Wednesday, October 25, 2006

Winds of War: Should America Just Surrender to Islam?

From The Gathering Storm

This is a short article written by Barbara J. Stock, a registered nurse who enjoys writing about politics and current events.

I nominate her as our next George Patton.

If one reads the editorials in many American major newspapers, it would seem that the war in Iraq is a total loss. They seem to say that there is no way to win--ever. What many liberals call nothing more than a “band of thugs” has defeated the mighty American military. Perhaps we should just surrender to them. Of course, all 140,000 of our troops there would be summarily tortured and beheaded, but that is the price of being bested by thugs. This unconditional surrender has been issued by liberal ex-generals, liberal politicians, the liberal media, and, of course, the liberals that will be running for president in a year. Even some “cut-and-run” Republicans are weeping about how badly the war is going in Iraq. They say that a “change of course” is needed. Translated, that means: ''Remove our troops from Iraq because we can’t beat the terrorists, and the war is lost. America needs to cut its losses and run.''
The Naysayers are right about only one thing: America does need a change of course in Iraq. We need to remember that this is a war. Wars are ugly. Wars have always been ugly. War should be ugly. This makes people hesitate before starting one. But once a war has begun, there is only one option, and that option is to win. War is not a game. War is not an exercise in humanity at its best. War is not about “winning the hearts and minds” of the enemy. War is about killing the enemy before he kills you. At least, that is way war used to be. Now America is fighting a politically correct war. And that's why we are not winning.
When Americans fought, clawed, and died gaining a foothold in Europe on June 6, 1944, they did not jump out of those landing craft and airplanes with the idea of winning anyone’s heart or mind. They were there to kill German soldiers, who were equally intent on killing them. As our Marines struggled and died on Iwo Jima, they were not exchanging pleasantries with the Japanese soldiers or explaining to them how America would help them rebuild Japan after our bombs leveled their cities. Those Marines has no intention of becoming “buddies” with the enemy.
World War II is the last war that America has won. We won World War II because we knew we were fighting a war. Political correctness was unheard of during World War II. Our soldiers did not have CNN following them around with cameras. We did not have media outlets gleefully receiving video from the enemy and then obliging them by putting it on American television to convince the populous that the war is lost. Can you imagine what would have happened if there had been television in the 1940’s and an American newsreels played propaganda films of the Third Reich killing American troops? CNN officials from the network that refuses to show footage of the innocent victims of 9/11 leaping to their deaths rather than suffocate because it’s too graphic, didn’t hesitate to air a film given to them “from their contact with the Iraqi insurgents” showing Islamic snipers shooting American soldiers. What would Ernie Pyle have thought of that? If video had been available of the Bataan Death March would it have shown on theater newsreels to demoralize the American people? Wouldn’t this have been proof that America was loosing the war? What if an embedded cameraman had been with the soldiers that landed in the middle of a city occupied by German soldiers? Those soldiers were picked off like turkeys in a turkey shoot. They never had a chance. Would that cameraman's film have convinced Americans that the war was lost?
We need a change, and that is certain. But not the change the liberals want. We need to return to the spirit of the 1940’s when America knew how to win wars. America needs to get tough. First, the words “politically correct” need to be banned from the English language followed immediately by politically correctness concerning war and victory over our enemies becoming an act of treason. Our troops are not in Iraq to win the “hearts and minds” of the people. They are there to win a war. They are there to kill and break the backs of the enemy. Second, any film received from the enemy to American media outlets should be turned over to authorities along with the name of the “contact” who gave it to them. Third, the Iraqi government has had its chance. Time is up. The entire elected government should be put somewhere safe, isolated to prevent leaks, and informed that there is a time-out. To use a football analogy, there is a flag on the field. Americans are now taking control of the situation. We will be in control until there no longer is a situation. Why? Because we can.
The weasel known as Muqtada al-Sadr should be hunted down and eliminated. He should not be arrested or detained. The land that Al-Sadr and his entire army occupy should become a large bomb crater. We could then erect a large sign: “Here lies what is left of a man and his army who challenged American military might. We tried to be nice, he blew it.” Then some smaller city that is a known stronghold for terrorists could be chosen. The citizens of that city would have one hour to turn over all foreign Islamic terrorists to the American military. Shooting them and tossing their bodies in the streets would be an acceptable alternative. Only women, children, and old people would be allowed to leave the city. Included in the cleaning would be any Iraqi who has shot at Americans, set off a car bomb, gunned down innocent Iraqi civilians, planted roadside bombs, or is a member of any Iraqi terrorist group. If the residents of the city refuse to turn these terrorists over, our bombers would start at one end of the city and not stop until the people got the message that we mean business. If the entire city is leveled, so be it. We will no longer have to worry about that city protecting terrorists.
We should then move on to every city in Iraq and repeat what was done until we get to Baghdad. It would not take long for Islamic terrorists to flee the country for their lives. Basically, they are cowards. They know they cannot defeat the American military if the leash of political correctness was removed. Of course, we would have the borders covered to gun them down as they run. If this sounds barbaric, is it any worse than what is going on there now? I would search our military for a George Patton. If he wasn’t a general, I would make him one. Then, I would tell him to take Iraq. I would tell the United Nations to shut up and sit down. I would make sure that Iran and Syria got a constant live video feed of what was going on in Iraq. Then, I would send Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad a short and to-the-point message: “You’re next.”
You want to win a war? Keep the politics out of it and realize that there is nothing “correct” about war. The point is to win as fast as possible to end the misery of all concerned. Worry about winning the “hearts and minds” of those who have a heart and a mind AFTER you defeat those who have neither.

