| Submit your comments on this article | |||||||||||
| How we've changed in five years | |||||||||||
| 2006-09-11 | |||||||||||
But the normal we are returning to is different from what we knew a week ago.True, and wise words, even if long forgotten by the people who wrote them. We're five years into a war that will probably run for a generation, perhaps longer. The enemy remains vengeful and elusive, though much better defined now. We can clearly see, assuming we're paying attention, not a monolithic enemy but a multiheaded hydra.
For years now, younger Americans have yearned to prove that they are as patriotic and as capable of self-sacrifice as the Greatest Generation. The commitment made after Pearl Harbor was both larger and simpler than the one we are being asked to undertake.Americans have in fact proven their patriotism and their commitment. Today they're fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, and they're working in support of the war effort in dozens of other countries. They're men and women who are living up to the example provided by the heroes of 9-11: the men of Flight 93, the NYPD and FDNY, Barbara Olsen and a host of others. These are the men and women of the current Greatest Generation, the ones who don't flinch, don't whine, just go in and get the job done. Our shared mission, to eradicate terrorism, is a noble one.There's the rub, isn't it? It's hard to be patient. The heroism of patience doesn't involve running into burning buildings. Patience doesn't go well with a short attention span. American resilience, which allows us to bounce back from setbacks, forgive old enemies and rewrite our national story for every generation, has a downside. Some may call it a short national attention span. That's what we call it around these parts. We've dwelt upon that very subject numerous times. That fact is, the Times is no less susceptible to Short Attention Span Syndrome than is Joe Sixpack and Harriet Soccermom. Yesterday's crusade is tomorrow's inconvenience. The gas crisis that was supposed to commit us to energy conservation quickly gave way to the S.U.V. era. People who willingly stand in lines to get through airport security this month may not be so understanding by the Thanksgiving holidays.The patience lasted past that first Thanksgiving, but not by all that much.
Perhaps most painful of all, America may have to give up the post-Vietnam illusion that it is possible to fight wars with few casualties.In that past few years it's been seldom that we've read the opinion pages of the Times and nodded in agreement. With bodies still unrecovered from the rubble, with soot and the smell of death still in the air, the Times, like the rest of the nation, could see what needed to be done. The could even see what the pitfalls of the coming years would be. But after five years of politix as usual, business as usual, and a constant parade of the usual suspects across the front pages, they've fallen victim — again, like much of the rest of the nation — to the very things they warned about. The gravest mistake, the most egregious error, that the Bush administration has made has been to let the public forget, to return to business as usual, when the enemy we face means to destroy us. Probably, rather than pulling retirees out of retirement to fill support slots the draft should have been reinstated. Probably, since we're at war with an enemy that's financed by oil money, we should have instituted gasoline rationing. But those are should haves. We didn't do those things. We're stuck with the world the way it is. We'll have to live with the consequences of not doing those things, which means we're going to have to work around the problems they raise. Like most shortcuts, it will boil down to "pay me now or pay me later," with the payment being in lives and resources. | |||||||||||
| Posted by:Fred |
| #109 Zenster. I will put my faith in the American people. You can put your faith in whatever gizmo gives you a woody. Nice religion that technology worship. Catch the fever! |
| Posted by: Zpaz 2006-09-11 16:23 |
| #108 The coming war with Islam Dude, you lost me coming out of the gate. In case you haven't noticed, we have already been in that war for a while as Inside-Information-Person (IIP) has so "cogently" pointed out. Combined with a much more responsive military doctrine, our armed forces will project power in entirely different ways from all previous history. Phhhhhpth. Thanks, but no thanks for that pap Zenster. You are a genuine windbag. Rush now down to your local recruiting office so that you too can some day become an IIP and get your Army War College lobotomy. All that rubbish is just so without the will to use it. |
| Posted by: Zpaz 2006-09-11 16:20 |
| #107 Would you propose drafting men only Yes. |
| Posted by: Zpaz 2006-09-11 15:59 |
| #106 Forgot another of the Bush administration's major accomplishments: the ramping up of special forces was accompanied by having a Spec Ops guy as Chief of Staff of the Army now. Oooooooh! Another coup de reorg. Take that Osama. By the way, how is the Osama Hunt going inside information person? Us chillin's wanna know. Have you tagged the old boy yet? Why not sick some Network Centric Warfare on him? That'll do the trick. Can he be found on Blue Force Tracker? He is the one in the white turban. |
| Posted by: Zpaz 2006-09-11 15:48 |
| #105 continued interchanges That's the ticket. Cultural interchanges. Where cars can get off one cultural highway and onto another. Sounds a bit left-wing touchy-feely, but hey, I am game. Ummagosh, we are so gonna win. A draft is not necessary and not politically feasible You guys always prat on about doing battle with the left wing. I see no better way than to institute a draft. Just think of all the possible "interchanges" in boot camp. "Drop that Cappuccino maggot and give me 20!!" |
| Posted by: Zpaz 2006-09-11 15:37 |
| #104 You haven't got a single clue about what I am doing in the WOT or have done in support of our national security for decades Did I miss the newsletter Dude? Or should I say Dud. Or are we back to talking about horoscopes? |
| Posted by: Zpaz 2006-09-11 15:19 |
| #103 my son has probably know more soldiers lost in this war than him, unfortunately Is that the criteria for passing judgement on combat operations or lack thereof? How large my personal body count is? Are you Cindy Sheehan? Do you have absolute moral authority because your body count is higher than mine? Would you like a badge? Would you like a National Defense Service Medal with Maple Leaf Cluster for each body so we can know the superiority of your arguments before you open your mouth. |
| Posted by: Zpaz 2006-09-11 15:18 |
| #102 That includes economic impacts on us (directly and via the international markets) and political and geopolitical effects (including whatever influence we can exert on the creation of new international structures to replace the eroding post-WWII alliances). Could someone please translate this mush for me. Dude, I humbly bow down before your superior jargon. I am now utterly and completely convinced by your arguments from authority and inside information. If only I were in the know, I would be in the know, you know. The inevitableness is washing over me as we speak. Enjoy your Long War or whatever you choose to call it tomorrow. I hope you get that promotion and nice big fat pension. Us dumb citizens will sit this one out and just shake our heads. You obviously have this one in hand. Everybody move along, the professionals are here to save us. |
| Posted by: Zpaz 2006-09-11 15:10 |
| #101 Enough. Screw all the maudlin 9/11 sentimental rubbish. Here is my strategy for winning: 1. Ask Congress for a declaration of war on Afghanistan (no mistake), Iraq (no mistake), Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Lybia, Egypt and nuclear Pakistan. This forces Congress to say yea or nay. Which in turn forces the people to decide what exactly it is we are doing. It will put the decision in the people's laps and not the cabinet's. Put your faith in the people. Yes or no. Are we in a war or not. If not, you bring the troops home. If so, we have our mandate to crush the enemy. 2. Re-institute the draft. I don't want an Army of professionals. I want amateurs. Pissed-off amateurs who had to leave their homes and families. They will force a short war because the political heat they will bring to finish will be unbearable. ALL must share the burdens of the war. Give every segment a stake in the battle. 3. Boots on the ground everywhere in the millions. 4. Any resistance. Rubble. This must be our stated strategy from the beginning. Make it a fact on the ground that no outside Euro ankle biter can fight. They will get used to it. Impose our will face-to-face man-to-man. No retreat from harsh measures. 5. Only drafted, censored Army Journalists on the ground. 6. Screw smart weapons. The biggest fallacy we live by is that war can be won without slaughter. Any resistance and pull the troops out and bring in the B-52's with dumb bombs. Then send the troops back in. Make them bleed, not us. 7. Impose our will. Piss on the Koran. You will see how fast it will all end. When the country has come around to my way of thinking and it will, I'll be waiting with my pea-shooter wearing my adult diapers. |
| Posted by: Zpaz 2006-09-11 14:36 |
| #100 shape the battlefield until it favors us Sigh. Thanks for the meaningless jargon. this Administration has put MARINE generals in charge of Strategic Command (!!!) and our interface with NATO. Yes, I do believe I hear the Mullah's knees knockin' over this decisive and brilliant reorganization. Take that Ahmadinigaderoo. managed to plant small but sufficient bases in the 'Stans We were doing Ops from the Stans in 2001. You site that now as progress. Gimme a break. |
| Posted by: Zpaz 2006-09-11 13:47 |
| #99 It is inevitable that this phase of the Long War would be one of slow grinding attrition How so? Explain to me this inevitabileness. Did I miss that in GWB's horoscope? Are the Mullahs being attrited? The Madrassahs in Pakistan? The Imams in Saudi? We are not engaged. They all have a secure base of operations. All I see is us that it is being attrited with our elites cheering all the way. In 2001 we chose to walk all over the Taliban. In 2003 we chose to walk all over Saddam. And you say we are somehow not prepared for war and need "restructuring". What a hoot lotp. Since 2003 we have lost our will and have chosen to fail. Bugger that. tech would be a key force multiplier our all-volunteer professional military Do you actually believe that jargon? You should write pamphlets like that and send it to the Mullahs. You are utterly brain-washed. The guys on flight 93 knew more about fighting than you ever will. It ain't about tech. It is about will. |
