Retreat!
Guess what? John Kerry has revealed his secret Iraq plan. I wish I could say that I am surprised.
Per Newsmax.com, reprinted here with permission:
{sigh} Let’s take these one at a time:
“We can significantly reduce American forces in Iraq” – What about defeating al Qaeda and the Ba’athist redoubtists? What about the possibility, growing more likely all the time, of the necessity of military action against Iran if they don’t drop their nuclear weapons ambitions? These two factors alone necessitate that we leave substantial forces in Iraq for at least the next year or two. And what about the signal we would be sending to every Islamist in the world? It would be Mogadishu writ large, and open season on Americans everywhere.
“Convert this from an American occupation to an international presence” – Not to put too fine a point on this, but what other country or even consortium of countries can match our resources and ability to project power to any corner of the globe? Even if there were such a group, what on Earth - other than Mr. French’s conceit – is there to suggest that they could be persuaded to become our mercenaries? And, for that matter, where is this great record of success of the “international community” in nation-building ventures? Weren’t the UN and France and Germany and Russia armpit-deep in Saddam’s bribery and corruption? Wouldn’t turning Iraq over to them – which the Iraqis sure wouldn’t want – be tantamount to handing the country back to Saddam – or to bin Laden?
“This president rushed to war without a plan to win the peace” – Bullshit. “This President” dithered for fourteen months, went back to and through the UN, got yet another SCR, got a congressional resolution for which both Lurch and Opie voted, got the weapons inspectors back into the country, got the “material breach” that was the tripwire for war, and diddled for three months further still before finally invading. The only difference between Mr. Bush and Bill Clinton before him – and John-John now - is that Dubya wasn’t bluffing.
Ditto this “no plan to win the peace” canard. “This President” is winning the peace by staying in Iraq until the country is firmly established as a friendly democracy, or at the very least a stable power that will not be an enemy and abettor of terrorism. Kerry’s plan to “win the peace” bears the singular stink of Saigon 1975.
“He pushed our allies aside” – Bush appealed to our allies. Repeatedly. And some, like the Brits, the Aussies, the Italians, the Spanish, the Poles, and several dozen others – answered the call. But for some reason, they don’t count in John Kerry’s reality, where our only “allies” are three countries that stretch the definition of the term past the breaking point.
But take another look at Kerry’s choice of words – “pushed our allies aside”. Doesn’t that suggest that our “allies” were defending Saddam Hussein, and had to be “pushed aside” so that we could get at him? Our “allies” were also “allied” to one of our declared and most bitter enemies? Wouldn’t that make the sort of withdrawal, which would throw Iraq back into chaos or worse, precisely what these “allies” would want? Gee, now it starts to make sense, doesn’t it?
“We’ve lost our credibility in the world” – Just the opposite. Under Bill Clinton we were a global laughingstock and punching bag for every rogue regime and terrorist on Earth. Now when America speaks, the bad guys listen – and piss themselves with fear. Just ask Muammar Khaddafy. Doesn’t that ultimately matter far more than the prissy, sniffy disdain that flows back and forth in the cultural echo chamber that elitists like the Boston Balker inhabit?
Not to him. Which is why he is offering himself as a willing tool of the Lilliputians to tie down the American Gulliver once again, thence to stir up the Islamist anthill for the Final Picnic. And now he’s admitted it.
Per Newsmax.com, reprinted here with permission:
John Kerry has finally revealed his secret plan for ending U.S. involvement in Iraq, telling National Public Radio in an interview broadcast Friday morning that he'll cut and run within one year."’I believe that within a year from now we can significantly reduce American forces in Iraq,’ Kerry told NPR's Steve Inskeep.
Kerry running mate John Edwards, also appearing on NPR, explained that he saw the pullout plan as an opportunity for a ‘fresh start’ that has the capacity ‘to convert this from an American occupation to an international presence helping the Iraqis provide for their own security.’
’This president rushed to war without a plan to win the peace,’ Kerry added. ‘He pushed our allies aside. We've lost our credibility with the world. We need to restore that.’
The Kerry-Edwards pullout plan runs counter to the advice of most military and national security experts, who say it will be necessary to maintain a significant U.S. presence in Iraq for at least three years to keep the country from falling into the hands of al-Qaeda.
{sigh} Let’s take these one at a time:
“We can significantly reduce American forces in Iraq” – What about defeating al Qaeda and the Ba’athist redoubtists? What about the possibility, growing more likely all the time, of the necessity of military action against Iran if they don’t drop their nuclear weapons ambitions? These two factors alone necessitate that we leave substantial forces in Iraq for at least the next year or two. And what about the signal we would be sending to every Islamist in the world? It would be Mogadishu writ large, and open season on Americans everywhere.
“Convert this from an American occupation to an international presence” – Not to put too fine a point on this, but what other country or even consortium of countries can match our resources and ability to project power to any corner of the globe? Even if there were such a group, what on Earth - other than Mr. French’s conceit – is there to suggest that they could be persuaded to become our mercenaries? And, for that matter, where is this great record of success of the “international community” in nation-building ventures? Weren’t the UN and France and Germany and Russia armpit-deep in Saddam’s bribery and corruption? Wouldn’t turning Iraq over to them – which the Iraqis sure wouldn’t want – be tantamount to handing the country back to Saddam – or to bin Laden?
“This president rushed to war without a plan to win the peace” – Bullshit. “This President” dithered for fourteen months, went back to and through the UN, got yet another SCR, got a congressional resolution for which both Lurch and Opie voted, got the weapons inspectors back into the country, got the “material breach” that was the tripwire for war, and diddled for three months further still before finally invading. The only difference between Mr. Bush and Bill Clinton before him – and John-John now - is that Dubya wasn’t bluffing.
Ditto this “no plan to win the peace” canard. “This President” is winning the peace by staying in Iraq until the country is firmly established as a friendly democracy, or at the very least a stable power that will not be an enemy and abettor of terrorism. Kerry’s plan to “win the peace” bears the singular stink of Saigon 1975.
“He pushed our allies aside” – Bush appealed to our allies. Repeatedly. And some, like the Brits, the Aussies, the Italians, the Spanish, the Poles, and several dozen others – answered the call. But for some reason, they don’t count in John Kerry’s reality, where our only “allies” are three countries that stretch the definition of the term past the breaking point.
But take another look at Kerry’s choice of words – “pushed our allies aside”. Doesn’t that suggest that our “allies” were defending Saddam Hussein, and had to be “pushed aside” so that we could get at him? Our “allies” were also “allied” to one of our declared and most bitter enemies? Wouldn’t that make the sort of withdrawal, which would throw Iraq back into chaos or worse, precisely what these “allies” would want? Gee, now it starts to make sense, doesn’t it?
“We’ve lost our credibility in the world” – Just the opposite. Under Bill Clinton we were a global laughingstock and punching bag for every rogue regime and terrorist on Earth. Now when America speaks, the bad guys listen – and piss themselves with fear. Just ask Muammar Khaddafy. Doesn’t that ultimately matter far more than the prissy, sniffy disdain that flows back and forth in the cultural echo chamber that elitists like the Boston Balker inhabit?
Not to him. Which is why he is offering himself as a willing tool of the Lilliputians to tie down the American Gulliver once again, thence to stir up the Islamist anthill for the Final Picnic. And now he’s admitted it.
posted by JASmius at 11:42 AM
<<< Home