previous post next post  

The Democrats muddled message.

Lemme see if I have this straight, too.

The Democrat opposition to President Bush's handling of the war boils down to...

1. We left Afghanistan too early, leaving the Taliban bent, but not broken, so now they are reorganizing and causing trouble. We should have stayed longer, rather than leave the Afghans to muddle out self-governance themselves, after all, they haven't had much practice.

2. We've stayed in Iraq too long, and used too many troops who should be elsewhere fighting terrorists, and we should leave the Iraqis to muddle out self-governance themselves (though it has been some time since they've had any real practice...).

3. The troops are too tired and the Army too broken to fight, but if they weren't in Iraq, they could be somewhere else fighting terrorists, which presumably means deployed to other countries, since the only terrorist attacks near military installations in the US have been the Phelps Phamily annoying people at military funerals. But, I guess there would be fewer of them doing that overseas... so there is *some coherence* there.

And of course these countries can just jump on the self-governance bandwagon!

Just look at us... we did it overnight! Not. It took sitting on Japan and Germany a good 10 years (with a lingering presence for decades after) to get them realigned and moving on.

Where else have we seen this quick reaction... I know, lets check in on a Democrat-inspired nation-building exercise... the Balkans. I think Bill covered that pretty well, let's rummage in the comments a coupla posts below.

*rummage, rummage* Ah! Here we go! Bill opined thusly at 8-ish yesterday morning:

In 1998 (three years after the Dayton Accords), Bosnia-Herzegovina was still severely factionalized, but there was reluctant official cooperation between the Serbs, the Bosniaks (Muslims), the Croats, the Bosnian Serbs, the Serbian Muslims and the Bosnian Croats. The various ethnic groups still hated each other's guts (and made no excuses for it), but everyone was pretty much sick of the killing.

By 2001, the cooperation was well-established and the various factions were at least working together actively, albeit not happily. The various ethnic groups drifted from active hatred into grudging acceptance of each other's right not to be summarily shot.

These days, the politicians in BiH are still squabbling, but at least they're doing it within the framework of a constitution. The various ethnic groups are now only mildly annoyed with each other and are willing to settle differences with a ballot rather than a bullet.

I'd say Iraq, three years after the war, is midway between Boz's 1998-2001 progress, and the Army's even further up the road.

Extrapolate from the Balkan timeline above and apply it to SWA and that should yield a fairly accurate timetable for a US withdrawal, Mr. Congressman.

Ummmm, what's that? You say we've still got troops in the Balkans?

Heh. Yeah, I know...

*wadding timeline and tossing a 3-point sinker*

Ry made the observation that it takes time to build an Army and other Security Forces. Especially ones that don't have "strong NCO" traditions. Oddly enough, Bill had a post that discussed that, too, in June of this year.

Update: I see I'm slow to this... Jeff at Protein Wisdom knocked this apart before I did. Great minds, etc.

19 Comments

Your post sugests that we pulled out of Afghanistan. This did not happen. American service members are still there. And like you said, we're still in the Balkan region. Plus, we're still in Korea. Of course, the Korean War has never officially ended. It's still at a cease fire.
 
Your post sugests that we pulled out of Afghanistan. This did not happen. American service members are still there. And like you said, we're still in the Balkan region. Plus, we're still in Korea. Of course, the Korean War has never officially ended. It's still at a cease fire.
 
No, the post describes the Democratic opposition as suggesting we've pulled out of Afganistan.
 
Joe - *I* don't suggest we pulled out of Afghanistan - in fact, in the post below it I discuss that. The Democrat position is that we pulled troops out of Afghanistan too early in order to send them to Iraq, leaving Afghanistan vulnerable. Which is exactly what the Democrats argue we should do in Iraq now.
 
(Hears the sirens of the Castle Original Thought Police, attempts to flee, gives up as it's hopeless--John's got contacts everywhere) Busted, and guilty as charged(though it didn't occur to me at the time that I was plagarizing). Heh, who better to cite as an authority than a WO as a source and edumacator on such matters, eh? He's got posts on why asking a commissioned ossifer isn't useful too. (thinks about fleeing for Fort Q on the Wabash, but gives up the idea, it's hopeless, John's go contacts everywhere).
 
