Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Sun 10/03/2004 View Sat 10/02/2004 View Fri 10/01/2004 View Thu 09/30/2004 View Wed 09/29/2004 View Tue 09/28/2004 View Mon 09/27/2004
1
2004-10-03 Iraq-Jordan
The Battle for Iraq
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by tipper 2004-10-03 20:13|| || Front Page|| [11131 views since 2007-05-07]  Top

#1 Posted on LGF today:

Asked what the Kerry Doctrine actually is, Holbrooke, in a conference call with reporters, replied: “There is no Kerry Doctrine.”

Posted by 2b 2004-10-03 8:29:08 PM||   2004-10-03 8:29:08 PM|| Front Page Top

#2 Many of these commentators are using the "Canada Standard" to judge Iraq. That is, unless Iraq is like Canada IN ALL WAYS then it is chaos, quagmire, utterly futile, a gross miscalculation and "another Vietnam". The amusing bit is that the success of Iraq is as devastating to them as was the collapse of the Soviet Union. It means that they and their leftist brethren *were wrong*. Without reservation, absolutely and totally wrong. And that thought is as painful to them, to "the cause", as having their foot run over by a lorry.
Posted by Anonymoose 2004-10-03 8:37:45 PM||   2004-10-03 8:37:45 PM|| Front Page Top

#3 A certain amount of navel inspection is O.K. but it is easy to get bogged down and mired in indecision to the extent that you do nothing. Reuel Marc Gerecht talks a lot about might haves, should haves, and could haves but at the end of the day what does it stand for? If there is a kind of democratization of Iraq, I don't see how the Sunni's will ever be in power again. There will be a Shite-dominated country that will probably be closely allied with Iran. Something will have to be done to cool down the nuclear saber rattling of Iran.

The arguments about whether we should have gone into Iraq are not worth debating at this point--we are there. We need to see it through. Iraq may be the linch-pin of the mid-East. Once Iraq is pacified (democratized), the entire mid-East may finally settle down. It's was a bold gamble that just might work.

Something had to be done about the festering sore in the mid-East. 911 was the culmination of doing nothing.
Posted by John 2004-10-03 9:33:39 PM||   2004-10-03 9:33:39 PM|| Front Page Top

#4 Another thing nearly all of these commentators do, besides applying what Anonymoose dubbed the "Canada Standard", is assume that the small handful of publicly-stated motives given for invading Iraq were the **ONLY** reasons we did it. And from that, they proceed to the conclusion that if democracy cannot be established in Iraq, then the whole operation was a failure.

A democratic Iraq would be an enormous plus, to be sure; but in my view the most important thing we've achieved is we've now got 160,000 heavily-armed U.S. troops on a huge land base right next door to the three biggest sources of Islamic trouble: Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia. That land base smack-dab in the heart of Arabia gives us options we've never had before for dealing with the Islamoloonies, and those options are **NOT** dependent on whether or not we succeed in making Iraq democratic.
Posted by Dave D. 2004-10-03 10:10:15 PM||   2004-10-03 10:10:15 PM|| Front Page Top

#5 Personally Dave, I always preferred the option of taking out Mecca the next time anything happens in the U.S.--we need to make certain they understand that is an option.
Posted by John 2004-10-03 10:15:02 PM||   2004-10-03 10:15:02 PM|| Front Page Top

#6 Sorry for the multiple posts but amend that last comment. Take out the next time anything happens in the U.S. Maybe we should keep that option open just for the hell of it.
Posted by John 2004-10-03 10:18:31 PM||   2004-10-03 10:18:31 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 Well, that's a pretty big step-- one that would instantly plunge us into a war against all of Islam, all at once. We're good, but I don't know that we'd want to have that kind of battle on our hands if we can avoid it.

On the other hand, if terrorists were to succeed in setting off a nuke in one of our cities, we're going to be taking out a helluva lot more than Mecca.
Posted by Dave D. 2004-10-03 10:22:50 PM||   2004-10-03 10:22:50 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 Re #6: Agreed.
Posted by Dave D. 2004-10-03 10:23:55 PM||   2004-10-03 10:23:55 PM|| Front Page Top

#9 I gave way to my jingoistic feelings this evening. However, I do recall that we firebombed Dresden which had little military value during WWII.
Posted by John 2004-10-03 10:30:17 PM||   2004-10-03 10:30:17 PM|| Front Page Top

#10 Were we to take out Mecca in the aftermath of a massive CBR attack on the US, we would likely be bolstering the claim that this is a genocidal war. One serious consequence of making an 'option open' is that you have to intend to carry it out.

On a strictly technical level 'taking out' Mecca makes zero military sense. It is a religious city. It has no military signifigance, no strategically importance in support of operations of our enemies; and taking it out would simply be punitive in nature: in my most humble opinion, a gross waste of military resouces.

I like to think that our military forces fight wars as if our principle matters to us. That is why we won't level mosques, and it is why our commanders in the field understand why they are in Iraq. Our commanders there understand that priciples do indeed matter to us. That is why our forces are so militarily efficient: because our principles and ideals matter to us. We don't fire on non-combantants and we don't level cities that have no military signifigance in a war.

Talk of taking out Mecca in a resposne to a CBR attack is irresponsible, and inconceivable at any official level. It would be punishing a people and their religious icons for something 99 percent of them most likey do not support, and certainly did not participate in.
Posted by badanov  2004-10-03 10:32:19 PM|| [http://www.rkka.org/title-boris.gif]  2004-10-03 10:32:19 PM|| Front Page Top

#11 The threat of taking out the center of this satanic death cult should always be on the table. The Whole of Islam should know that there are multiple launch systems standing by to take out Mecca and Medna. They get watch if they don't get these jahadi under control and they do something stupid again.
Posted by Sock Puppet of Doom  2004-10-03 11:16:11 PM|| [http://www.slhess.com]  2004-10-03 11:16:11 PM|| Front Page Top

#12 That is why we won't level mosques

badanov,
Mecca may not be a military significance, but if the Muslims themselves do not have a regard for their own religion and shoot the U.S soldiers from inside the mosque, then we definitely need to level the mosque. We have been way too political in this war. When Rumsfeld gave up on Falluja, he was pulling a Clinton (Somalia). I hope Sammara is the start of something great.

