Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Winning the Iraq PEACE
#1
I believe we need to change the whole focus of the debate on the "War in Iraq".
Heck, we won the "WAR" in Iraq six weeks after the President said go.

Now we are engaged in trying to "win the PEACE".

We failed to do that after WW I.....and sowed the seeds for WW II.

Our European "Allies" very swiftly strangled the German economy for short term gains through "reparations", and set the stage for desperation there. And yes, the vacuum was filled. OOPS!

The Marshall Plan following WW II broke that age-old cycle...BUT LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WINNING THE PEACE TOOK TEN YEARS!

...and we probably would not have held the course had it not been for the threat of communism. People back then, just as now, were simply yelling..."bring the men home". Thank God we did not bring them all home.

Two results are pretty clear from our presence in Europe for umpteen years.
1. We had a physical presence there to confront the larger enemy "Totalitarianism", whether Nazi remnants, or communist pushers.

2. Our presence became over time a window into our essential good will toward the citizenry.

Well...
1. Muslim fanatics are about as "Totalitarian" as people can be.

2. We gotta' win the peace.....or die as a civilization... so how do we do that?

Best regards
Ken Bean
Reply
#2
Excellent post!

This is exactly what Tom Barnett has been saying as well.
"Most people just want tomorrow to look pretty much like today." - Terry Pratchett
Reply
#3
We're doing everything humanly possible right now. We're allowing our kids to die to give them a breathing space of maturing,they are stepping up and volunteering and dying as well,we are using funds to build various
projects,we are building relationships,intell and military,we are sheperding them through a start into tolerant democracy.

IMO,there is nothing else we can do but complete this mission and I doubt we will complete this mission. The people of this nation are wavering,if I were a jihadist I would have a smile as big as Texas on my face right now.

Bush's PR role is useless,I can explain to my wife in 25 seconds how our daughter and her daughters face rape and execution someday right here in America if we back out of a fight with these wolves in Iraq,Bush has allowed >50% of our people to ignorantly conclude Iraq is a battlefield we can safely cede to the enemy.

Unbelievable. Hell,how hard is it to explain?

Can't he manage to say,"If we exit Iraq in haste,the only thing we will have accomplished since 9-11 is moving al qaeda's headquarters from backroad dirt poor Afghanistan to oil rich Iraq". How da.mn difficult is it to figure out?

I'm fairly disgusted with the American people and the POTUS.

I also agree with your take on the significance of what we're doing,but I think EX the intervention of God Himself on history,we're in serious danger of failing here. I'm not prepared to lay wagers on what happens in Iraq,I don't have any confidence in the people of the USA. And I have no assurance The Lord sees us as worthy of preservation as a client nation.

Ah,off to listen to Monday night's sermon,I'm doing my part!
Reply
#4
Thanks, Seagull

Palladin Person!!!!! step back a pace and thank God we got a real President.

My goodness, man, we got 48% of the people in this country who don't have the sense to get out of the rain.

If "Dubyah" wanted to be President for life.....like Roosevelt...all he would have had to do is invade Syria, Iran, China, and North Korea.....ALREADY!

Tennessee, like Texas, is a marginal "fly-over country" for our national mouthpieces. Dubyah is trying to govern even the wusses in Mass. and Cal.
Give the darned man a break!!!!!

Anybody know how many volunteers we got from California and Massachusetts in our volunteer armed forces? Well not enough to shake pe pe out of a boot with!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

They would rather get drunk, drown girls, dope friends, and bellyache.

Dubyah is their President too

I help my wife give kids a whole new future. That is sorta' important...

How many of you will join me in Crawford, Texas to stand for the right?
Bean
Reply
#5
Ken,

Bush deserves my respect for his determination,true,his heart is right,I pray for him nightly,but Ken,he is a total failure in the leadership beyond determination in this GWOT. I do not have the luxury of comparing him to such a softy as Carter or Clinton,he led us into Iraq,it's his deal to lead this one.
For heaven's sake,we have Senators calling for the USA to cede the Iraqi battlefield to Zarqawi,by all accounts a small minority of us now support POTUS Bush!

It's our fault as a people,but Bush had more support when we started into Iraq,I have to hold him to account for losing massive amounts of it because the best he did was tell us about WMD and there was none,so it's fairly natural many see the battlefield as unworthy of American blood.