| Posted by: Zpaz 2006-09-11 13:37 |
| #98 Charlie Foxtrot is the phrase Steve. And who cares if it was not pretty? Kosovo passed the one and only test that matters. We imposed our will on the Serbs. They capitulated. Five years on, have the Mullahs capitulated? Has Hezbollah? Hamas? The Muslim Brotherhood? Al Qa'eda? The Taliban? We have achieved nothing. Are you truly satisfied with our current status-quo muddling strategy? I'm not. I am outraged. |
| Posted by: Zpaz 2006-09-11 13:12 |
| #97 Good to see you .com. As for my fellow Chicagoan, are the current results acceptable? It has been five years and what has been accomplished? We are stuck on Guadalcanal and we are spent. GWB is now unable to move anyone. The Democratic campaign to stick it to Bush has had one victor - the jihadis. The lesson I have learned, is the war can not be successfully prosecuted without the Democrat's support. The Republican willingness to fight counts for nothing because the Democrats refuse to be led. On the contrary, they are actively fighting for the enemy. This is a national disaster. And why should they follow? What is the Republican strategy for winning? Democratization has failed. I see no successor. "The Long War"? What the hell is that. It never needed to be long, but now it is. We are now in the worst position possible. No one fears us. The board is cleared for Iran and the jihadis and every fifth column in the West. Nothing has been learned in the past five years. We would have been better off doing nothing. All our enemies are strengthened. The goal of war is not to commit genocide or reduce the enemy to rubble, it is to impose your will on the enemy. Have we done that? No. We never will with one hand tied behind our back. That hand must be freed. That hand will never land with a roundhouse until the Democrats fear for their lives. In the end I am not looking for the Democrats to take power and exercise it as is, I am looking for their very transformation in the core of their souls when disaster strikes. If you think they are hopelessly stuck as is, then we are all lost. We can not fight without them. Without them, we might as well declare defeat and go home. The Democrats must transform. It can only happen if they are in power. I intend to vote straight Democrat as an act of war. |
| Posted by: Zpaz 2006-09-11 12:55 |
| #96 The day after 9/11 I wrote down on a piece of paper the governments that must fall. Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Lybia, Egypt. I keep that paper in my wallet to this day with its two miserable check marks. We stalled on step 3 and are stuck in mid-war. We are stalled by our own elites in my opinion, not by the jihadis. Whether by design (the left wing) or by failure to lead well (the right wing), we are stuck. Since our elites are not capable of winning the war, I have signed off on defending them. Why defend people who will not or can not defend you? The left is blind to the threat and can continue to be since the Bush Administration has prevented another attack on US soil - a minimal requirement of national defense that ultimately does not win the war - in fact quite the opposite. It simply allows the left to say "See, there is no threat!". The left will not get in the game until they see that the jihadis mean all of us dead. They must feel it in their gut. They must fear for their lives. That will only happen if we are attacked again. GWB, for all his guts is not up to the rhetorical challenge of the day. Thus, I say let the terrorists come. Let them do their worst. That's right, bring it on. To quote a violent fanatic from some other war, "I, John Brown, am now quite certain that the crimes of this guilty land can never be purged away but with blood." Only if our elites can mobilize all of us with a coherent ideology, coherent goals and country-wide participation, will I rejoin this war. Add one more government that must fall. That would be ours. Let the Democrats win the next election. Let them be responsible for formulating a winning strategy. And when they fail, well, maybe they will pull their heads out of the sand. Only with the Democrats and the -dare i say it - moonbats on board do we have a chance of winning this. Allow me this last heresy, but I believe we can not win without Hollywood kicking ass and taking names. That's right, we need those talented propagandists on our side, not the jihadis. Otherwise, go ahead and buy your prayer mats. |
| Posted by: Zpaz 2006-09-11 11:27 |
| #95 I now read between 20,000 and 40,000 pages per year of everything from reference works to fantasy. Gee, Zenser, I thought I was the only nut that did that... 8^) - plus I've written five and am working on six or eight others. My friends do complain that it takes me away from working on my stamps too much, but they're not serious - I hope! |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2006-09-11 23:59 |
| #94 Of course if it disabled them somehow the cost to maintain them would bankrupt their families... Don't stop there, 3dc. Do go on ... |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-09-11 23:53 |
| #93 I suppose that one day all jihadis will have nano-parasites (being sarcastic, Ship) embedded in their brains that will start spewing Prozac if they so much as think "jihad." 11A5S - I really like that idea... hmm... I should bounce it off some nano folks I know.... Of course if it disabled them somehow the cost to maintain them would bankrupt their families... |
| Posted by: 3dc 2006-09-11 22:05 |
| #92 I think the draft is misunderstood. When one perceives that he is being forced to do something, then he resists. However, if he is forced to choose and his choice never includes going home unproductive, eventually he will join some group or he will set the ultimate bad example. When you present a group as the toughest, then only those who think they are the toughest will join. When you present a group as being the smartest, then only those who consider themselves smart will join, etc. The problem today is that the MSM (our favorite traitors) have painted it as Bush's war and not America's war. We have been painting the MSM as anti-American, and they are. We need to paint the military as pro-American and patriotic. We need to define what is American and what is patriotic. We need to see the Twin Towers collapse over and over until we can't reasonably except that act. The MSM knows this so they will not show it. They desire to lul the people back to sleep and play their mind control games. We should have anti-Islam rallies and show the phalk up, but nothing is important enough for the average American to give up his golf game. zpaz may be right in that we need another 9/11 to focus the blusterers on reality instead of little bunny's soccer game, or the World Series or whatever the next time slot contains. I know many executive types who just don't follow the WOT. Maybe a full fledged oil shortage will do it. Maybe we should bomb the oil pipes and tankers to force their attention. But then, they think we're crazy and life goes on because we pay the high taxes for such protections. Why tip the cart ? |
| Posted by: wxjames 2006-09-11 21:41 |
| #91 Also extend my thanks to your son, Frank: I have encouraged my sons to consider the military option as well, although they won't be able to exercise it, as they choose, for a few more years. The contempt that the left demonstrates toward the volunteer army is an extension of their contempt for all things voluntary, whether it be social work, real work, and charity. Volunteerism means that individuals make choices, and it irritates the left that they are not making those choices FOR those individuals. Yet, as has been demonstrated time and again, a well-led group of volunteers engaging in any competitive behavior will beat an equally well-led group of draftees who were recruited against their wills. Letting people make their own choices, as long as they don't interfere with other people making their own choices, is at the core of being an American, so a volunteer army is the most appropriate, and moral, force for protecting a nation that has that view of moral choice. This, of course, will be diametrically opposed to, and opposed by, any philosophy or religion that says, in effect, "You don't have any choice!" THAT is the conflict facing us today. |
| Posted by: Ptah 2006-09-11 21:25 |
| #90 RDees website is bein overwhelmed. I get no server etc. |
| Posted by: .5MT 2006-09-11 19:43 |
| #89 After reading this thread I've had a thought, not exactly a "Draft" but something with the same name (For misleading the enemy as much as continuity) All the "Young Men" (Of both sexes) are required to register and attend a "Boot Camp" (Again the misleading name) But what they encounter is a severe and disguised psychological testing, somewhat as really went on at Boot, but with a grading and division of folks by abilities, not the traditional Boot of forcing them into a "Military" mold, but to find out what they're really capable of and steering them into that area where their abilities shine. Instead of a continuious three months with the exact same "Bunkies" say that every week or so there's a seemingly ineffective shakeup, where you'd get sent lock, stock and duffel bag to an entirely different location, maybe even a different state, and get an entirely new barracks full of faces to meet and greet, then as each seemingly disastrous shakeup occurs, you find that your new bunkies seem to have an awful lot in common, such as all your friends seem particurlarly good electronics breadboarders, or all own highly customized cars, or all are big game hunters, or all are skilled snow skiers, etc, then you're either sent to school (Oddly a whole lot of your new bunkies are there too) and then sent home. While you're thinking just how screwed up the Military Draft is, the real effect is to classify the available folks into skill sets, then when a particular set of skills is needed, joe from Montana (Who just happens to be an olympic grade skier, an avid elk hunter, and hates the hot summer,) is drafted into the ski patrol. |
