Get It Over With George
Iran is home to many that are, in truth, rather moderate. I suppose they might as well be liberated, and now is as good a time as any. Surely they will greet whomever frees them from the shackles of their current government as liberators.
Rather than blustery speeches and finger pointing, rather than classifying the Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization, rather than parking aircraft carriers off the Iranian coast in hopes of something ‘unfortunate’ occurring, or going on at length about the threat of Iran possessing a nuclear deterrent – just get it over with George.
Your approval ratings are in the toilet, you’ve lied to the American people to such an extent that no one knows what the truth is anymore, and Congress might even back you were you to engineer some halfway decent intelligence – especially being that Presidential campaigns are in full swing and no one wants to look like they’re soft. Let’s face it, the Democrats have failed to make any real significant inroads regarding Iraq, and that was the issue that won them the House majority.
Perhaps I have been a little too hard on the likes of Rove, Gonzales, and Snow. Maybe they’re just getting out before the shit hits the fan - not that the fan isn’t already covered in it.
Maybe, when all is said and done, this is just a matter of a clash of civilizations and ideologies. Maybe your administration has been correct all along in asserting that the global war on terrorism will decide the fate of liberty the world over. And if that is the case, then attacking Iran seems more than reasonable. After all, they’ve been a member of the ‘axis of evil’ ever since the term itself was employed.
Of course, a lot of Americans are going to die, because an air war will not alone accomplish the goal. And unlike Iraq, there will most likely be no one willing to support the United States militarily in the venture. The British are already at the breaking point, and most others simply won’t want any part of it. Israel, on the other hand, would probably be more than willing to involve itself, but who knows what that might lead to. Then again, if we’re to cross the threshold once and for all, does it matter?
I can’t speak for Canada. Even if a no confidence motion is tabled in the fall and another federal election takes place, it’s more than likely that the Conservatives will either win a majority or a greater minority, so you never know if Mr. Harper will be willing to commit us. I suppose, if we’re going to take this thing seriously, that being the global war on terror, we might as well get on board, stop our whining, and come to terms with the fact that it’s going to be a long, bloody affair. Best to do that now so that when the shocking realities of it hit home we’re ready for them.
A lot of people are going to die, most of them Iranians I would imagine. But as is often mentioned, freedom does not come without a price. This case is no exception.
Where will it all lead? I don’t think that can be answered, but for the sake of preparation, I think we should expect the worst. If Iran is invaded then three nations that border one another will be home to conflicts involving Western forces, so it only stands to reason that all three should be tied into the same effort. And if that is to be the case, we cannot employ half measures or allow the media to convolute the purpose. We must, for the sake of the safety of future generations, conduct an all out campaign of complete and total military domination using every asset that we possess. We cannot allow ourselves to be sidetracked by the existence of insurgencies, or their complexities – meaning that civilians will also have to be targeted to ensure that support mechanisms for insurgent movements are eradicated.
There is no time for mincing words, nor for attempts to present false fronts. The reconstruction of nations is of little importance if we are unable to wage all out war on those we deem a threat within them. Such considerations must be relegated to propositions after the fact. There is no point in attempting to destroy an enemy while, at the same time, working to rebuild the very nation in which they exist to placate its population. In truth, we possess the military might to forgo such concerns, and if we apply force without hesitation and in an overwhelming fashion, then the reconstruction of those nations will occur far faster.
The belief that the hearts and minds of a population can be won is a practice that has never been successful. Only through the use of overwhelming military force has the population of any nation been brought to heel, and in this instance it is quintessential that such is the case to ensure that no opposition will remain once the job is done. The only reality that can be accepted is one that involves wholly pacified populations that have been utterly devastated and thus lack the ability to form movements, be they political or militant, that are counter to our objectives.
Like it or not, that is the only way that the global war on terror is going to be won – through the use of unquestioned and overwhelming military force. There are some that believe that such action will only encourage more terrorism. But the reality is that if our use of force so decimates and dehumanizes the populations of those nations that we feel are havens for terrorists, their resolve will weaken and support for their zealotry will evaporate simply because the populace at large will have become so terrified of us that the alienation of such groups will become the norm.
