Veterans Day

Thanks to all those who serve and who've served. This post is a good reminder of the valor often required to win a war--they all volunteered for the mission. As to making your 'thanks' count, here's a suggestion from that same author..

Veterans Day and the Road Ahead

This is a day to thank the many men and women who have served this nation in uniform through the years. I'd particularly like to thank those who have signed up during times of ongoing threat, especially any who've signed up since Friday because of Friday. Bloggers can pontificate but they are not going to win any wars (some of us are lower than dogs).

But bloggers can offer their opinions, for what they are worth. On this day of honor the military faces an uncertain road ahead. The public seems to understand the Hasan attack but also seems confused on what to do going forward, just like the Commander-in-Chief. Perhaps that's why the Hasan attack has become controversial--political factions on both sides know it shines more light on the future.

Bush approached Af-Pak with a light footprint, condemned by most but in hindsight perhaps not so foolish. His foray into Iraq diverted attention to a battlefield we could more easily manage and where the people were more capable of affecting a change on the culture of the middle eastern terror swamp. Despite the many tactical and strategic errors made there it was never just about WMDs--the resistance in Iran attests to the basic need for freedom and self-governance inside all decent human beings.

Obama should now understand that gaining the good graces of world opinion is not all it's cracked up to be. The countries he tried to sway with his self-immolating Cairo speech or refusal to use the phrase Islamic terrorism are not now vigorously standing to condemn the Ft. Hood attack and reaffirm their solidarity with the USA to fight extremism. The Euros are not announcing more contributions to the NATO forces in Afghan. In many ways we continue to be the last best hope.

The argument over Hasan's motive exemplifies a sort of brutal truth that brings back the unpleasantries of 9/11--there is a demented set of ideologues unafraid to die who will wantonly slaughter innocents for their barbaric vision of God, which threatens the order of free society. Tools of their trade come right out of horror movies, and just like horror villains they must be killed with prejudice in the end. Appeasement doesn't work.

That said, and while my disagreements with Obama will not change much going forward, we only have one Commander-in-Chief. Regards Af-Pak I can only hope he makes the right call. It's not clear whether adding more troops into that theater will necessarily stop the Hasans of the world, but history suggests a wholesale departure would certainly embolden more of them. It's a legitimately tough call, one far removed from campaign politics and likely the reason this uber-deliberate president is taking so long.

But during the Bush years this blog repeatedly reminded folks that the GWoT was not a political issue. The same holds true today. While Obama used it politically to get elected he's in command now and our fate largely rests with his decisions. That doesn't mean he shouldn't get hammered for politically calculated decisions--he should--but at the same time 'hoping he fails' is not an option here. The memory of the fallen demands it.

Veterans Day

From the description..

“To The Shores of Tripoli” commemorates the 200th anniversary of the U.S.S. Constitution bombarding the Fort of Tripoli, now Libya, on August 4th 1804. President Thomas Jefferson had sent the U.S.S. Siren,& six gunboats loaned to the U.S. by the King of Two Sicilies, & the U.S.S. Constitution under the Command of Commodore Edward Preble, to the Mediterranean. Unlike European nations Jefferson refused to allow the United States to pay tribute or ransom to the Tripoli pirates who were taking American citizens prisoner. Instead Jefferson sent the U.S. Navy to show defiance of their piracy & to successfully liberate American citizens from enslavement. (Artist's note.) [emphasis added]

As we honor our brave volunteers today is also a good day to honor the valor of the first Marines and Sailors involved in fighting the "Global War on Terror". They both share the fight against tyranny.

Bush's 180

It should be no surprise someone dredged up comments made by Bush while Governor of Texas during Veterans Day 1997, whereupon he defended his skydiving dad for not chasing the Hammurabi Division back into Baghdad in 1991. Matter of fact, it's surprising it's taken so long. But it's also quite interesting, since Cheney is already on record as saying the same thing in 1994.

Surely Kos is busily planning his next summit to discuss how this revelation might alter the current PNAC/world domination narrative. Not surprisingly the stock answer coming from Bush central is the "paradigm shift created by 9/11", unsurprising since Bush himself has spoken of it many times while in public. Cheney has also said as much (when not confined to his secure location).

But if we can just for a moment suspend any disbelief, this story begs a rather curious question--was the 180 a result of 9/11 or something more? The precision with which both predicted what might occur during an invasion was stunning in its clarity, meaning both knew very well the pitfalls of going in, including the certain political pitfalls.

Now, with our newfound knowledge that both were actually endowed with gravitas usually reserved for college professors and liberals on message boards, can we therefore surmise they also might have guessed that things like TSPs, GTMOs and secret prisons would go over equally as well with the voters? I think so.

That both were willing to take those risks suggests less that Bush entered the presidency leading a secret cabal to take over the world and more that our knowledge of the entire WoT and Saddam's role therein might resemble an iceberg as seen from the surface. Or maybe they were lying back in the 90s. Odd that similar 180s have taken place within the Democrat party as well, in reverse of course.