| Posted by: Redneck Jim 2006-09-11 19:10 |
| #88 What Nimble Spemble said in # 98. Amen. |
| Posted by: Abdominal Snowman 2006-09-11 18:32 |
| #87 Coming Soon, to a Theater Near You--- |
| Posted by: mcsegeek1 2006-09-11 18:15 |
| #86 lotp: I don't think that you are a "high tech all the way" kind of person. But I have seen up close the synergistic effects of Congress, the defense industry and O-6's and above looking for their next star and too often the results remind me somewhat of that 300-lbs sheriff's wife mentioned on Rantburg today: disgusting, bloated and useless. Despite having a background in technology, I am of the opinion that a platoon leader functional in the local language and a company commander fluent in it are much more valuable than a sensor network. Also, based upon my reading of history and personal experiences, I believe that it is better to train every unit to elite unit standards than to have elite units. I know that the current sensors coming out are much better than the REMBASS stuff that I played with in the late 80's. However, it was child's play to defeat those sensors. When I did my terrain analysis, I just figured out where the black palm grew or where bad land nav (and if you weren't in a light infantry unit, you tended to have bad land nav skills) might carry the MI guys into an impact area and used that information to come right up on them undetected. I suppose that one day all jihadis will have nano-parasites (being sarcastic, Ship) embedded in their brains that will start spewing Prozac if they so much as think "jihad." Until then, you need small unit leaders that can interact with the locals, you need to recon until you are sick of it and then recon some more, and you need leaders that can shift rapidly from cunning and craft to the bloody mess of decisive battle. |
| Posted by: 11A5S 2006-09-11 18:14 |
| #85 I suggested drafting people for support roles: truck drivers, maintenance, computer guys, clerks, cooks, and what have you, basically what used to be called combat service support positions and maybe some combat support. That was the complaint the french professionnal military expressed when the draft was ended in 2000 (?, did my compulsive military service in 1998 and I was among the very last, including lots of mid/late twenties students who had delayed has late as they could), IE with the draft ended, they lost all that cheap support personnel, which often included skilled people , cooks, mechanics, computer operators,... and had to do with a reduced manpool (army went from 257 000 or so to 150 000), with recruits drawn from lower social backgrounds while having to be paid about ten times as much as draftees (starting at then 6000 FF a month against +/- 500 FF). A "draft" of such CSS could be useful, assuming it is presented the good way (the myth of the ms in France was it allowed social mixity for at least a short period in life, it renforced patriotic feeling, etc, etc...), I don't know. |
| Posted by: anonymous5089 2006-09-11 17:47 |
| #84 We have demonstrated that in combat our quality will beat any quantity "they" can assemble, with the possible exception of China. And even China is trying to get up the quality ramp as quickly as they can. However, after the combat is over, quantity has a quality all its own. This may be where we need the unit for which the draft is appropriate. More a police force than a military one. One that might be a seperate service, perhaps the NG. Available for domestic use in FEMA emergencies as well as overseas. Iraq is not the last country where we will crush the state in a month and be stuck with the population for a decade, if not a century (remember we've been in Germany and Japan 60 years). Using capital intense military in a labor intense environment is as bad a mismatch as sending a labor intense military force to fight our capital intense troops. How to manage the abandoned population of the states we destroy is a problem which I have the impression we are not addressing in any way. And its hard to see how it will make anyone's career a success. The ground version of mine warfare. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2006-09-11 17:43 |
| #83 The supporters of the draft raise it because they know it would kill the high esteem we currently hold our military in It would also degrade it to no better than a so-so police force, which they would like to see happen I think. |
| Posted by: lotp 2006-09-11 17:41 |
| #82 al gore thingy, yes Frank, ...you've done a fine job with those kids of yours. Tell Kieth my whole family supports him and let us know if he needs anything. |
| Posted by: RD 2006-09-11 17:40 |
| #81 What Dave said. |
| Posted by: lotp 2006-09-11 17:37 |
| #80 Best of luck to your son, Frank. God bless 'im. |
| Posted by: Dave D. 2006-09-11 17:34 |
| #79 I feel a lot better knowing the soldiers Keith will be serving with made the decision to join and fight voluntarily. The draft sucked and I hope it never becomes necessary, cuz I think it will always suck. Better to have a dedicated professional competent and loyal fighting force. The supporters of the draft raise it because they know it would kill the high esteem we currently hold our military in (see: Rangel, D-Asshole) |
| Posted by: Frank G 2006-09-11 17:30 |
| #78 High tech weaponry, I think that the _only_ high utility system to come out of all of the recent fielding initiatives has been BFT I guess my perspective on that has been shaped by the systems I'm seeing deployed and close to deployment. Among the deployed: - The Raven backpackable UAV which played an important role in Fallujah, when we finally decided to roll in. - The robots that cleared caves in Afghanistan. - IED detection and detonation systems in use and soon to be deployed. Among those close to deployment: - The Commander's Digital Assistant. Think: ruggedized PDA with comms which allows a patrol to send info on people/munitions/etc. found - real time updates to every other CDA in the area of operations, resulting in real time maps with updated overlays and rapid situational awareness at the squad level. "Every soldier a sensor." And a lot of C4I systems being upgraded, integrated, deployed as soon as they are able to be used. Fred is right on when he stresses combined arms operations. I'll go farther and say that there is a whole hell of a lot more in the way of joint service ops going on than makes the news. True at the special forces / unconventional operations level, but at other levels too. That Fallujah operation which melded army and marines is one example. And just to make it clear, I'm not "high tech beats low tech" -- but high tech where it fits and enables the forces to leverage is a great investment. The battlefield networks and the emerging DOD global information grid tie it all together. 115AS, it ain't real until it's real, but from what I can see the issues you're concerned about have had a lot of attention. |
| Posted by: lotp 2006-09-11 17:23 |
| #77 I was in the Army back in the early 70's before they ended the draft. I wouldn't want us to go back there. Really. |
| Posted by: Dave D. 2006-09-11 17:18 |
| #76 Steve W: I must agree that having a two tier Amry would not be helpful. In an infantry battalion, everyone from the newly minted PFC to the battalion commander curses the "fucking pogues" and "fucking REMFs" in the CSS and CS units. As I have aged and gained some wisdom, I have realized that that attitude was not particularly healthy. Drafting the CS and CSS types would make it even more unhealthy. |
| Posted by: 11A5S 2006-09-11 17:13 |
| #75 Frank, thanks and good luck to your son. I hope the pride you feel in his decision overcomes the fears that any parent would feel. Fred, re: the draft I am of a mind, perhaps hopelessly so, that there needs to be some sort of national service for the 18-20 year old set. This would force intermingling/integration at least to some degree. More importantly, if done correctly, it would imbue a sense of nationalism on many of our citizens. The obvious problem here is that the only institution set up for this kind of thing is the military and one can only wonder at the Charlie Fox that other government institutions would make of such a program. |
| Posted by: remoteman 2006-09-11 17:11 |
| #74 Frank: add my profound thanks to your son. As to Fred's point on the draft, nope, not feasible now. I live in a blue state and I have to say that even the folks who support the WoT at home would rise up against a draft. That said, I understand the point of a draft as Fred outlined it: purpose, motivation and contribution would go a long way towards binding us together. But draftees on a two-year hitch aren't going to master combined arms, and I think the cultural rub of volunteers (who do the infantry/armor/artillery/cool stuff) versus draftees (who haul ammo and dish out reconstituted eggs) would be harmful to our country, not helpful. I do wonder whether a volunteer civil affairs corps would be helpful; might get the 40 to 55 crowd in some numbers to help with the peacekeeping and rebuilding. The 93rd Volunteer Light Infantry? Dunno if that would work. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2006-09-11 16:58 |
| #73 is that an AlGore "lockbox™", RD? |
| Posted by: Frank G 2006-09-11 16:52 |
| #72 I'll just keep batting down his military ignorance, along with others here who know the score. You've got more patience than I. But it looks like someone else ran out also. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2006-09-11 16:51 |
| #71 damn everytime I get so busy with projects I can't even blog all the fricken critters come out.... see ya.. |
| Posted by: RD 2006-09-11 16:44 |
