Suck It Up, Dammit

The Realpolitik crew is now out in full force, the latest being Kissinger claiming we can't win a military victory in Iraq. That from one of the high-minded individuals who gave us Vietnam. I wish these doddering old folks would retire from public view and realize the world has passed them by.

We already won the military victory in Iraq when we defeated Saddam's army. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to tell you Iraq isn't about a pure military victory. It requires a broad victory which is more political, than it is militaristic.

I see Ace is full of doom and gloom. That's understandable. And it's hard to keep from falling into the trap that sees Iraq as purely a military effort that is going to succeed or fail in six months or two years based upon body counts and exploded IED's. But it is more than that, much more.

First one must understand Iraq in the context of the GWOT and its particular significance given its location. It borders on more of the states which ferment Islamo-fascism than any other country.

Then one has to consider that, like it or not, the GWOT isn't going to be over in a year, or five, or even ten. It is going to go on well into the next generation, if they are lucky enough to win it then. But it can and will be won many years down the line from now.

Consequently, if Iraq doesn't turn around next month, or next year, it is only a minor fraction of the time we are going to be engaged in fighting the war on terror.

What is important is that Iraq move forward and not backward and there are a host of other outcomes which ultimately work in our favor.

Sunni is now, in many cases, pitted against Shia. That is a good thing. And not because Muslims are killing Muslims. But the last thing we want is for all Muslims to come together under some banner of radical Islam. That's also what makes Iran's outreach to al Qaeda so dangerous. That would be a bridge between Sunni and Shia we don't want.

Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Saudi Arabia and every other country in the Middle East is eventually going to be a focused front in the war on terror. That doesn't mean the US is going to invade any of them, it means how they each evolve as states is going to be key to diffusing Islamo-fascism.

People need to stop looking for quick, easy or painless fixes for the global threat we are facing. This war is going to last years and we can not hide from it. It's already been proved that it will find us if we don't go off in pursuit of it. So suck it up, get used to all the negativity. It isn't going to go away. And neither are our enemies, at least not before we finish killing or converting them to a more moderate approach to living.

That ultimate goal which will be realized thirty or more years down the road defines the war, including Iraq. Acknowledging that can make enduring every set back, or that lingering dread many of us feel much easier to endure. This isn't going to be over for a long time; however we will prevail in the end.

But to do that we will need new leadership, not the old ideas and old men who didn't do very well in their time, given that their lack of long term vision has brought us to precisely where we are today. These are all men who have coddled Sheiks and dictators that oppressed their peoples, many still do. By their expedient but ultimately failed appeasement, they contributed to the breeding of Islam-fascism as much if not more than any one else. That they are singing the same old song now should come as no surprise.

Here's some reading for you:

Jules

AJStrata

and Steel

Comments

[ajacksonian]

Just remember that these Great Solons of Foreign Policy have been unable to state basic objectives for a lasting system of Peace in the Middle East since 1948 and for combatting Transnational Terrorism since at least 1979, but definitively 1983. So let us finally bury 'Realistic Foreign Policy' as an idea that wasn't so hot to start with and now is trying to drag us down with the 20th century in which it was so inadequate that it left us with our current problems which were not SOLVED by them when the SOLVING was cheaper and easier: http://ajacksonian.blogspot.com/2006/11/end-of-unreal-realists.html

[Phoenix]

Wow. You are my new hero. I don't know who the old one was, but you're it now.

Superb in analysis and writing.

[Steel]

Where is it written that this 'war' must be confined to Iraq?

Iran and Syria should be our battlefields now.

Assuming, of course, we are serious about actually 'winning' the war.

Which we are not, we have neither the nuts or the resolve to fight longer than a TV mini series lasts.

We are doomed to replays, like Vietnam.

[TommyG]

Dan,

If you think that the US should continue to use military force to battle Islamic fundamentalism for the coming decade or more, then I think you are more interested in creating a state of endless overseas conflict than you are with combating extremism.

Iraq has been a disaster in terms of its effect on violent Islamic fundamentalism. The last 3 years have probably seen the biggest and fastest growth in the number of violent fundamentalists, their funding, their training and the resources available to them in all of history.

And now you and your friends are talking about expanding what is happening in Iraq to its neighbours? There's a genius idea. No wonder everything is going so swimmingly in Iraq with such brilliant thinkers as yourself doing the cheerleading....

[yyy]

Winning the war is more than a military issue in this case, it is NOT like WWII, not even like Vietnam, the only way to "win" from a purely military standpoint is to kill everyone, wipe out the Sunni triangle, women, children and babies. Line up the paramilitary groups and kill them too. Kill several hundred thousand or maybe a few million Iraqis and then you can call it a win...if you kill everyone there isn't anyone to fight you anymore.

Exactly why we had no business invading Iraq in the first place, becuase the solution to a democratic state is not military and never was and never will be.

The reason we are stuck with this debacle is because Rummy wanted to prove he could fight a war on the cheap...we "lost" the war pretty much as soon we failed to prevent the looting and when we sent the army home weapons and all.

Rummys failure to acknowledge that his war on the cheap was an absolute failure about 2.5 years ago and up the troop strength cemented the situation.

[Phoenix]

No matter how reasonable, how objective the posts on this blog are, there is a default reaction that proves Dan's very point that this war on terror will go on for years and years because there are still dipwads who don't get it. If we can't get it at home, how in the hell will we ever get it abroad?

[John Ryan]

Remember all of the fear and hysteria about Vietnam ? The Domino theory? First South Vietnam , then Thailand Singapore and fianally Hawaii?
Well .......
Perhaps our government is exagerating the danger. Again.
An American is much more likely to be murdered by a fellow citizen than by some muslim extermist.

[Phoenix]

Oh, right. Like the Trade Towers falling was a bit of an exageration. Spain. London. Netherlands. All of that fantasy?

At any rate, I sure don't see any fear and hysteria. Unless it's in the halls of Congress when some flunky discovers a nasty email.

Hmmm... 'perhaps' our MSM is exagerating the danger. Again. I wonder why they might do that?

[Badge 2211]

Surely one consideration must be made, if only our honor is at stake.

Are we going to betray the Kurds a third time in 3 decades due to Kissinger's brand of realpolitik?

I know of no man in this country who has had the influence to cause as much damage and slaughter as Henry Kissinger.

By all means, let's listen Henry again because the third time is a charm-while tens of thousands of Kurds are murdered, again.

[Robert Crawford]

Remember all of the fear and hysteria about Vietnam ? The Domino theory? First South Vietnam , then Thailand Singapore and fianally Hawaii?

Yeah! Everyone remembers how well things turned out after we abandoned the Vietnamese!

Idiot.