united?"

I do - it is obvious that you do not and you would like to keep it that way. And if we were, they would not stand an ice cube's chance in hell. But because those like yourself keep telling them "Don't worry, we'll run away like the good dhimmi's we are." they keep the faith. You keep giving them faith. You keep standing up for them and telling them not to worry about winning on the battlefiled, we'll give you the victory you want - just please be nice to us once we are gone!

"They're in a fight to the death; we're in a fight for political and economic dominance of a region. How do you really expect it to come out?"

If people like "Cut & Run" Harry Reid, Nancy "would you like cream in your tea Mr. Assas" Pelosi, Jack "Semper One" Murtha, and you hold sway over our political future, how do I think all of this to come out? We will soon be kneeling to our new Muslim Masters begging them to be nice to us.

How do you know when you've... (Below threshold)
Brian:

How do you know when you've lost? When you conclude that your best political strategy is to challenge the opinions of Rosie O'Donnell.

Brian-that is pretty... (Below threshold)
slingshot:

Brian-
that is pretty funny!

Peter F-
I think you make some good points in your 3:02 post. I think the problem is that most people just don't believe that the Bush administration is in any way capable or competent to fight this new kind of conflict, as from many of their statements,especially from before the war, indicate that they do not actually recognize this conflict as you have described it. Making any point by comparing the number of dead as to a stalemate or not doesn't seem all that productive.




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]blog.com

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