winning the war - two competing notions
In the past few days, Don Rumsfeld and GW Bush have both compared the current war on terrorism to the ideological struggle against the Nazi's and post WW2 Communists, and, for once, they are right. Rumsfeld mouthed off about opponents of the administrations policies being likened to Neville Chamberlain and those that attempted to deny the looming Nazi threat, a day later his boss echoed the theme comparing this struggle to the cold war clash with the communist threat.
The guys are right.
No doubt about it.
This is the issue that will define the world for decades or even centuries to come, and we cannot afford to be on the losing, or quitting side.
In my opinion though, this administration has not the first idea of how to attack this menace, and how to win this war. Smart bombs, ICBMs, cruise missiles, stealth technology, submarines, aircraft carriers and hundreds of thousands of troops are not going to cut it.
Let's cut now to Iraq, and the emerging social fabric in that war-torn country.
I do not know how the average Joe Iraqi feels about too many things, or how to guage the depth of the insurgency that we are fighting in that country, however, this past week, a report in the Washington Post reported on what they called a "worrisome parallel" between the followers of Muqtada al-Sadr in Iraq, and Hezbollah in Lebanon, with the al-Sadr sect becoming a state within the state, acting according to their own policies and directives and to hell (in a figurative and literal sense) with the 'established' government.
al-Sadr has cultivated his following by waging peace on the needs of the indigenous Iraqi's who have been displaced, hurt or otherwise affected by the larger 'political' war. His strategy has been to feed the hungry, house the homeless and treat the sick and wounded and bury the dead behind the front lines of the war that we are seeing on TV and in the headlines. His influence now controls the Ministry of Health as well as other portions of the government.
Cutting now, back to the chase, al-Sadr is waging peace on his own constituency, who, not biting the hand that is helping to feed them, is vocally loyal, and may care not one iota that he is being financed by Iranian interests, or is undermining the social order by supporting terrorist attacks on those that seemingly have caused the misery to begin with. He has, borrowing an old catch-phrase, captured the hearts and minds of his people; wresting it away will be a formidable, if not impossible task.
This is the way to win these wars. Iraq may be lost now, it is not clear that any sort of victory is possible, let alone one that is secured through munitions and lives. The United States needs to be first in to take care of the people, and work, through them, to secure the desired changes.
Our guys in Washington (of either party),will never, ever, understand this.
The guys are right.
No doubt about it.
This is the issue that will define the world for decades or even centuries to come, and we cannot afford to be on the losing, or quitting side.
In my opinion though, this administration has not the first idea of how to attack this menace, and how to win this war. Smart bombs, ICBMs, cruise missiles, stealth technology, submarines, aircraft carriers and hundreds of thousands of troops are not going to cut it.
Let's cut now to Iraq, and the emerging social fabric in that war-torn country.
I do not know how the average Joe Iraqi feels about too many things, or how to guage the depth of the insurgency that we are fighting in that country, however, this past week, a report in the Washington Post reported on what they called a "worrisome parallel" between the followers of Muqtada al-Sadr in Iraq, and Hezbollah in Lebanon, with the al-Sadr sect becoming a state within the state, acting according to their own policies and directives and to hell (in a figurative and literal sense) with the 'established' government.
al-Sadr has cultivated his following by waging peace on the needs of the indigenous Iraqi's who have been displaced, hurt or otherwise affected by the larger 'political' war. His strategy has been to feed the hungry, house the homeless and treat the sick and wounded and bury the dead behind the front lines of the war that we are seeing on TV and in the headlines. His influence now controls the Ministry of Health as well as other portions of the government.
Cutting now, back to the chase, al-Sadr is waging peace on his own constituency, who, not biting the hand that is helping to feed them, is vocally loyal, and may care not one iota that he is being financed by Iranian interests, or is undermining the social order by supporting terrorist attacks on those that seemingly have caused the misery to begin with. He has, borrowing an old catch-phrase, captured the hearts and minds of his people; wresting it away will be a formidable, if not impossible task.
This is the way to win these wars. Iraq may be lost now, it is not clear that any sort of victory is possible, let alone one that is secured through munitions and lives. The United States needs to be first in to take care of the people, and work, through them, to secure the desired changes.
Our guys in Washington (of either party),will never, ever, understand this.
posted by eccentric recluse at 6:22 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home