The Hub

The saying goes, “Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.”  General David Petraeus, an American hero and, as evidence shows, a brutally honest battle commander has once again been ignored and trivialized by the power hungry who are advocating surrender. Yes SURRENDER. They’re just calling it different things I’m clearly not “nuanced” or “sophisticated” enough to understand.  Me being a war monger and all. Yes I’ve been called that on at least two Multiply pages.  It doesn’t insult me and I’m in good company so go ahead.  Beats being a peacenik. 

I’m not going to get into the tired argument about whether it was a good idea to invade Iraq.  My position on that is clear, educated and based on first hand exposure and experience.  Besides, that kind of second guessing is moot at this point in time.  What is relevant is that we are there now and things are clearly improving.  Yet, the Dems want to once again snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.  The repercussions of our abandoning Iraq the way Clinton, Obama and Co. are outlining can’t even be fathomed by most of the peaceniks, and may even be a little hazy for some of the war’s lukewarm supporters.

 Allow me to provide a historical perspective.  For a while it was fashionable to make comparisons between Iraq and Vietnam.  I haven’t seen much of that lately, and it’s possible that they figured out what I’ve known.  First, most of the comparisons were inaccurate and the ones that applied went against their arguments and talking points.  Here’s what I mean.  Our abandoning Vietnam the way we did by caving to the Peaceniks, the Media and the liberals caterwauling directly resulted in the murder of millions of Vietnamese and Cambodians.  This in the face of the liberal elites saying the slaughter would never happen and that the best thing for Cambodians and Vietnamese was for us to just leave.  Some names you may recognize.  Like John Kerry.  I’ll post a link below.  In fact, here’s something Senator Chris Dodd (then a US Rep) said back in 1975:

“The greatest gift our country can give to the Cambodian people is not guns but peace. And the best way to accomplish that goal is by ending military aid now.” -U.S. Rep. (now Sen.) Chris Dodd of Connecticut, March 12, 1975.

So we listened and the result was a massacre that was aptly named “The Killing Fields”. 

So what you say?  Well, it also resulted in a decade of hangdog shame, self-loathing and loss of national pride that was only eventually reversed when a Presidential candidate unabashedly reminded us that we were the “shining city on a hill”.  Want to know what Chris is saying now?  Here’s an example:

“Q [to Dodd]: Should the US set a firm deadline for the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq?

DODD: I believe we should. I didn’t come to that decision a long time ago. It’s been an evolving situation here. I think most would agree today that we’re more isolated today, our moral standing in the world has suffered terribly over the last number of years as a result of our involvement in Iraq. We’re feeling less secure, more vulnerable today. My view is there’s a greater likelihood that the Iraqis, if they understand that this is not an open-ended process here, there’s a beginning time and an end time for our military involvement here, and that we’re willing to help train troops and help on counter-terrorism, but that come the first of April next year, our military participation is over with.”

Then there’s Senator John Kerry.  This pompous ass needs his own category.  He’s irony incarnate.  Here’s what he said on the Senate Floor on November 9, 1997 [Congressional Record, p. S12256]:

“We must recognize that there is no indication that Saddam Hussein has any intention of relenting. So we have an obligation of enormous consequence, an obligation to guarantee that Saddam Hussein cannot ignore the United Nations. He cannot be permitted to go unobserved and unimpeded toward his horrific objective of amassing a stockpile of weapons of mass destruction. This is not a matter about which there should be any debate whatsoever in the Security Council, or, certainly, in this Nation. If he remains obdurate, I believe that the United Nations must take, and should authorize immediately, whatever steps are necessary to force him to relent–and that the United States should support and participate in those steps.

We must not presume that these conclusions automatically will be accepted by every one of our allies, some of which have different interests both in the region and elsewhere, or will be of the same degree of concern to them that they are to the U.S. But it is my belief that we have the ability to persuade them of how serious this is and that the U.N. must not be diverted or bullied.”

He recently stated this about Al Qaeda in Iraq:

“Truth-be-told, it is our overwhelming footprint that energizes Al Qaeda in Iraq.  If we reduce our footprint — as the Iraq Study Group and General Jones have recommended, I believe the Iraqis themselves, will drive Al Qaeda from Iraq, with a leaner U.S. military and special forces there to finish the job.”

I’m wondering what exactly he meant back in 1997 and what exactly he intended to do about Saddam Hussein?  Clearly nothing. 

Way back in 1971 in a debate between John Kerry and John Oneill on the Dick Cavett show John Kerry made the ridiculous assertion that reports of an ensuing massacre if we abandoned Vietnam were exaggerated.  Well, we all know how that turned out.  You can read the transcript or watch the entire debate here:

http://www.wintersoldier.com/index.php?topic=KerryONeill

It’s pretty extensive but well worth watching.  You might even get chills and an odd sense of déjà vu when analyzing today’s armchair military geniuses and their “predictions”.  I don’t know about you, but I’d rather not re-live the decade of the 70’s, politically speaking.

Filed under: Gwot |