That was such a strategic error it is mindboggling. I can do a better job of explaining why we must prevail,that ain't right,that is simply NOT RIGHT that a dam.n red neck idiot like me can detail why we must prevail better than him. And I can,I do it daily on one board or another.

Yes,I respect Bush cause his heart is right,I pray for him cause the Bible tells me to,but he is no great leader,that's all I say,he is a mediocre talent with a good heart and determination,which is better than Kerry or Gore,but we can do better. I don't know who or where,but we need a better leader bad right now,he's real close to watching us cede Iraq to the enemy against his will,IMO. It's a race against time,Ken,that should never be the case.
Reply
#6
First of all when everybody was sure that Iraq had "Weapons of Mass Destruction" and somehow contributed to the 9/11 Tragedy, most of us supported Bush's actions.

Now most of us believe that those reports were mistakes made by the various world intelligence agencies. What's more we are being told that this war has cost us more than $600 billion already, and just to get infrastructure of Iraq back to what it was before the war will cost us $300 billion. I assume the cost of us staying in Iraq for estimated 10 more years will also cost us a bundle.

However, more important than financial costs are lost of lives.

If we are there just to establish some kind of order and peace, how about more than 100 other countries in this world that need some kind of order and peace established?

After all these said, I can't see how US could leave Iraq now, and perhaps throw the whole region into a turmoil.
Reply
#7
Sorry, Palladin, gotta disagree. With an antagonistic Media Bush 43 must do exactly what he's doing.

Don't you recall what happened to Newt Gingrich? He got all the GOP to pull together and gain a majority by pressing issues. The Contract With America was simply a pledge to get 10 issues to the floor for a debate that had never been allowed to see the light of day. The Contract was not to pass them - just to shine the light of day on them.

Once they were allowed to be debated, and not bottled up by a Democrat majority, they were resoundingly endorsed by America and passed en masse. They were so well received that many Democrats and Clinton claimed they were their ideas - even though they weren't even allowed to be debated under democrat leadership.

What then happened to Gingrich cannot be allowed to happen to Bush and the War on Terror. The media spent the next two years denigrating everything that Gingrich did or said. David Bonnior alleged over 200 ethics violations against Newt and every single one was investigated and found to be untrue. The only ethical violation that stuck to Gingrich was his own admission to the Ethics panel of misfiled paperwork on a nonprofit bank account - one of many that were reassigned to new projects. This particular one was arguably non-profit but some felt it existed in a gray-area, so it was better to be safe than sorry. This was not a charged levied by a Democrat - but a notice of an error that should have been easily addressed and corrected. Instead - the Ethics committee, fined him $300,000 and the ensuing press left him no alternative but to resign.

Several nonpartisan research groups found that for two years straight every single speech given by Gingrich was not repeated verbatim - but was paraphrased, and always in a derogatory manner. I personally heard many great speeches he gave that were totally mischaracterized by the media.

Bush 43 has the same media to buck. They will not get it right. They will misconstrue and mischaracterize any clear statement he makes - so his basic plan is to say nothing and let his deeds do his talking. The bully pulpit is a double-edged sword. He can say all the right things and still go down in the polls, thanks to a media with an agenda.

You are correct that he could say more things that instruct and inspire. To that I say that he already did. But where is it in the press? Where are the soaring words he used to explain what was what? Where are the explanations in the press to explain his side of things in a supportive manner?

Y'know, like they did for Michael Moore and Sean Penn?
Reply
#8
Thanks, wm.

Years...and years D .....ago, the fellow who wrote "Advice and Consent"
(and God bless me I cannot spit out his name), wrote a series which included "Preserve and Protect" etc......

The theme of the entire series of novels, (3 or 4 thousand pages), took place during the cold war, and chronicled the news media doing their lies so well that America fell, and each and every one of them personally was killed along with every member of their families.

Thank goodness for foxnews and Rush Limbaugh et al. flipping over the coin for us.

The one thing I am proud of is that "Dubyah" won't quit...like (democrat) Johnson did. He will just stay the course for the next three years regardless. Dubyah aint a moral coward! ?

