How Far Gone are the Peaceniks?

Here we go again. I don't know why I keep responding to the same drivel, but its a deep rooted compulsion, and just a barrel of fun to boot. My favorite lib has gone senile:

--------------------------------------------------------
Ya know, I was dozing off in my easy chair last night when it came to me.
A real strategy for Iraq and Afghanistan……

I've been reading Scrub's, and Rummie's, and Condi's and some of the Congressional jabber about "staying the course" and all that rot.

And it really reminded me of the same mindless talk during the Johnson years. You know, "light at the end of the tunnel" stuff.

Ya, it's really hard to avoid the Vietnam parallel. Deja vue all over again. Especially for those of us who lived through those years when another government misled the country into another war.

So.
What the anti-war (peacenik) types need to do is stand back and let'er rip!
Let Scrub and the warmongers have their way.
Spend the money.
Destroy the economy.
Let the troops die.
Kill the civilians.
Bomb everything flat.
Let another American army be eaten piecemeal.
Grow the debt.
Let the infrastructure of the country waste away.
Lose all creditability in the community of nations.

Because.

There are three things we peaceniks cannot let happen after Iraq that did happen after Vietnam.

First. The cost of the war has to be seen and felt. After Vietnam not everybody agreed on what the war policy had cost us. This time, we have to let the bankrupt policy actually lead to bankruptcy. Scrub's policy, allowed to carry on to its logical, final, fatally flawed end, will make the idiocy of that policy absolutely clear; no excuses, he had his way, and lost.

Second. Defeat and retreat have to be seen for what they are. No Iraqization of this war like the Vietnamization of that one. It has to be made clear that "standing-up" the Iraqi army, knowing that it will fail just as ARVN failed is designed solely as ass covering for an American retreat. None of this, "well, THEY lost the war, not US". No, we broke it, we own it. The burden is on the US, the occupying power.

Third. No 'stab in the back' excuse. I still hear this, 'well, if we had stayed in Nam just another (six months, year, 2 years…..) we could have won the war". Or, another version, "The politicians never let the Army win." This time we commit all the forces. Whole hog. Then, when defeat looms, there is no excuse.

My strategy has three desirable results:

First. We would no longer be able to afford the military-industrial complex that is the American war machine.

Second. Military defeat shows the limits of military power. There are many other factors besides military power to consider.

Third. The mystique of the military as the invincible heroic guardians of freedom is broken.
--------------------------------------------------------

Do you realize how far gone you are? You can not recognize a single positive element in anything! Unbelievable. The one thing that you really don't want to happen is for the US to succeed! Can't you read your own gibberish? It becomes clearer and clearer every day how far gone the radical left is. You illustrate perfectly the utter blindness of the left. Do we need to go point by point? First we spend the money. Right, you were for spending the money before you were against spending the money, but now your for it again. Next its the destruction of the economy. When on this very day we have released more robust growth numbers reflecting continued economic strength. Then you state "Let the troops die." On the one hand, there has been very little loss of life, unprecedented in modern warfare. Yet in your view, those brave soldiers who have given the ultimate sacrifice fighting for a mission they volunteered for and understand, have died in vain. There is growing contempt for that viewpoint. Now we get the asinine statement "Kill the civilians." There is no comment necessary for this type of stupidity. Followed by more 60's mantra. What are we supposed to be bombing flat? And as for "another" American army getting eaten piecemeal, show me the first one that did. More dangerous disregard for anything truthful.

Only one thing is worth commenting on, and that is the increase in the national debt. If it was just because of the war in Iraq, wouldn't be a big deal. But we are already saddled with expensive entitlements, and politicians who refuse to restrain the purse strings regarding anything, so borrow they will. If we didn't blow so much money on freedom repressing social programs, a war or two would be easy to fund.

Finally, you are worried about credibility. Not with the countries who are helping us, but mainly France and Germany. Move there. I don't care whatsoever about how we appear to the leading purveyors of the democratic socialist state. In fact, I view them as economically hostile to our interests. And, from the abuse of power by these same in the U.N. regarding Iraq, that view is entirely justified. The credibility you should be concerned about is with the American people. Your doomed if there is even the remotest success in Iraq. It may fester for years, yet be seen as a major victory if the government stabilizes and polices itself. And that appears to be the case. The only people with blinders on are leftist peacenik liberal junkies in America with there crack dealer journalists. But the change is already happening.

Political winds of change are funny things. The myriad pollsters pounding the streets for Hillary have got one thing right before any of the other soulless leaders of the Democratic party. Signs of hawkishness regarding Iraq were on her door long before the rest of the gang. And the traction for the Bush Lied crowd has rapidly turned to mud. Lastly, the one Democrat the media hates (apart from Zell Miller) has an recent opinion piece in the Wall Street journal. Yes, Joe Lieberman went to Iraq, and expresses his view quite succinctly. If Dem's from Hillary to Lieberman are jumping off the peace-ship, it can't be good.

My final comment is directed at the goals of your plan. Your goal is not a safer America. Your goal is purely based on belief in a failed ideology. You believe it so deeply that its fact now, irregardless of the world around you. Success for you is defeat for America. Where does that leave you? Sinking further into the dream days of Vietnam and Watergate, when you ruled the world, took down the mighty, and had free love. What is you goal now? To rule the world, destroy a President, ruin the military, buy some Viagra.