Official Washington, the media and much of the public have fallen under the unconscionable thrall of defeatism. Which is to say that they cannot conceive of a set of policies -- for a nation of 300 million with an annual GDP of over $12 trillion and all the skills and technologies known to man -- to subdue the city of Baghdad and environs. Do you think Gen. Patton [bold added] or Abe Lincoln or Winston Churchill or Joseph Stalin would have thrown their hands up and said, "I give up, there's nothing we can do"?
Tuesday, December 12, 2006
Hey, Look, Patton!
Tony Blankley, writing in the Washington Times:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Do you think Gen. Patton or Abe Lincoln or Winston Churchill or Joseph Stalin would have thrown their hands up and said, "I give up, there's nothing we can do"?
Um... yes? (Well - no for Joseph Stalin, but I find it hard to accept Uncle Joe as a role model in anything except the bloodthirsty lusting after power. You?)
After all, we live in a democracy, and Iraq is a war of choice we are fighting with a (decreasingly) volunteer Army, ostensibly on behalf of a nation of people who don't really want us around any more.
The situation is not complicated. When you are the leader of a democratic nation and the people have turned against your foreign escapade, whether you are George W. Bush, Harry S. Truman, LBJ, Nixon, Churchill, or Lincoln you have two choices: (A) Convince them it is worth the costs; or (B) Find a way out.
Bush's approval rating is 31%. The only thing he does worse on is his handling of Iraq, where 20% think we are on the right course (you and Blankley among them). So he has obviously not taken path (A).
That leaves us with path (B). If Bush does not figure this out himself some time soon, the machinery of democracy (slow moving but still powerful) will have to do it for him.
Aloha,
Derek
p.s. Lincoln never found himself in any situation akin to Iraq, but Churchill was an early and vociferous opponent of Indian independence who later found himself - in line with British public opinion - presiding over the British "quitting of India" and its declaration of independence. So I rather think he supports my case over yours, n'est pas?
Whoa! I inserted this item because just after I picked Gen. Patton out of obscurity to represent Americans who know how to fight to win, the next day, Blankley puts Gen. Patton first on a list of winners that includes Churchill and Lincoln.
About Stalin, one of the 20th Century’s three greatest murderers (along with Hitler and Mao). He's on that list because he was smart enough to downplay Communism and rally the Soviet Union as “Mother Russia” to throw back the full fury of Nazi Germany. Nobody was more important in winning World War II, which is why he collected so many of the spoils.
Bush’s approval rating is currently 36.5% , not 31%. You can’t rely just on CBS News.
Lincoln’s position before Atlanta is much like Bush’s today. Both were losing national support because they didn’t have a victory to offset the war's cost in American lives. Bush needs a victory in Iraq, or else we are going to have to get out, as you suggest.
Galen
Hi Dad,
Sorry to miss the Patton angle - you were definitely a step ahead of Blankley there.
Aloha,
Derek
Post a Comment