Actual WMD won't be reported....ever... during his administration... Too damned scary!

He understands that.

ie Nazi Germany start ted experiments on nuclear bombs a full two years before we did. Do you remember Roosevelt announcing that in the history books?

...Heck NO!!!!!!!!!

Mr. Roosevelt knew better than to scare the dickens out of Americans for no good reason.....Duh!

The children here talk about whirled peas. OK, they deserve a voice. They also deserve here a glimpse of reality.

.....There are three BILLION persons in the world...pi**ed off that you and I can climb in our car and enjoy the freedom to point it anywhere we want.
I personally am sad that those persons cannot enjoy the freedoms we have.

That is the ONLY reason our troops are out there on the gates.

God bless 'em.

Best regards
Ken bean
Reply
#9
Gents,

Sorry,George W Bush is a mediocre leader who has watched a valid battlefield( i entirely disagree with Kamil here) in a war the enemy chose to start become a contentious issue even among patriotic Americans,if you think he needs praise for that,have at it,I think WE need a great leader.

As an example,imagine FDR having to listen large % of people claim we ought to have ceded Europe to the fascists after 2000 dead. It is the fault of we the people,but also,as with Kamil,it is Bush's fault for not doing a job worthy of a kindergarten child in informing WHY we should send our sons to die in Iraq.

Ken,Kamil is a conservative political man,when he and I see Bush failing,you best start thinking maybe something is wrong. Bush is failing this nation disastrously.

It was a fatal error to over emphasize WMD,it's about that simple and he does not have the talent to overcome that false image. Of course the media is opposed to Bush,his job is to step ahead and deliver the pitch as our soldiers do.
They have opposition TOO,but they are not mediocre,they did not sit around for 18 months without saying anything substantial,they fought the enemy while Bush was busy with his silly retorts,whereas there is a DEAD serious set of reasons most Americans WOULD have accepted as valid for sacrifice. IMO,it is way too late to retrieve the people on Iraq.

The fact is ONLY WWII saw the people here united,in all other wars the press to a large extent opposed the administration,it's past time we face reality.Bush dropped the ball on Iraq and he doesn't get another chance to dunk it,either.

I respect him for his basic views and his determination,but his leadership quotient is low,he cannot be compared to FDR,Lincoln,Wilson nor even Nixon in his ability to carry forward an unpopular war with tons more casualties.

Just being honest about it. The people's character is lower today,but his talent is commensurate with it,IMO.
Reply
#10
Palladin, I urge you to have patience and wait and see. Too much gets filtered through the agenda-driven lens of the liberal media for you to know much of Bush 43's true worth as a President.

There are some very intelligent people who work with him closely who call him one of the greatest Presidents in the history of the nation. This is just too big a disconnect from the opinion of perpetual naysayers to let slide. Without a proper observation by those who should give a valid portrayal, we are left to listen to the Michael Moores of the world, or the Bill Burkettes. I choose to withhold judgment until the legitimate facts are in.

I am concerned about our borders, but we have increased arrests of illegals crossing our borders to 1.4 million. That is a huge number. During the election Kerry and Edwards claimed we weren't inspecting containers coming off of ships in our international harbors - yet our maritime professionals say 100% of containers are inspected at the point of loading. Too much noise in the system. Not enough factual reporting.
Reply
#11
William,

As far as I am concerned,POTUS Bush gets high credits from me for his general proper views on most issues, his views on Islamic terrorism and how to combat it and his basic decency,bravery and determination.

I DO NOT receive information from the MSM,my views are based on my take of where we stand strictly in Iraq. Based on PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE of knowing more than 1 person who has been or is in Iraq,reading the milbloggers who are there and people like Michael Yon.

I have NO complaints about how or why in Iraq as Bush's opponents do,I simply think he has failed to lead the nation into firm and lasting support for victory there and it is not proper to alleviate him of all responsibility simply by saying the press works against him,Lincoln had to arrest publishers during the civil war,how about that?

I share the views of this conservative Christian minister whose son is headed to Iraq

http//www.donaldsensing.com/index.php/2005/08/23/bush-failing-to-keep-public-informed/
Reply
#12
You know, Palladin, I keep seeing the same refrain from you over time.
ie "Dubyah ain't a great leader"

I truly believe the one thing this country DOESN'T need is "the great leader on the white horse"!!!!!