She’s right. We couldn’t win the Vietnam War because of political reasons, and we’re not going to win the war in Iraq and Afghanistan for the very same reason. As I’ve said before, we must fight this war in the entire theater of battle - from Syria to Afghanistan. But I’m afraid that will never happen until the Western powers are forced into that situation. And the only event that will cause that is the threat to the oil fields.

If we keep trying to fight a politically correct war, it will only make our position weaker and the enemy more brazen until we are faced with sitting in our stalled cars and freezing in the dark.

But there is one possibility of fighting the war as described by the article. Have the Iraqis do it.

What I mean is to use the same strategy that we used in Afghanistan. We didn’t march into that country with 150,000 troops. We used Special Forces personnel supporting the allied tribes with the immense power of the US Air Force. The same suggestions can be used as in the article but instead of using US ground troops, use Iraqi troops imbedded with Special Forces personnel to do the ground assaults backed by US airpower. Fight the war as it’s suppose to be fought with no holds barred. Why risk US ground troops. As the article suggests, carpet bomb the insurgents in front of the Iraqi troops who will then take control of the geography.

It’s brutal, yes. But it may be the only way to win the Iraqi front in this war.


Anonymous said...

America is loosing the will to fight, but with the current crop of Democrat leadership it is no wonder.

Cicero, in 42 B.C.E said, "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and he carries his banners openly. But the traitor moves among those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the galleys, heard in the very hall of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor - he speaks in the accents familiar to his victims, and wears their face and their garment, and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation - he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city - he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to be feared." When one looks at what is going on in the USA, what is going on in Europe it is scary. Will we wake up in time?

Check out my own, Amerabia or the Islamization of America, where I speak a little of the problem both in Europe and in the US.

WC said...

Great post. I'll use it in my next radio show.

KG said...

Damn straight--we're allowing our "civilised behaviour" to aid in destroying our civilisation.
Time to put manners and compassion away for a bit and to get ugly.
Very ugly. It's that, or lose.

Demosthenes said...

Amen! Sister Barbara!

The trouble we face is how to speak out strongly without being politically marginalized by the cowards. One suggestion I have is to not back down when the leftists counterattack. We may from time to time commit an error of rhetorical excess. If it can possibly be done, I would argue explain it away instead of retracting. Only admit you are wrong as the last resort. It's not exactly like the left ever admits it was wrong. I haven't seen many apologies for the left's behavior during the Cold War. Their actions were far worse than even the worst rhetorical excess.

I feel compelled to emphasize the argument above is not the same argument often seen in far rightist circles (e.g. WSJ editorial page) and far leftist circles (e. g. dailyKos). These circles argue that the political parties most affiliated with them should take the most extreme possible view and never compromise. That argument is simply lunatic. Politics is a game played in a multidimensional space and both parties have good and bad ideas. Democracy is the search for the best possible answers in that multidimensional space. Political parties should compromise in a statesmen like way and help us find the best solutions.
Our political goal is very different from an extremist groups like WSJ editorialists and dailyKos. Our goal is to rally people to our side, because our cause is noble. We simply want Western civilization to find some spine and save itself (and other civilizations) from Islam. This is not to deny that when we face the problem of exactly what, we end up playing that multidimensional political game. Let's worry about that when we have more power. For now, we just should just offer our best thoughts on everyone else' ideas--even those we think are nearly lunatic.