Attn: Dems & John Warner
Michael O'Hanlon -- a liberal scholar at the Brookings Institute -- explains why it would be ridiculous to declare defeat in Iraq now.
posted by LadybugUSA at 3:53 PM
Saturday, August 25, 2007
Contact & Other Information
Contributors
Key Links
Previous Posts
- The "Whore Wars"
- Think Pink?!
- Things Are Improving; Let's Surrender!
- Gwen Stefani Dresses Down
- Placing Politics Above National Security
- A Magnificent Speech
- The College Class of 2011 Mindset
- Democratic patriotism defined and questioned
- Changing the Plan, Stan
- The Fine Print
6 Comments:
Perhaps readers would do well to consult this story from the Los Angeles Times addressing morale issues in the American forces. The overall assessment is mixed, but here are some interesting quotes that should startle those who believe that morale is high:
"I don't see any progress. Just us getting killed," said Spc. Yvenson Tertulien, one of those in the dining hall in Yousifiya, 10 miles south of Baghdad, as Bush's speech aired last month. "I don't want to be here anymore."
....
"This occupation, this money pit, this smorgasbord of superfluous aggression is getting more hopeless and dismal by the second," a soldier in Diyala province, north of Baghdad, wrote in an Aug. 7 post on his blog, www.armyofdude.blogspot.com.
"The only person I know who believed Iraq was improving was killed by a sniper in May," the blogger, identified only as Alex from Frisco, Texas, said in a separate e-mail.
....
"There are two different wars," said Staff Sgt. Donald Richard Harris, comparing his soldiers' views with those of commanders in distant bases. "It's a dead-end process, it seems like."
Asked to rank morale in his unit, Harris gave it a 4 on a 10-point scale.
O'Hanlon hasn't gotten anything right so far. One mistake after the next. So much for being an expert. He signed on to the neocon's manifesto, New American Century. So it ins't suprising the Pentagon invited and paid for his dog and pony show. He is also gung ho about attacking Iran, Pakistan, Russia, and North Korea.
The thing about quoting soldiers is that there are so many who feel exactly the opposite. They may not agree with their commanders, but do they get the big picture assessments their commanders do? I think likely no. So that there should be disgruntled soldiers during wartime one should be surprised? Damn near every war movie includes a disgruntled soldier or two.
Wow!
Good news regarding military actions in Iraq begins to trickle out. Liberals who have been very critical of the Bush administration admit that things are beginning to turn around in Iraq. And the final straw - Bush dares to use Viet Nam analogies!
The looney left must be about to explode!
So they comfort themselves with anecdotes about soldiers wanting to come home. They are comforted by the fact that there is still an enemy that can cause trouble in Iraq. And daggonit, they have a patent on Viet Nam analogies!
There are more people being killed in Iraq now than this time last year, and there are more Americans being killed as well. I don't think anybody can really say, honestly, that this surge is working.
I, for one, would like to see something done to bring peace to Iraq. But, just like Viet Nam, this country is unable to do that.
It was intgeresting to hear George W. Bush, after denying similarities between this military effort and the one in Vietnam, to finally draw parallels between the two. After all these years, would he want us to still be fighting the Viet Cong?
I reject the claim that the tide is turning in Iraq. The situation is complicated, and there is some good news, but there's also bad news. Civilian deaths are higher now than a year ago. The Iraqi government is in a slow slide to collapse. I don't deny the good news; I am accusing some people of denying the bad news.
Post a Comment
<< Home