Those types ride off in too many directions...with too much demagoguery...

Dubyah has been "misunderestimated" by all the right folks ?

Best regards
Ken
Reply
#13
Ken,

He is hardly a great war time leader. Can you tell me in our history that there was less support for a war effort than now?

We had an election in 1972 after 8 years of war with Vietnam Communists and Nixon just crushed the anti war candidate. 8 years and about 45K dead,we have 2000 dead,an enemy that will come and get us and at least 1/2 of America want peace at any price. YES,that's their fault,but I don't see Bush as doing anything substantial WHEN HE STILL COULD to change things.

Face it,the guy majored on the minor in explaining why we needed to do this,when it was harder than his pollyanna views dictated,he had a long time to adjust before beginning recently to properly explain why we went there.
It stands to reason you don't talk about WMD for 1 year if that is the main reason to go,yet that's what he majored on to the expense of real good reasons which IMO it is too late for all but we hardtail righties now to gain our support.

I would rather die than to leave in defeat,but most Americans want us out NOW and that's a da.mned failure of leadership. He's the POTUS,not Gore or Kerry.
Reply
#14
Palladin Wrote:Ken,

He is hardly a great war time leader. Can you tell me in our history that there was less support for a war effort than now?

We had an election in 1972 after 8 years of war with Vietnam Communists and Nixon just crushed the anti war candidate. 8 years and about 45K dead,we have 2000 dead,an enemy that will come and get us and at least 1/2 of America want peace at any price. YES,that's their fault,but I don't see Bush as doing anything substantial WHEN HE STILL COULD to change things.

Face it,the guy majored on the minor in explaining why we needed to do this,when it was harder than his pollyanna views dictated,he had a long time to adjust before beginning recently to properly explain why we went there.
It stands to reason you don't talk about WMD for 1 year if that is the main reason to go,yet that's what he majored on to the expense of real good reasons which IMO it is too late for all but we hardtail righties now to gain our support.

I would rather die than to leave in defeat,but most Americans want us out NOW and that's a da.mned failure of leadership. He's the POTUS,not Gore or Kerry.
But, Palladin, we didn't have a dedicated leftist press intent upon ruining a sitting President before. That's why he is lower in the polls.......not because of leadership.
Do the majority want us out, or do the majority disagree with the way the war is currently going? These are two completely different questions.
Solo~

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty. --Thomas Jefferson
Reply
#15
Palladin Wrote:Ken,

He is hardly a great war time leader. Can you tell me in our history that there was less support for a war effort than now?

We had an election in 1972 after 8 years of war with Vietnam Communists and Nixon just crushed the anti war candidate. 8 years and about 45K dead,we have 2000 dead,an enemy that will come and get us and at least 1/2 of America want peace at any price. YES,that's their fault,but I don't see Bush as doing anything substantial WHEN HE STILL COULD to change things.

Face it,the guy majored on the minor in explaining why we needed to do this,when it was harder than his pollyanna views dictated,he had a long time to adjust before beginning recently to properly explain why we went there.
It stands to reason you don't talk about WMD for 1 year if that is the main reason to go,yet that's what he majored on to the expense of real good reasons which IMO it is too late for all but we hardtail righties now to gain our support.

I would rather die than to leave in defeat,but most Americans want us out NOW and that's a da.mned failure of leadership. He's the POTUS,not Gore or Kerry.
But, Palladin, we didn't have a dedicated leftist press intent upon ruining a sitting President before. That's why he is lower in the polls.......not because of leadership.
Do the majority want us out, or do the majority disagree with the way the war is currently going? These are two completely different questions.
Solo~

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty. --Thomas Jefferson
Reply
#16
S,

Maybe it's the other option,but I challenge the view we did not have a leftist press back then. We had more leftist bias then as now.

Today,we have Fox and we have powerful radio shows,we have internet bloggers. We are not a captive audience today,we were in 1968.

S,I can't escape reality,we Americans are as cowardly as Bin Laden said we were.