| #70 When I made my comments about reinstituting the draft I wasn't referring to combat troops. I suggested drafting people for support roles: truck drivers, maintenance, computer guys, clerks, cooks, and what have you, basically what used to be called combat service support positions and maybe some combat support. I wouldn't draft them so much because the military needs them as because they need the military: the motivation, the sense of purpose, the feeling that they're contributing to the defeat of the enemy. Talking about millions of boots on the ground shows Zpaz doesn't have the concept of the combined arms force down yet. That's understandable, since most of the rest of the world, to include the Brits, doesn't seem to quite get it. They regard our successes in Iraq I and Iraq II as flukes. They weren't flukes, and similar successes will be the case every time we engage in a similar major conflict, unless the force is reorganized out of existence or the doctrine is dropped in favor of something else -- and it had better be something even better, or we'll be back to the golden age of body bags. When I went into the Army, back in that golden age, the cream of the crop was skimmed off in the recruiting process, going to the slots where smarts were deemed most necessary, to include clerk-typist school. The leftovers got to hump ammo in the artillery, or to suck diesel in an armored unit, and the bottom of the barrel went to the infantry, since they were good for nothing better. That was the requirement, back in the age of STRAC. Military philosophy saw us drafting huge numbers of men to deploy to Europe to fight the Soviets' huge numbers of men, refighting Kursk in central Europe, cannon lined up hub to hub and tactical nukes popping off in all directions. That was the other end of Mutually Assured Destruction. Combined arms reverses the priorities of the STRAC military. The tooth is where most of the quality goes, and the tail has to make due with what's left over. Not that there aren't lots of quality people in the rest of the Army, mind you. Recruiting standards are much higher than draft standards (two arms, two legs, pulse) were, which gives us better quality to pick through. The combat arms -- infantry, artillery, and armor -- do not need the unmotivated, they do not need the guys who flunked out of cook school. It takes brains to execute today's infantry tactics, along with the courage and toughness our parents and grandparents brought to World War II. It takes a hell of an NCO corps to coordinate those smarts and toughness, and it takes constant and realistic training. The officers of today are head and shoulders above most of the run of the OCS mills I saw in Vietnam. There aren't any Lieutenant Niedermyers anymore. The armed forces we've put together specifically to perform combined arms operations is qualitatively the best in the world. A draft would be a political move, a move to include the nation in what I regard as a fight for the survival of our civilization. I occasionally think it would be a good move, but as has been pointed out, it's not a feasible political move right now. |
| Posted by: Fred 2006-09-11 16:42 |
| #69 Frank, my respects and thanks to your son also. |
| Posted by: Grunter 2006-09-11 16:35 |
| #68 Since I think more in terms of vectors and trade offs than in poles (high tech good <---> low tech bad), I'd like to make a few comments. High tech weaponry, I think that the _only_ high utility system to come out of all of the recent fielding initiatives has been BFT. I'm not saying that high tech is bad, but one system out of 13 (that's a number that I recall reading) is a pretty poor ROI. I won't bore you with all of my theories and direct experience with the evolution of technology. I would only like to point out that evolved systems like (what most of us now consider to be) crappy Dell servers are much more reliable than purpose-built MILSPEC systems ever were. Regarding the discussion of networked forces, I have yet to see any serious discussion of the value of hierarchical versus peer networks in warfare. Peer networks will grind you down in a war of exhaustion but are poor at massing for decisive effect in wars of annihilation and manuever. It's generally good that we are networking our forces, I just want to make sure that what we create is the right kind of network. The politicos wouldn't know Metcalfe's Law if it hit them in the face and the technologists are usually just abyssmal at understanding the organizational behavior issues. Draft versus volunteer military. I'm not sure if either of these two paradigms will remain the right ones in the near future. Especially in Europe, the only way to fight this threat may be as creative minorities, expressing themselves militarily as militias. There would be enough standardization among the militias to realize some economies of scale and for them to communicate and mass for decisive warfare. I am not sure that we will ever reach this point in the US, but there is some chance that we will. Frank G: Please pass along my thanks to your son for volunteering to serve. Fred: Thank you for a great piece. I am long overdue in hitting the tip jar. |
| Posted by: 11A5S 2006-09-11 16:35 |
| #67 Time to go,zpazz. They're pissin'on your swag. |
| Posted by: Grunter 2006-09-11 16:34 |
| #66 thank you for all the above well-wishes - I will pass them on. Keith seems to have his head on straight, and I'm so very proud of him. It hurts to have him leave the nest (I only have his 17 yr old brother left), but I'm only being selfish on that. |
| Posted by: Frank G 2006-09-11 16:33 |
| #65 Yes sir. Ok everybody, funs over. Back to the club for drinks. |
| Posted by: 49 Pan 2006-09-11 16:28 |
| #64 Enough. |
| Posted by: Dave D. 2006-09-11 16:26 |
| #63 Zpaz, you and Islam just think we are currently at war. Yes, Islam is at war with the United States. So far, America has not even gone to anything approaching a true war footing against Islam. Once that happens, the difference will be like night and day. However, I don't expect someone of your limited vision to notice. HINT: Insults are the surest indicator that your arguments carry little, if any, weight. Intelligent people use factually based information and informed opinion to establish their points. So just keep on poking eveyone with that stick. They're bound to start liking you real soon. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-09-11 16:26 |
| #62 When I am King, everyone will have Strawberries and Cream! |
| Posted by: Abdominal Snowman 2006-09-11 16:12 |
| #61 Zpaz, your observations are so off base as to be laughable. The coming war with Islam will be unlike any other war we have ever fought. Afghanistan and Iraq need to be our final lessons in nation-building. We have neither the economic wealth nor the military staff to go in and put boots on the ground in all enemy countries (those boots that you are so in favor of drafting). As lotp so cogently notes, American technology is driving us towards incredibly smart weapons that preclude the need for ground force invasions and yet still manage to inflict the needed amount of destruction. Combined with a much more responsive military doctrine, our armed forces will project power in entirely different ways from all previous history. We now enter an era of doing what our military does best, namely, "breaking things". We must begin a process of using whatever tools available, be it economic sanctions or cruise missiles, to disable our foes. Let them use their own treasure to rebuild. Should they not reconstruct according to our liking, we will raze and repeat. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-09-11 16:08 |
| #60 "Oooooooh! Another coup de reorg. Take that Osama. By the way, how is the Osama Hunt going inside information person? Us chillin's wanna know. Have you tagged the old boy yet? Why not sick some Network Centric Warfare on him? That'll do the trick. Can he be found on Blue Force Tracker? He is the one in the white turban." Lose the shitty attitude, Zpaz. RIGHT NOW. |
| Posted by: Dave D. 2006-09-11 16:01 |
| #59 First things first. My 18 yr old son goes in tomorrow to bootcamp at Ft. Sill. When I asked him why he wanted to join, he said 9/11 did it for him. Frank, please do me a huge favor and extend my warmest personal thanks and deep appreciation to your young lad for his commitment to America. Our country cannot survive without contributions like his. I cannot imagine both the pride and trepidation that, as a father, you must be feeling right now. Here's hoping that my small gesture of support can help you in some way. That's a keeper and one that I will use in my own writing in the future, with your permission. I would be honored to see it used by yourself, Steve. At all times I have tried to deliver cogent and worthwhile commentary at this site (with a smaller boatload of snarking). That you see some value in my efforts makes it all worthwhile. I will also make careful note that in my above observation the role of some horrendous Islamic terrorist attack is not supposed to be that of the "magic wand" that others here rightly denounce. I do not seek or expect there to be some overnight solution to this nearly intractable situation. None of this prevents me from anticipating that Islam will, at some future point, manage to commit an atrocity that goes so far beyond the pale that our outrage will finally overcome any reluctance we may have to inflict massive retaliation. It may as well be carved in stone. Islam's very nature is one of supreme arrogance and overweening pride. Within that self-important mindset dwells a blatant disregard for the value of human life. Be it that of Islam's intended victims or its own followers. This is the key aspect in their arrogation of power and how it will lead to their downfall. Islam's blind obsession with the subjugation of its self-perceived enemies is what will drive it to commit this ultimate offense. They cannot possibly see how such a potent tool could work against them when they are able to deal such a horrendous blow to their foes. I can only hope that the remaining world will wake up to this fact before Islam detonates a nuclear device in some major metropolis. They want to do it. They plan on doing it. They will do it if opportunity presents itself. This monstrous desire on Islam's part is what must imbue us with the grim determination to pre-empt such a horror. It is nearly impossible to avoid the cynicism that predicts how such an atrocity must necessarily precede our finding such resolve. This will be our own greatest crime against ourselves. Faced with every possible indication that Islam is a clear and present danger, we continue to give them the benefit of the doubt. We stopped giving such benefit to the Nazis long before they had even attempted to kill thousands upon our own shores. A single attack by Imperial Japan awakened our nation's wrath. How it is that so many terrorist atrocities have happened without us finding the courage to begin dismantling Islam is simply beyond me. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-09-11 15:52 |
