Then victory you shall most assuredly not have.
Of course, Obama considers himself to be an enlightened sophisticate who has moved beyond the primitive warlike tendencies of bygone cultures and civilizations. He is a twenty-first century man, and he is confident that underneath it all, Khamenei is too, and isn't any more interested in victory than Barack Obama is.
Rude awakening to come.Video thanks to Weasel Zippers.
where is the outrage over this comment on the left. oh well if the bar is lowered so low it will never look like a failure, must come from the new school of taught.
'Victory' in Afghanistan is indeed a fata morgana. We can't kill them all and we can't built them a modern country. We all know that democracy under sharia is an impossibility, and we also know that we will never win the 'hearts and minds' of these good muslims, unless we kill all the adults and educate the children from scratch.
In my view, and I have been insulted and vilified and cursed whenever I say it, there is nothing to be gained by wasting men, money and materiel where the Brits and the Russians already failed to rearrange the rubble.
We can't fight this by extending miranda rights to terrorists and we don't need to put our soldiers at risk. We should declare victory and withdraw, leave Karzai to his lovely people, and bomb them whenever we detect that the Taliban or Al Qaeda are cooking up another attack.
Pakistan is a lost case, a failed state because of Islam and it is not for us or for anyone else to save it. Let it implode! Isolate them, forbid Pakistani migration, keep trade to an absolute minimum and let them stew in their own juices.
Disengagement would be far better than what we're doing right now.
Obama just foolishly removed an important option that always needs to be there when dealing countries like Iran, and North Korea.
Mr.President you just sent a very weak signal to the Mullahocracy not to mention other anti-American States.
All this high minded liberalism may be fine within the ivy covered walls of academia but it rapidly fails in the real world. Obama is just proving his ignorance every time he opens his mouth.
Fortunatly he has been unable to disarm the great unwashed in this country. The ammunition factories are running 24/7 and can't keep up, any wonder why?
Sheik,
I agree with what you say here. I think it's similar to the policy that Hugh Fitzgerald outlines. A combination of cultural containment and isolation are needed these days, especially with this administration, as well as a deliberate strategy of promoting conflict along sectarian, economic and tribal/ethnic lines. Disengage from Afghanistan while we haven't lost much, monitor from a distance and strike when necessary with extreme prejudice. Otherwise give the Islamic world the means and opportunity to fight within its fractured whole.
The problem with Pakistan is what will happen when their nuclear arsenal falls into the hands of al-Qaeda & the Taliban. This country needs to go in take those weapons destroy the infrastructure needed to produce them, and make it clear any attempt to rearm will be produce the same result. Problem with this is that requires leadership with the courage to do what's right instead of the past and current batch of cowards who pass off possibly unpopular decisions to the toothless tiger (U.N.) If the west needs oil take it at the point of a gun, quit trying to make nice with a bunch of medieval zealots.
I totally agree with your comments.
Why should our good men continue to be sacrificed?
Whenever a western government submits to an Islamic demand
on it's own soil it is an insult to the men (and women)
who have been killed in our defence.
What is the point in continuing a war abroad only to surrender at home?
You forgot one thing though, we need to seriously curb our dependence on oil. All the money we throw away on aiding our enemies would go a long way to acheiving that.
The guy obviously has minimal knowledge of, and no understanding of history accompanied with an infantile understanding of human nature.
Sheik yer'mami,
I agree with what you've posted. Ralph Peters and Andy McCarthy and others also agree. McCarthy's "A Dangerous Delusion" article had the best defense of this position that I've read:
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MzFiZDY4MzlmMmU0MDdiNDViN2QxYzcxMDI5ZWI3MTQ=
The one problem I do see is that we do profit from having troops with feet on the ground in Afghanistan, from both an intelligence gathering and a quick-strike perspective. Also, when the inevitable Islamist takeover of Pakistan happens, we will possibly be more prepared to counter the Islamists.
The coming conflagration will be born from leftism. Leftists are not interested in victory for they see themselves at fault, thus welcome Obama onto the world stage. He fits the bill. Perfectly. We will pay.
Nativity and ignorance combined. This is what change is all about. Let's hope he gets his political butt kicked next week when he meets Achminijad. That is the only way (if it works at all) this fool we have as a President will understand the sun does not rise and fall on him alone.
Another way of looking at it is . . . "Pride cometh before a fall."
I wrote the Pres. (via the web) yesterday offering the suggestion to arrest Achminijad and company while he was at the UN on whatever charge his staff of lawyers could come up with and send them to Guantanamo. After I sent it, I thought Jerusalem would have been better. Let him be on the receiving end of any one bomb attacks coming from his followers. That includes any stray rockets.
I would be happy to abandon the region, but with Pakistan nuclear and Iran going that way, it would be foolhard to think that splendid isolation would work. Intercontinental ballistic missile knowledge is not new. Even a 60's version ICBM would wreak havoc on the4 U.S., not to mention Europe.