I know,it makes everyone mad at me,but if you were him,what would you think about now watching the domestic scene? We have Senators calling for declaration of defeat at least in Iraq,we have senators calling US soldiers NAZIS for mistreating terrorists,we have mothers of volunteer soldiers calling Bush the terrorist,we have little support for war victory at this point. We ran from Lebanon,we ran from Somalia,we're close to abandoning Iraq.



Of course I don't mean the soldiers,but a majority of the general public suck,IMO.

Mothers begging their sons to avoid the fight,I bet Muslim mothers aren't doing that. Ask Vagrant,he's a recruiter,his biggest problem are America's parents. "let someone else go do the hard work".

Wonder what the "someone else" think about that?
Reply
#17
Palladin Wrote:S,

Maybe it's the other option,but I challenge the view we did not have a leftist press back then. We had more leftist bias then as now.

Today,we have Fox and we have powerful radio shows,we have internet bloggers. We are not a captive audience today,we were in 1968.

S,I can't escape reality,we Americans are as cowardly as Bin Laden said we were.

I know,it makes everyone mad at me,but if you were him,what would you think about now watching the domestic scene? We have Senators calling for declaration of defeat at least in Iraq,we have senators calling US soldiers NAZIS for mistreating terrorists,we have mothers of volunteer soldiers calling Bush the terrorist,we have little support for war victory at this point. We ran from Lebanon,we ran from Somalia,we're close to abandoning Iraq.



Of course I don't mean the soldiers,but a majority of the general public suck,IMO.

Mothers begging their sons to avoid the fight,I bet Muslim mothers aren't doing that. Ask Vagrant,he's a recruiter,his biggest problem are America's parents. "let someone else go do the hard work".

Wonder what the "someone else" think about that?
Yes, we do have bloggers and Fox news now, thank god! But, the Left is very shrill even though they are in the minority. Old hippies still thinking we are in Viet Nam. I'm encouraged on a daily basis to see how many people are essentially behind Bush despite the MSM's HUGE attempt to ruin him and this war. We have soliders who are returning and have a completely different story about what is going on in Iraq than what the MSM is trying desperately to prove. And, I do believe that a number who responded in these poorly worded polls are against the way war is being fought in that we aren't kicking butt enough. The polls are so very, very poorly worded, and are used for political purposes. Being a statistician as part of my career, I'm aware of how numbers can be manipulated to create a false viewpoint.
And, concerning the past times regarding war, if I'm not mistaken there was a hugely held view for isolationism prior to WWII. Which is what is going on now and which is being perpetrated by the MSM, which Roosevelt did not have. He pretty much was the Democratic party and view of the whole nation during his time regardless of what he said/did. That is something Bush does not have because of the stranglehold the liberals have had for so long on the political and media processes. Thank God, that is waning.!!!!
Solo~

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty. --Thomas Jefferson
Reply
#18
http://www.startribune.com/stories/1762/5580680.html

According to this story knowing someone that was in Iraq you are more likely to support the war. Hmm, I wonder why that is?
'People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.' -George Orwell
Reply
#19
OK,here's a point. I know 2 infantry soldiers currently in Iraq,plus my son has served inside Iraq(Basra) in an oil terminal protection scenario as a sailor and he worked with new Iraqi sailors and Marines(his ship has more Marines than sailors).

I already KNOW what they tell me is accurate by reading milbloggers. Point being,we can know the facts without knowing someone personally.

I know the facts,this would include bad news as well as good. Here's a fact,we've abandoned Baquba to the IA,formerly a bad place and moved the battalion to Ramadi,still a bad town,I wouldn't have clue if not for the blogger telling us that. We've turned over several FOBs to the IA,it happens about twice a month,that's progress.
Reply
#20
Pallidan, I don't comprehend your anagrams...or abbreviations...so I can't answer.

TELL YOUR WIFE TO SHUT UP...OR GO FIND A VEIL AND CHADDOR!
lol lol lol ...AND THEN SHUT UP! lol

Soldiers ALWAYS bellyache...rule of the universe....and their (American) right to do it out loud.

I do get a little tired of peanut-gallery griping and muttering.

Shut the heck up and root for our troops. They are covering our hineys.
Best regards
Bean
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Winning Iraq, through sanctioning Iran? Independents4Bush 15 4,888 11-18-2006, 05:04 PM
Last Post: mv

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)