| #58 A nation mourns for the lost possibilities of having you in charge, Zpaz. |
| Posted by: NYer 2006-09-11 15:50 |
| #57 You in Europe are farther along in the cultural / demographic suicide curve Yes, and I'm part of the problem, sadly. What scares me is that while I mostly admire the USA (say, some western cultural aspects you've so far managed to retain, plus some original, "anglosaxon", ones), my readings have shown me you're engaged in that same suicide curve, which you sent back to Europe in the 60's, where it encountered a much more favorable ground (dechristianization & marxism cultural hegemony)... Remember, in 2002, about 49% of the Us electorate basically voted for a guy in the EU mold. When I'm feeling low, I think you'll more or less the torch-bearer of what's left of the West, and that you're under siege from within too. |
| Posted by: anonymous5089 2006-09-11 15:33 |
| #56 A draft is not necessary and not politically feasible It would also be the quickest way I can think of to totally degrade the effectiveness of our forces. Did I miss the newsletter Dude? That and a whole lot of other things .... |
| Posted by: lotp 2006-09-11 15:26 |
| #55 Anon5089, I was just responding to the incoherency of Zpaz' comments on military options. I'm more than aware of the other dimensions of this struggle. You in Europe are farther along in the cultural / demographic suicide curve than we are. I wish I had an easy solution for you. In a small way, our continued interchanges with your underfunded and unsupported militaries may help to encourage a wider resistance to the creeping conquest of your continent, but I am not optimistic. |
| Posted by: lotp 2006-09-11 15:24 |
| #54 I gotta say I prefer lotp's take to that of zpaz. A draft is not necessary and not politically feasible. We don't need millions of boots, and we sure as hell don't want to grind the region into rubble. What we have in Iraq (not Afghanistan) is an experiment to see if an otherwise intelligent, well educated people stuck in despotism, totalitarianism, and Islam can make the jump to personal liberty (the correct expression of democracy, as Fred often reminds us) within a generation. The jury is out and will be out until around, oh, 2020 or so. If they can, the solution to Islamicism and Qutbist theology is at hand -- we have to force the Arabs to be more like Iraq. If they can't, we may well be royally screwed, but we're not going to know for at least a decade. That doesn't fit our nature as impatient people, but that is what it is going to take, along with Fred's big blue nightstick. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2006-09-11 15:18 |
| #53 Now stop it! Both of you, before I have to come back there! |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2006-09-11 15:18 |
| #52 I hope you get that promotion and nice big fat pension. Us dumb citizens will sit this one out and just shake our heads. You haven't got a single clue about what I am doing in the WOT or have done in support of our national security for decades. Promotion and fat pension, my ass. |
| Posted by: lotp 2006-09-11 15:15 |
| #51 Also, regarding the lotp long war, there's something that is not taken into account I fear, it is demography and immigration, IE population shifts. Again, sorry if I rant, but you're thinking of the WOT in military terms, which is appropriate for americans (you're the ennemy); on the other hand, I fear we euros/froggies have much more to fear from "demopathy" and demography (relative birthrates combined with immigration), along with the crumbling of "european civilization" on itself (we're being "colonized" and submitted into willing dhimmitude, if you wish). You're being fought and attacked in an asymetrical war, we're being subverted (with the help of the socialist/marxist metastasis) and invaded, in slow motion, with terror being only one mean to further that end (stick & carrot). Perhaps it will end up in hot conflict, with ethnic/religious intestine warfare say in France & Belgium, with possibly algeria or turkey coming in along volunteers from the arabo-muslim world to military "help the persecuted muslims" once TSHTF(???). I'm not sure both sides of the Atlantic face the same war, at least for the time being; rendez-vous in a few decades. Sorry if I sound a bit hollow, but that's what I believe; it's always interesting to read RB and have that "military" perspective, but I'm not sure it does apply to Europe at all. |
| Posted by: anonymous5089 2006-09-11 15:11 |
| #50 Anon5089, as I recall St. Cyr takes people with a baccalaureate degree and puts them through focused military training. They also earn a master's degree in the process IIRC. The ones I've met have come to my place of employment to learn / exercise some technical skills. They've done well. |
| Posted by: lotp 2006-09-11 15:01 |
| #49 #13 note that our youngest generation gets it. The Army met their recruitment goals in wartime this year - all volunteers. My 18 yr old son goes in tomorrow to bootcamp at Ft. Sill. When I asked him why he wanted to join, he said 9/11 did it for him. Posted by Frank G 2006-09-11 Btw, speaking of military students, all my sympathy and admiration to your son, Mr. Frank G. Not only can he understand the stakes, but he does act upon his beliefs. Stand up guy. |
| Posted by: anonymous5089 2006-09-11 14:59 |
| #48 A draft?? WTF, never again I hope. Screw smart weapons? Again WTF??? This aint a gang fight what the F is he thinking? "Lets throw humans at it" Draftee's don't want to be there so they will fight harder?? Arggg, my ten year old has a better grasp of combat than this Z guy, but then my son has probably know more soldiers lost in this war than him, unfortunately. |
| Posted by: 49 Pan 2006-09-11 14:57 |
| #47 The funny thing with St Cyr is that graduating from there is the only way someone will ever be promoted past captain in the french army (that what I was told during my national service) I don't know what this school is worth on the "international military market", but I do know it's a bastion of elitism (think "Old France", with catholic value, families with officers from generations to generations,...) and selection (every few years or so, there are reports of students dying from over-exhaustion during hiking, I've seen it at least twice IIRC, or hazing). |
| Posted by: anonymous5089 2006-09-11 14:57 |
| #46 Forgot another of the Bush administration's major accomplishments: the ramping up of special forces was accompanied by having a Spec Ops guy as Chief of Staff of the Army now. Politically TABOO under Clinton and the political generals. Absolutely appropriate for this war. |
| Posted by: lotp 2006-09-11 14:56 |
| #45 NS, I see his agenda but let him call it out specifically. I'll just keep batting down his military ignorance, along with others here who know the score. |
| Posted by: lotp 2006-09-11 14:49 |
| #44 #45 Re-institute the draft. I don't want an Army of professionals. I want amateurs. Pissed-off amateurs who had to leave their homes and families. They will force a short war because the political heat they will bring to finish will be unbearable. ALL must share the burdens of the war. Give every segment a stake in the battle. The peanut farmer and his amnesty program ended all chances of this ever becoming reality, even it were a sane idea which is hardly the case. Would you propose drafting men only? Oh, I see, you'll draft 18 year old young ladies as well. I don't think so. You can stick a fork in the draft, it's DONE! |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2006-09-11 14:49 |
| #43 You GO Lotp. Blue Force Tracker saved a great many lives. Newer, faster systems similar to Tracker are now under development and fielding. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2006-09-11 14:46 |
| #42 Come on, R, what's he really stuck on? |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2006-09-11 14:46 |
| #41 Not St. Cyr, unless he's one of their worst. The people I've met from there have a much better understanding of warfare in this century. |
| Posted by: lotp 2006-09-11 14:46 |
| #40 Zpaz, Training at St. Cyr or the Frunze? |
| Posted by: Richard Blaine 2006-09-11 14:43 |
| #39 Re-institute the draft. I don't want an Army of professionals. I want amateurs. Pissed-off amateurs who had to leave their homes and families. They will force a short war because the political heat they will bring to finish will be unbearable. ALL must share the burdens of the war. Give every segment a stake in the battle. With that one you clearly demonstrate that you haven't a clue about the current state of our Army, how they train, how they fight and how they are equipped. Sorry Charlie, masses of drafted grunts with M16s aren't going to be deployed. What a recipe for degrading our military strength!!! |
| Posted by: lotp 2006-09-11 14:43 |
| #38 How so? Explain to me this inevitabileness If you don't see it, then you are stuck looking at tactical trees and not the bigger forest. I am losing my patience with people who persist in thinking that this struggle is like a Saturday morning cartoon or a video game. You know, the heroes find the magic sword or execute the stunning martial arts move and KAZAAAMMM - the bad guys are all dead or give up, just in time for the commercials. The war we are in has been in the making and in slow ramp-up for decades. You are stuck in a WWII mentality: take territory, attrit uniformed/identified enemy. This war will be and must be fought on the basis of the effects we wish operations to achieve -- ALL the effects, including but not limited to those older goals. That includes economic impacts on us (directly and via the international markets) and political and geopolitical effects (including whatever influence we can exert on the creation of new international structures to replace the eroding post-WWII alliances). Not to mention dealing with active opposition of the liberals here at home. As far as technology goes, don't take my word for it. Go talk to then-LTC Rocky Marcone, the Silver Star awardee commander whose tank battalion was at the tip of the spear in the Thunder Run to Baghdad. Ask him what he thought of Blue Force Tracker (now fully deployed as FBCB2) when it was given to his battalion two weeks before he crossed into Iraq. Then ask him how it saved his battalion -- and secured critical bridges used by the rest of our forces -- when the IRG counterattacked under cover of a sandstorm and FM voice comms were degraded to the point of being useless. I could tell you what he told me and about 30 officers and a few other civilians in a presentation over lunch one day when he got back stateside, but you wouldn't pay it any attention I suspect. |