I don't agree with the Iraq war until we killed Osama, but as Dave D has mentioned, forget about Democracy and now that we are there, let's get some bases out of this situation. Syria and Iran are just waiting for a ass kicking. We need to get Osama first.
Posted by Poison Reverse 2004-10-03 11:21:28 PM||   2004-10-03 11:21:28 PM|| Front Page Top

#13 PR....it's 11:30! I would have thought lock-down would have occurred by now - oh wait - maybe you're on the west coast.
Posted by 2b 2004-10-03 11:27:11 PM||   2004-10-03 11:27:11 PM|| Front Page Top

#14 What can I say? I am dedicated to this site.
Posted by Poison Reverse 2004-10-03 11:30:21 PM||   2004-10-03 11:30:21 PM|| Front Page Top

#15 #12 PR:
We need to get Osama first.
OK. Got a method to identify cave paste?
Posted by Barbara Skolaut  2004-10-03 11:45:07 PM||   2004-10-03 11:45:07 PM|| Front Page Top

#16 Mecca may not be a military significance, but if the Muslims themselves do not have a regard for their own religion and shoot the U.S soldiers from inside the mosque, then we definitely need to level the mosque.

You have a buncha Muslims shooting at troops from a mosque you have a building and a military problem, though not a serious one. But you level a building to get at a few jihadis and you have aided your enemy in several different ways.

It may make you feel good that Al (Insert Isalmis sounding name name here ) mosque was leveled by US aircraft because a few insanely hostile terrorists have hijacked it and are using it for their own purposes, but now you have excellent cover for them which will increase the chances of your soldiers getting shot even more. Add to that the enemy can make all the insane charges they nomrally make only this time they have photos. A real propoganda victory for them and a short lived military advantage for us. In other words a waste of military resources

Well the mosque is leveled and we all feel great, but we still have a place from where soldiers can get shot from riflemen with better places to hide, and now terrorists know that no matter how hard you 'bounce the rubble' it won't come down on them.

Now in all of this I don't say no mosque or any building of historicval signifigance shouldn't come down if it has military value. It should if a military advantage could be gained. But this talk of leveling a religious city simply for punitive reasons has no value; it gets us nowhere. We win nothing in the ground war or in the propoganda war.
Posted by badanov  2004-10-04 12:01:12 AM|| [http://www.rkka.org/title-boris.gif]  2004-10-04 12:01:12 AM|| Front Page Top

#17 You go Badanov. It is every bit as offensive and counterproductive to level a mosque as it is a church. It may need to be done at times - but it's never a good idea.
Posted by 2b 2004-10-04 12:06:03 AM||   2004-10-04 12:06:03 AM|| Front Page Top

#18 #10 If the scenario occurred that you outlined, i.e. a massive CBR attack on the U.S. I would argue that genocide had already occurred. Retalitory response should be measured and appropriate.

We have a great military--I have no complaints there.

When Dresden, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki wer bombed, we got a lot of religious shrines and innocent people. However, the war did come to and end. I would argue that it did have strategic consequences.
Posted by John (Q. Citizen) 2004-10-04 12:09:29 AM||   2004-10-04 12:09:29 AM|| Front Page Top

#19 Gotta go. My keepers are coming.
Posted by John (Q. Citizen) 2004-10-04 12:10:52 AM||   2004-10-04 12:10:52 AM|| Front Page Top

#20 If the scenario occurred that you outlined, i.e. a massive CBR attack on the U.S. I would argue that genocide had already occurred. Retalitory response should be measured and appropriate. We have a great military--I have no complaints there. When Dresden, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki wer bombed, we got a lot of religious shrines and innocent people. However, the war did come to and end. I would argue that it did have strategic consequences

Nagasaki and Hiroshima both had strategic consequences because they had a strategic purposes: bring Japan to surrender, which they were clearly not going to do. So your argument supports mine. The Nuking of Japan has a clear strategic purpose in that surrender occurred within 30 days of the last bomb.

But your argument that Dresden brought the war to a conclusion is silly. It was still 3 more months of fighing for the Allies before the Gemans' surrender. In fact since the Allies were forced to go into Berlin, it can well argued that the bombing of dreden hardened resistance, and possibly prolonged the war. The bombing of Dresden was clearly an attempt to kill German morale and terrorize civilians, but outside of that it had little military advantage. But I don't want to get into a fight about Dresden.
Posted by badanov  2004-10-04 12:38:54 AM|| [http://www.rkka.org/title-boris.gif]  2004-10-04 12:38:54 AM|| Front Page Top

16:12 anonymous
02:48 .com
02:39 HRH.RAJA BONGSU-2
03:36 Conanista
03:17 HRH.RAJA BONGSU-2
17:58 Ms. Sittley
16:18 lex
16:14 Mrs. Davis
13:01 lex
10:44 Frank G
10:35 .com
10:34 Mrs. Davis
10:28 Frank G
10:24 Mrs. Davis
10:17 Frank G
10:08 Raptor
00:38 badanov
00:10 John (Q. Citizen)
00:09 2b
00:09 John (Q. Citizen)
00:07 Bomb-a-rama
00:06 2b
00:01 badanov
23:45 Barbara Skolaut









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com