[Rhodes22-list] Political - 21st Century 'Ernie Pyle"

[Brad Haslett]

There's your problem, Boy! (I'm white and you're white so I can say that!)

"it seems, to listen to the media, that we have created an entire nation of
guerrillas"

Here's your sign!  Quit listening to the media and think for yourself!

Brad





On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 1:23 PM, john Belanger <jhnblngr at yahoo.com> wrote:

> one of the things we wanted from this war was a stable nation able to
> defend itself. i think we should let our desire for success rest there. stop
> the infiltration of foreign arms and personnel, put in place mandatory basic
> laws and infrastructure for 10 years time. require all citizens to register
> and carry id. reward those who stand out as good citizens. bring the
> religious leaders into the process. and lastly, make sure all citizens have
> access to jobs, health care and education. sounds a little marxist, doesn't
> it? but its a step up from where we are now.
>
>  the germans regretted making a rubble heap out of stalingrad because it
> created so much hiding room for guerrillas. not uniformed
> troops.....guerrilla's.
>
>  my understanding of one of the main reasons for having a regular army is
> so that it can surrender in the face of a superior force. the populace
> recognizes and accepts defeat when its army surrenders.
>
>  it seems, to listen to the media, that we have created an entire nation
> of guerrillas, by decapitating the leadership and disbanding the army.
>
>  just my .02
>
>  and i'll take my answerr off the air.
>
>
>
>
>
> Rob Lowe <rlowe at vt.edu> wrote:
>  Gentlemen,
> You both raise some very good points. Historians for years will be writing
> about that failings of the Bush administration to "understand the extend
> to
> which their culture made it difficult to move from an authoritarian
> government to (a) liberal democracy".
>
> The military has done an exemplarily job given their impossible "mission",
> which still has no definition. The military has done a much better job
> than
> it's civilian leadership. The military won "the war", in that they
> defeated
> Sadam's army in about three weeks.
>
> But I disagree with the notion that the only choice is to stay in Iraq. We
> can not impose a liberal democracy. The Iraqis don't want one. We can not
> make them want one. They have no history of democracy and only understand
> authoritarian governments.
>
> The Shia's are fighting amongst themselves right now while we've armed and
> paid off the Sunni. Soon enough the Shia and the Sunni will be fighting
> each other. The Kurds will sit on the sidelines until they can either
> break
> away or be forced into the battle. There can be no democracy in a country
> unless the citizens of the country want it, and Iraqis do not. Al-Malaki
> wants to rule, not compromise. Has his political party tried to negotiate
> with al-Sadr? No, he attacks him and is now trying to isolate him
> politically. Has Al-Malaki tried to negotiate with the Sunni or their
> Awakening Councils? No, he refuses to do so and the Awakening Councils
> were
> formed to protect Sunnis from the (mostly) Shia national army. Soon, Shia
> and Sunni will be fighting each other. Hard to say where the Kurds will
> ally, I would expect they will sit this one out and declare independence
> once the dust settles and no one can stop them.
>
> We can not fix this situation. No amount of nation building can succeed
> where the parties are not interested in forming a democracy. Face the
> inevitable, get out now. Bush knows he's lost the peace but is passing the
> buck to the next president just so he doesn't get the blame. If the
> democrats get elected and withdraw, they will be blamed for "loosing the
> war", even though it was lost the day Bush decided to invade. If McCain is
> elected, he certainly won't withdraw, but he can't win it either, no
> matter
> what he does. So we go into a Vietnam type statement all over again.
> The US won the war, but lost the peace because they had, and still don't
> have, a way to win the peace. They lost the opportunity long ago. Face the
> inevitable and get out now.
>
> Some of this is not much different than our own Civil War. They only
> "solution" is
> a military victory by one party over another. There could be no end to our
> own Revolution, Civil War, French and Indian War, War of 1812, and all the
> rest of the armed conflicts around the world, regardless of the nation,
> without a military victory. I can't think of any struggle that was
> resolved
> without armed force expect perhaps the independence of India, and that was
> an occasion where the occupiers lost the moral will to rule. There have
> been other instances of nations being granted self rule by their
> occupiers,
> but that was only after their self interests expired or the costs were not
> worth the returns.
>
> So, withdraw now and let the inevitable happen. To stay in only prolongs
> the inevitable and costs us more in dollars and soldiers. The British
> learned the hard way you can not rule this region. History does repeat
> itself but no one in the Bush administration seems to know much about
> history. We could not win in Vietnam and we can not win in Iraq. Get out
> now and let them fight it out. Just my 2 cents. - rob
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Brad Haslett"
> To: "The Rhodes 22 mail list"
> Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 2:15 PM
> Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] 21st Century 'Ernie Pyle"
>
>
> > Robert,
> >
> > The last sentence says it all, "There is a recognition that we did not
> > understand the extent to which their culture made it difficult to move
> from
> > an authoritarian government to liberal democracy."
> >
> > Where shall we go now? The world is a small globe - fast airplanes make
> it
> > smaller. We as a nation are imperfect, but what nation is better? Where
> do
> > Chinese dissidents who fear for their lives for their involvement in
> > Tienanmen Square have to run? In what nation can Islam evolve to the
> more
> > enlightened passages of the Koran? If we as Americans don't believe in
> the
> > spirit of 1776, what hope do we hold for the rest of the world, most of
> > which envies our lifestyle and freedoms?
> >
> > I'm all for realism, including the 'meat' of the article you referenced.
> > But, "where do we go now?"
> >
> >
> > It's easy to focus on the Bush 43 failures and the difficulties of the
> Iraq
> > invasion. That's one small part of a larger problem. Solutions?
> >
> > Brad
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it
> now.
> __________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>