| Posted by: lotp 2006-09-11 14:41 |
| #37 Dat's nice. Do ya have a strategy for winning if noone makes you God-Emperor for the week? |
| Posted by: Abdominal Snowman 2006-09-11 14:40 |
| #36 The Marxist/Soviet influence on the left in this country and Europe remains extremely powerful. It can be concious or subconcious, but it is certainly there. This influence means that the hard core left will not fight for the ideals Zpaz calls for. There will be no transformation until millions of Americans are killed. I state millions rather than thousands because I don't think that even a couple hundred thousand being killed would unseat this other "cancer" that infects them. But slowly it seems as though the populace at large is turning and beginning to understand what we face. They are schucking the old mind control despite the best efforts of teachers, professors, media elites and elected democrat representatives to keep it working on them. When another attack hits the US, one that is in the low thousands, these regular folks who pay at least some attention to the left will walk away. The process will move more quickly after that and the hardcore left will be increasingly marginalized. I would like to think the same would happen in Europe if there were a major attack there, but I am less certain of the outcome there. The marxist influence there is far stronger. |
| Posted by: remoteman 2006-09-11 14:32 |
| #35 Interesting point about imposing our will. Short rant from my fox hole: Remember we can only impose our will on governments/nation states. We can isolate them, attack them, nuke them, etc... This is all based on the premise that the "will" we impose on them is a lesser evil than what will happen if they resist. Our enemies are not governments/nation states. They have no borders, nothing to lose, and we continually want to fight as if they do. If we are going to win this war, and it will be years if not decades, we must be willing to disregard borders and fight terrorism on their battlefield - IE anywhere they are. We must be willing to go into a Mosque and kill the enemy, cross into Pakland and kill our enemies berfore they bring it to us again. If nation states complain, well then we get into the forcing our will on them. I'm tired and don't care what the UN, France or China thinks of our policies and if they protest our killing of terrorists too bad. |
| Posted by: 49 Pan 2006-09-11 14:02 |
| #34 Well, good luck with that, Zpaz. I agree with a lot of what you say, but I believe your prescription is a sure looser. The Dhimms will not be led - true, but they will not lead either. Clintoon was the best they had to offer. Gore? Kerry? Hildebeest? Kennedy? Shummer? Durbin? Leahy? LOL. These guys are all wrong. Their interests are different, but they all point to the destruction of America. "True to our ideals" means keeping perfectly clean hands. The war cannot be won with clean hands. The Democrat view that human nature is perfectible is not centered in reality. The far Left wants the destruction of America. They will never enlist in the defense of this country. They will continue to be a true 5th column. I also am not pleased with the pace of the war, but many commenters here have pointed out that you cannot lead where the people are not ready to go. I cannot imagine ever voting for another Democrat as long as their ideology is not centered in reality. |
| Posted by: SR-71 2006-09-11 13:46 |
| #33 Thanks, anon5089. The soldiers I work with every day have helped me stay grounded and look at the strategic and tactical issues simultaneously. (Any failures on my part are not their fault. LOL) |
| Posted by: lotp 2006-09-11 13:29 |
| #32 I don't know of anyone here at RB that's 'satified' with the pace of this war. Hell, my grandparents weren't satified with the pace of WWII. We'd all like to see it done more cleanly, decisively and expeditiously. But we're also under no illusions that we somehow need the mullahs of moonbattery to help us win. |
| Posted by: mcsegeek1 2006-09-11 13:21 |
| #31 Nice to see you've got your head well screwed on your shoulders, Ms. lotp; RB ladies (you, TW,...) seem to be refreshingly level-headed and realistical, that's good. |
| Posted by: anonymous5089 2006-09-11 13:21 |
| #30 The day after 9/11 I wrote down on a piece of paper the governments that must fall. Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Lybia, Egypt. I keep that paper in my wallet to this day with its two miserable check marks. We stalled on step 3 and are stuck in mid-war. Pretty ambitious and wide-ranging. Pakistan is notable by its absence. |
| Posted by: Abdominal Snowman 2006-09-11 13:16 |
| #29 It is inevitable that this phase of the Long War would be one of slow grinding attrition. That may not play with the TV - instant gratification generations who make up most of our public, but there it is. Bush policies might have shifted the pace a little, but not much IMO. The reality is that, while as TW notes we all knew SOMETHING would happen (or we did if we let ourselves pay attention), we were NOT ready for this conflict. Not logistically, not politically, not geopolitically, not economically. The closest damn thing to being prepared we had was: a) The SECDEF's understanding that a WWII/Vietnam military needed restructuring because in any wars we would fight after 2000 info tech would be a key force multiplier our all-volunteer professional military HAS to leverage, and that we would need a more nimble, expeditionary organization to our army. b) The Bush/Cheney team's pre-9/11 stance that craven international agreements with no teeth in them would not stand (see: Pyongyang). That's it. As far as imposing our will, we have done so to a far greater degree than you are willing to admit, zpaz. It's just that the scope of vision of this administration is substantially wider than yours. Here are some (not all) of this administration's intents that they have imposed on the Islamacists, Europe and others: 1. There have been no successful attacks on the homeland since 9/11. If you think that just happened by coincidence, you are blind, deaf and dumb. Attempts have been made. They have been stopped, sometimes in the planning stage. 2. There has been no international economic crisis within the developed countries. Read the text of the latest al-Q video, and then read the transcripts of previous ones. Bin Laden and the more intelligent of the other jihadi leaders are focused on destroying the wealth of the west, in the (probably correct) belief that when that goes, so too does any other resistance to them. They have failed. There are now significantly stronger security and other controls in the international banking sector, the markets are reasonably solid, oil is still denominated in dollars rather than Euros. That did not happen by accident -- this administration imposed its will on fractious "allies" in Europe and on oil producing countries like Iran who have tried to make a shift happen. 3. In the meanwhile, the technology R&D capabilities of this country have been ramped up BIG TIME to augment our capabilities. Whether it's IED detection systems in Iraq or chem/nuke sniffers in our ports, a signficant improvement in our capabilites has already been fielded and much more is coming. 4. The Army is accomplishing a massive and wrenching reorganization into the brigade as the deployable unit of action rather than, as in WWII, the division. Even BEFORE this reorg got underway, we saw in Iraq captains making the sorts of decisions that in WWII and VietNam Lt. Colonels and above made. That was the direct result of info tech integrated into operations, along with doctrines like Effects Based Operations which Rumsfeld supports. Accompanying and enabling this reorganization, the Bush administration has attracted new allies in places like Eastern Europe, managed to plant small but sufficient bases in the 'Stans and elsewhere and has ramped up our Special Ops capabilities -- NOT any easy thing to do quickly. Moreover, this Administration has put MARINE generals in charge of Strategic Command (!!!) and our interface with NATO. I doubt if anyone other than Rummy could have accomplished that. A marine in charge of Strategic Command says our nuclear weapons and our ballistic missile defense are to be seen as operational assets, not a last-resort, remote potential capability. Think about that one, because I assure you it has had an impact in Europe. 5. Moreover, we have coaxed India into a closer alliance, encouraged Japan to openly talk about throwing off their constitutional limits on offensive military capabilities, kept Pakistan somewhat contained, pressured Iran and Syria, supplied Israel during the Lebanese operations to the extent their muddled leadership could aborb it etc etc. And all the while we have exposed the corruption and bias at the UN for all to see. I'm sure this doesn't satisfy those who want a visible, devastating counterblow in Iraq and elsewhere. It doesn't satisfy me -- but I don't blame this administration for that. I've read enough military history, and talked with enough of my military colleagues, to recognize that first we get our defenses in order. And while we're doing that, we take the fight to the enemy to disrupt his C4I (command / control /communications / computing/ intel) capabilities, degrade his offensive strength and above all to shape the battlefield until it favors us. This will be a *LONG* war. Come to grips with that fact, because it is not going to change. Recognize the steps that have been accomplished. Do your part in November to further them. And give up the fantasy of a magic wand, i.e. a devastating strike on Iran, or a strike here that converts the Dems a la Paul on the road to Damascus. If those happen, fine -- but I for one am not going to sit back and put all my eggs in those baskets. |
| Posted by: lotp 2006-09-11 13:15 |