Give 'em hell, John :)
 
You know, I can't find the link, but somebody very recently put up copies of newspapers from post WWII that said, "Losing the Peace" and went on to describe how polls of Germans said 66% wanted us to leave and 44% of them longed for the return of the fuehrer. Another one said that the US army was constantly having violent confrontation with German partisans (would that be the werewolves?) and a third one talked about how the US sector was far behind the Russian sector in restarting the economy and returning self governance (all be it communist). so much for the pristine view of post WWII Germany just going like clockwork under the Marshall plan. Of course, a few years later we were doing the Berlin Airlift to keep people from starving in that vaunted Russian sector.
 
Um, we were doing the Berlin Airlift to keep people from starving in the French, British, and US sectors of Berlin... not the Soviet-controlled side. They were trying to starve *us* out.
 
Ry - Um, that isn't what I meant... I was just *supporting* you. Guilty conscience, boyo?
 
Sorry..I'm an idiot. LOL Okay...please delete my message. LOL
 
Or maybe I should say, "You know what I meant".. so I could pretend to be a Democrat (again). LOL
   
kat-missouri, The articles you referenced were mentioned on "Jessica's Well" at: http://www.jessicaswell.com/MT/archives/000872.html With links to the Life article at: http://www.kultursmog.com/Life-Page01.htm http://www.kultursmog.com/Life-Page02.htm Can you imagine today's Democrats in the late 1940's? Pelosi: "It was a mistake defeating Hitler and the Nazis! Oh sure, Hitler was a bad tyrant, killing all those Joooos and all. But look what we've done! We've destoyed the infrastructure of a whole continent, and now we must keep hundreds of thousands of our military in Europe for who knows how long just to keep our former allies, the Soviets, from starting yet another war."
 
The "Goldilocks" Democrats: Bush didn't stay in Afghanistan long enough. Bush has stayed in Iraq too long. Clinton did it JUST RIGHT in the Balkans. LOL
 
Frank - *that* is an excellent snipe!
 
Frank, Ha!! Awesome comment. :D
 
I think you unnecessarily distort the Dem message. We were all bipartisan about Afghanistan and getting bin Laden (hmmmm, think he's in Iraq?), and if you read "Operation Anaconda", you'll see that yes, indeed the Bush administration did divert the main effort from Afghanistan to Iraq too quickly. At least the Afghans seem to cooperate better at restoring order to their country, and the badguys are staying in the fringes. Now we see them adopting Iraqi IED/ambush techniques - but that surely can't be because Iraq has turned into the terrorism 101 class for the world... complete with live fire exercises. As for the Balkans, we've only a very small American contingent there because we were able to get NATO support (what a concept), and oh by the way, how many troops did we lose in the Balklans over the last 5-8 years??? Ahhh. So there is a difference then, between Iraq and Boz.
 
I concede all you points - and I'm still not being as obtuse as the Dems are. Iraq is harder, true. The implication being that we shouldn't do it, now that we've started it, because it's going to be harder? I included the Boz piece as much to show that even when it's *comparatively* easier - it takes longer than anyone wants to give it time for. If they'd like to frame the debate around that issue - that it's just too hard, let's go home, and we won't ever try anything hard again - fine. And then lets live within that construct. Oh, wait - we did. And it gave us 9/11.
 
How is this for a muddled Dem mess, While our brave men and woman are fighting half way around the world our congress is going to take up the issue of the BCS (College football).What??? During times like this I ask myself, 'What is going on?'I think if these guys have time to have a hearing on football maybe we should fly them to the frontlines of this Iraq war and let them see what is really relevant. I agree with your previous comments on Afghanistan, nicley put, short and sweet, right on point. Raymond B www.voteswagon.com
 
© 2008 John Donovan
All rights reserved.