| #28 And why should they follow? What is the Republican strategy for winning? Democratization has failed. I see no successor. "The Long War"? What the hell is that. It never needed to be long, but now it is. We are now in the worst position possible. No one fears us. The board is cleared for Iran and the jihadis and every fifth column in the West. Nothing has been learned in the past five years. We would have been better off doing nothing. All our enemies are strengthened. The chickenshit nobles, princelings, and plantation owners in the Middle East who send the more troublesome of their slaves to die fighting us so he won't have to put down a slave revolt next year appreciate your belief that democratization is an absolute failure; since you won't surrender and go home, and won't try to change Middle Eastern societies, this makes your troops the perfect jannisary executioners for those who _would_ be overthrowing _them_ instead of fighting the US were the current crisis not going on. (The best thing of all: this will let them pretend they're a) anti-imperialist, b) the real democrats, and c) pious moslems. The truth is, they're none of the above...) |
| Posted by: Abdominal Snowman 2006-09-11 13:12 |
| #27 Fred, you are a treasure. :-) |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2006-09-11 12:55 |
| #26 I'm all in favor of making it a law enforcement problem and leaving the military out of it. What I have in mind is six or seven 18,000-man police divisions, with heavy armor and their own organic Apache support. Now, we'd have to buy some new radios and such to integrated with the police air arm I think we'll need -- probably four wings of F15s with badges painted on their sides, and one each of B52s and B2s, likewise in blue. The police naval arm would be built around blue aircraft carriers, each with police destroyer escorts, but would also have a submarine arm with blue Tomahawks. Call it Operation Stop-or-We'll-Shoot. |
| Posted by: Fred 2006-09-11 12:28 |
| #25 What Steve said. |
| Posted by: mcsegeek1 2006-09-11 12:07 |
| #24 Sorry Zpaz, the idea that we need to have the Dhimmicrats on board reminds me of Peter Bienart's "The Good Fight: Why Liberals -- and Only Liberals -- Can Win the War on Terror and Make America Great Again." He's a New Republic editor and is conceited enough to think that Republicans can't fight the WoT. So far I've seen only Pubs do so, and I've no assurance that the Lib'urls can recognize the enemy, let alone fight them. Bienart is well meaning, but read his argument closely (summary here): it all collapses back into the mushy jello of law-enforcement-plus, with the military option not being part of the plus. He realizes that the jihadis are a threat to him and his values (points for that), but his response to "what do we do" is to "build international institutions". Feh. He cites Kosovo as an example of our working with allies to get a better result. Reeeeeeally? Kosovo is a near-complete Charlie-Fox situation. He also thinks we need to "live up to our ideals", which is code-speak for the satin-ribbon approach to interrogating jihadis. He wants the results but he doesn't want to think about the difficulty in getting said results. If what he envisions is international institutions and LE-plus, I'll take Dubya and the point spread. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2006-09-11 11:58 |
| #23 Wow, Zpaz. Remind me not to piss you off, lol. You have the fever. I once ranted along a similar line and called it "fry us up". I truly dread the 2-4 years it would take for the DhimmiDonk morons to prove just how cravenly corrupt, self-serving, and useless they are to the self-absorbed segment. I'll have to vote Pubbly in November - I just can't make myself go there. But a fine fine rant, bro. *kudos* |
| Posted by: .com 2006-09-11 11:42 |
| #22 Great rant, Fred, and great thread, Rantburgers. My wife woke up and turned on the radio. Well, the airwaves are full of 9-11 rememberances. I tell you, I woke up angry and frustrated. I will not watch any TV shows on 9-11 with all their fake, gentle, smaltzy sh*t. I will reflect on the meaning for 9-11 myself, quietly. We have made a significant amount of progress since 9-11, at a HUGE price in national assets, and with a relatively low level of casualties, if you look at it in the cold accounting of war. Those relatively few casualties are not insignificant. They represent sacrifices in lives unlived, many very young, and lives disrupted or shattered by serious wounds. They are all to be honored. Many of us, especially Rantburgers, realize the stakes in this war. This is a war for civilization as we know it. This is a war where one side chooses and honors life and liberty, and the other side is an authoritarian death cult. It is not really that complicated. What makes it a sticky wicket is that to win this war, we, on the side of life and liberty are going to have to get decisive, down, and dirty to defeat our enemies. Collectively, we do not really know our enemy. He takes advantage of every weakness we have to exploit. That which makes us great---freedom, openness, creativity, eccentricities, a system of laws that protect individuals---are seen as opportunities to infiltrate, weaken, and defeat us, just like a virus does, just likc a cancer does. Much of the world is in denial about the nature of our enemy. As Elrond said to Gandalf at Rivendell, "Our list of allies grows thin." Well, thin is better than nothing. We are where we are and we will just have to readjust to meet these realities. We have two wars to fight---the external enemy, and the enemy within. The latter seriously inhibits our options and actions against the former. Well, for good or ill, we in these United States are going to have it out with the enemy within, one way or another. We need to engage this battle and win it in order to fight the external enemy. We have a two front war, folks. It will be up to the people to save this nation, if they really want it saved. Meanwhile, as to the big enemy, radical, or plain old Islam, the Islamists will keep going and keep probing and will finally stumble on a big bomb or equivalent and use it. Then Wretchard's 3 conjectures will kick it and the problem will be solved. It will be horrendous, but it will be solved. Until the leadership of this death cult is dealt with by taking them out, they will always have a following. The question is: do you take out the nests now, or do you wait until the whole house is infected and you have to burn it down? We are trying to run a marathon while some in the crowd are throwing rocks. We cannot win the marathon with out dealing with the rock throwers. /rant. Have a nice day. |
| Posted by: Alaska Paul 2006-09-11 11:15 |
| #21 If there is a single hallmark of Islamist terrorism it is that of over-reaching itself. Good point. You would think they would realize that Allen can't really be depended on to fill in the gaps. In fact he's pretty much as useless as tits on a boar. (or a turd in a rainstorm...) Never forget also that this war is just the latest 'episode' of a larger war against civilization which has been going on for 1400-odd years - ever since Mo had his 'vision' in a cave. You might say the Crusades were a 'War On Terror' in their day. Even the Jews in Medina were in their own 'War on Terror'.... |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2006-09-11 11:13 |
| #20 Talk is CHEAP NYT. You folks actually sounded American back then. But alas, if one's rhetoric does not match their conviction of heart, the rhetoric will soon change to conform itself to what the heart believes. We have long since learned what you believe. Here's what I believe: The attempted Islamification of the world is the biggest threat the modern west has faced since Nazism. You, and others like you are in fact ENEMIES, because your ideology aids and abets Islamists in achieving their ends. Unlike you, I WILL NEVER FORGET. I WILL NEVER FORGIVE. Well, glad we had this little chat, NYT. Now F*ck off. |
| Posted by: mcsegeek1 2006-09-11 10:50 |
| #19 We all dread the cost. That's why we haven't paid the price yet, before inflation sets in. |
| Posted by: Fred 2006-09-11 10:41 |
| #18 The issue is not in doubt. The cost is. The very reason I HATE islam so very very much because if can make me, ME, consider the possibly the possibility of the need for genocide. As I say, the issue is not in doubt, but I dread the cost. |
| Posted by: kelly 2006-09-11 10:35 |
| #17 .com is back? Sweet!!!!! |
| Posted by: Thoth 2006-09-11 10:25 |
| #16 I'm still fucking angry, but much more clued up about the enemy and their accesories. |
| Posted by: Bright Pebbles in Blairistan 2006-09-11 10:01 |
| #15 Zen's comment: "If there is a single hallmark of Islamist terrorism it is that of over-reaching itself." That's a keeper and one that I will use in my own writing in the future, with your permission. I'm not going to add comments in the text (this is Fred's essay, not mine), but allow me to note a difference between Zen's comment and Fred's on impatience ('Patience doesn't go well with a short attention span.'): there's a difference of kind between our impatience and Islamicist impatience, and it's important to see that difference. Our 'friends' on the progressive Left, if they acknowledged Zen's comment at all, would claim that we're just as impatient and thus just as ready to destroy the world. The difference between us and them thus isn't impatience. Indeed, American impatience is a virtue -- it forces us to focus on and solve problems that more patient people (e.g., the Euros) would walk away from. The difference is the grounding. We're grounded in reality, and the Islamicists are grounded in fantasy. That isn't an insult: the Islamicists believe that if they're faithful enough, for long enough, in just the right way, Allan™ will open the heavens, smite their enemies and establish the Dar-al-Islam on earth. Whereas, we know that isn't going to happen. Whether we're Christian, Jewish, Buddhist or secular, as westerners we understand that the End of Times isn't brought about by our actions, it's on a very different time scale with a very different keeper. In the meantime there is reality. Our grounding in reality allows us to see what a situation is and what needs to be done. And since we're Americans, we're a little impatient to get it done. But we have a touchstone. That allows us to reach but not over-reach, to be impatient but not (usually) to be foolish, and to understand that whatever our religious beliefs, this life, this one right now, is worth living, protecting, and occasionally sacrificing for our families, our children and our country. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2006-09-11 09:41 |
| #14 I salute your young son Frank. Congratulations. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2006-09-11 08:40 |
| #13 note that our youngest generation gets it. The Army met their recruitment goals in wartime this year - all volunteers. My 18 yr old son goes in tomorrow to bootcamp at Ft. Sill. When I asked him why he wanted to join, he said 9/11 did it for him. |
| Posted by: Frank G 2006-09-11 08:21 |
| #12 Excellent read, thanks Fred. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2006-09-11 07:17 |
| #11 Hmmm. I hadn't thought of that one - but it definitely applies. And how about A.R.M. as the precursor to the LLL moonbat P.C. thing? |
| Posted by: no mo uro 2006-09-11 07:01 |
| #10 no mo- Allow me to suggest a different Niven analogy, and this one from what I - IMHO - consider the finest science fiction novel ever written, The Mote In God's Eye. The Moties - which looked like supersized chimpanzees with 3 arms - were: - An ancient race - A high birthrate - A past history with exceptional inventions and technology - A desire to hide their society from outsiders - A seemingly insatiable desire for political intrigue and plotting that is consistently in the worst interest of their society - And an uncontrollable urge to fight wars that in the end devastate their civilization. That sounds a lot like present day Islam to me. Mike |
| Posted by: Mike Kozlowski 2006-09-11 06:40 |
| #9 "If there is a single hallmark of Islamist terrorism it is that of over-reaching itself." Most excellent observation, Zenster. I don't know if you've ever read Larry Niven's stuff, but he described an alien race called the Kzin which fit this exactly. They were fanatical and warlike and always attacked before they were truly ready. Thus, even when they had advantage, they ended up losing. Niven was writing this stuff forty years ago. I don't know if he had the Islamostalinists in mind, but if he did, he was spookily prescient. |
| Posted by: no mo uro 2006-09-11 06:30 |
| #8 I don't know if you've ever read Larry Niven's stuff All of the "Ringworld" series. All the "Moties" books. "Lucifer's Hammer", which was the final straw for me about establishing a permanently manned lunar colony. "Oath of Fealty" and "A Gift from Earth" just recently. "Footfall" and a few of the "Man - Kzin Wars" series. "Integral Trees" and, probably a few others in there as well. I have several thousand books, hard and soft back in my library. My cookbook collection alone totals almost 1,500 volumes. Since I have left my television off for the last five years, I now read between 20,000 and 40,000 pages per year of everything from reference works to fantasy. Thank you for asking. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-09-11 06:22 |
| #7 "If there is a single hallmark of Islamist terrorism it is that of over-reaching itself." Most excellent observation, Zenster. I don't know if you've ever read Larry Niven's stuff, but he described an alien race called the Kzin which fit this exactly. They were fanatical and warlike and always attacked before they were truly ready. Thus, even when they had advantage, they ended up losing. Niven was writing this stuff forty years ago. I don't know if he had the Islamostalinists in mind, but if he did, he was spookily prescient. |
| Posted by: no mo uro 2006-09-11 05:50 |
| #6 Bravo, Zenster. Only one slight adjustment: Islam's relentless, unmitigated psychosis is precisely why it IS predictable. And that's exactly what makes the end so unavoidably, inevitably clear. However much we don't want it to go that way, it will, it must, because the psychosis leaves it no other place to go. |
| Posted by: ST 2006-09-11 05:39 |
| #5 We're five years into a war that will probably run for a generation, perhaps longer. Fred, I must respectfully disagree. From what has happened, so far, current perspective most definitely seems to support your time line of a generation or so. What no one can possibly comprehend or predict is the absolutely psychotic insanity of Islam. While Robert Browning's aphorism remains true that "Man's reach should exceed his grasp", Islam and the terrorists specifically take this well beyond its logical limits. If there is a single hallmark of Islamist terrorism it is that of over-reaching itself. Just as the Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity, so do the terrorists always rush the gate, jump the gun or however you wish to put it. Look to Nasrallah's recent dust-up with the Israelis for solid proof of this. It is this one defining characteristic that will bring the Global War on Terror to a head much sooner than a generation from now. Somehow, some way, the terrorists will finally find a way, be it with atomic bombs, biochemical weapons or inflicting some other massive and catastrophic loss of innocent life, that will overcome the West's reticence to inflict wholesale destruction upon the Muslim world. This is the Muslim holocaust that I continue to predict. The nature of whatever atrocity that will precede this is as irresistible to the terrorists as it is repellant to us in the West. It is much like the fable of the scorpion who rides upon the frog’s back only to sting him to death mid-river and thereby drown himself. It is the scorpion's nature as surely as hurriedly and ill-thought-out crimes against humanity are part of terrorism. Islam's fixation upon death precludes rational elements of thought that we take for granted here in the West. Due to this, the correct emphasis upon long-term planning and a proper degree of goal orientation are simply lacking or intentionally discarded in how terrorism plots it course. Palestinian destruction of the Israeli greenhouses are a sterling example of this. All claims of becoming a new "Singapore" of the Mediterranean aside, these short-sighted thugs simply could not resist the urge to smash all things Jewish and thereby lost an entire agricultural industry that was handed to them on a silver platter. Islam, as a whole, is batting aside the golden opportunity we in the West are offering it to survive, silver platter and all. As Wretchard in his superb essay, “The Three Conjectures”, put it; This is Islam’s “golden hour”. They can cast aside this last opportunity for reconciling itself to coexist with the West only to die one and all, or they can reach some sort of rapprochement that preserves them. It is impossible to believe that, once again, they will not miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity, even one wherein their lives, one and all, hang in the balance. Islam’s collective martyrdom is as assured as the sun’s rising in the east. On this day, the fifth anniversary of the 9-11 atrocity, I no longer abhor such a concept and urge all who intend surviving Islam’s quest for its global caliphate to embrace this notion as well. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-09-11 05:08 |
| #4 LOL. Excellent stuff, all... especially Fred for creating such a beautiful free-fire zone. :) |
| Posted by: flyover 2006-09-11 03:06 |
| #3 * "Let the public forget" - funny, I thought it was the Clinton-led US DemoLeft that wanted Amers to NOT take any mil action, or in the later no action without the tacit/explicit approval of the UNO = "World Community". "Obeying the UNO/World community" wasn't treason, iff I recall, as was Kofi's "America must install a PROGRESSIVE GOVT. in IRAQ", i.e. PROGRESSIVE SOCIALIST GOVT. IN AMERICA!? "MUST", NOT CAN, SHOULD, or MAY. * "We have to live with the consequences of not doing those things" - funny, unless the Amer education system has been lying to both itself t + whole generations of Amers all these decades, the CONGRESS = THE PEOPLE, AND THE CONGRESS = THE PEOPLE CAN DO ANYTHING IT WANTS TO. The DemoLefties will support anything from the Right, Center, andor Left, Ultra-Libertarian or Ultra-Totalitarian, etal. that puts the Gummermint in charge of everything and everyone. AND IFF AMERICA = AMERIKA, the USSA = Amerikan Global SSR/USR's, DOESN'T WIN THE WOT = WAR FOR CONTROL OF THE WORLD, FUTURE WORLD ORDER AND FUTURE OWG, THE LEFTIES WILL HAVE THEIR "JUSTIFIED" EXCUSE WHY ORDINARY/MAINSTREAM AMERICANS CAN NOT HAVE THE SAME RIGHTS-FREEDOMS AS THEY DID PRE-9-11, ANDOR PRE-AMERICAN HIROSHIMA(S). VOLUNTARILY = FORCIBLY, UNILATERALLY = BY THE HAND OF THE MANY. *ETHERZONE.com > writer Ted Lang > THERE MUST BE INTERNAL/DOMESTIC ARMED RESISTANCE AGAINST FASCIST DUBYA AND FASCIST GOP-RIGHT, IN ORDER TO SAVE AMERICA AND AMERICAN WAY-OF-LIFE. But-t-t-t-t, to do so while leaving the Clintons and DemoLeft alone, or to not criticize the role of same vv the coming Dubya/GOP-caused anarchies = revolutions = civil war = factionalism/sectarianism in America. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2006-09-11 02:53 |
| #2 Other than acknowledging just how steep the mountain is when trying to refute the vast majority of the MSM and their incessant drumbeat efforts to invent BDS memes and thwart efforts to keep the focus on the important bits, I echo your thoughts, Fred. Has a President ever faced such a solid wall of opposition in our history? I don't think so. Everyone seems to believe the bully pulpit would do big majik - everyday. I think that had Bush been using it non-stop for the last 5 years as many demand, he would have "used up" his credibilty and destroyed what value the bully pulpit actually has. Through habituation, people learn to ignore the inconvenient discomforts which intrude upon their awareness. Assessments of politically effective moments to intrude upon the natural public complacency have been made... whether we agree or not. Funny how, when a resounding success comes along, everyone snarks about Rovian Plots and such. I think those successes should not be forgotten when frustration gets the better of us and we bellyache about perceived failures. Go figure, huh? |
| Posted by: .com 2006-09-11 02:52 |
| #1 Nice rant,Fred. Hard to believe that someone at the Greying Lady wrote that. Wonder he still has a job. |
| Posted by: GK 2006-09-10 14:04 |