If Mr. Bush feels military action against Iran is required to usher in this new reality, then action should be taken and it should be swift and decisive and devoid of mercy. Because when it comes to war, there is no point in politicking. Either it is undertaken whole heartedly or not at all.
So what’s it to be?
Want to bookmark or share this entry?
This entry was posted on Tuesday, August 28th, 2007 at 3:08 pm. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
August 28th, 2007 at 3:27 pm
The final solution. There are those that believe there is no clearly defined, or realistic, end state to full spectrum operations.
August 28th, 2007 at 3:44 pm
That’s what it really comes down to, isn’t it. If they’re gonna stick with this, the whole rhetoric about “minimal necessary force” isn’t worth the breath with which it’s spoken, since when fighting this sort of war minimal necessary force is overwhelming, unrelenting force with enough ferocity to break the will of those fighting. And if that’s not the goal, if you’re going to try to preserve whatever goodwill left to you in the world, and to do it in such a way, however barely, as to try to keep to the values of Western society, than it’s just a waste of time and lives. Well said, Matt.
August 28th, 2007 at 4:13 pm
Matt:
Kudos to you for honestly addressing a much danced-around topic:
“The belief that the hearts and minds of a population can be won is a practice that has never been successful. Only through the use of overwhelming military force has the population of any nation been brought to heel, and in this instance it is quintessential that such is the case to ensure that no opposition will remain once the job is done. The only reality that can be accepted is one that involves wholly pacified populations that have been utterly devastated and thus lack the ability to form movements, be they political or militant, that are counter to our objectives.
Like it or not, that is the only way that the global war on terror is going to be won – through the use of unquestioned and overwhelming military force. There are some that believe that such action will only encourage more terrorism. But the reality is that if our use of force so decimates and dehumanizes the populations of those nations that we feel are havens for terrorists, their resolve will weaken and support for their zealotry will evaporate simply because the populace at large will have become so terrified of us that the alienation of such groups will become the norm.”
You nailed it. Let’s stop tip-toeing around the subject and face facts.
I cringe at the thought of your Inbox tomorrow morning…..just keep in mind that you DO present strong arguments here and the stronger your argument is, the more it will ruffle the feathers of those who have now way of refuting those arguments other than waving an angry Straw Man at you.
I suggest we start overwhelming you with “LoveMail” each morning…..might be a nice change of pace, albeit a tad odd…..?…
August 28th, 2007 at 4:53 pm
Just take a page from the last chapter of the Boer war. I think that was one of the last guerrilla wars won by conventional forces. It took the British a while to get it right but the war effort eventually coined the term “concentration camp.”
I’m sure George et al could be comfortable with that, just so long as it got the job done in time for November.
August 28th, 2007 at 4:59 pm
Ugh. Matt, please don’t argue for the right, even if it is tongue in cheek. You do it too well. It’s an uncomfortable look at the dark side, because you know there are many in the current US administration that think exactly like that. Their argument continues to be that the problem with Iraq is not that it was an unnecessary, illegal, and doomed war from the start, but that it was undertaken in a half assed manner. Or to quote you:
“the only way that the global war on terror is going to be won – through the use of unquestioned and overwhelming military force”
They still believe that you can remove the root of a problem if you just finally put the effort in and kill enough people.
August 28th, 2007 at 5:00 pm
Hey man, war in iran? im down. just lemmie put on some socks and turn off fox news…
August 28th, 2007 at 5:14 pm
Oh, I understand that perceptive I think. It is practical and logical. No point really in leaving yourself a problem. A clean sweep makes perfect sense. Crushing the opposition with military might that is “decisive and devoid of mercy” adds up fine. It is the argument behind every genocide in history. It’s not that I don’t understand the argument as logical, it just lacks humanity.
August 28th, 2007 at 5:19 pm
This post reminds me very much of The Onion’s prophetic, post-September 11th article, especially the ‘Point/Counterpoint’ entitled “We Must Retaliate With Blind Rage/We Must Retaliate With Measured, Focused Rage” (link is here -> http://www.theonion.com/content/node/34153).
Matt, thank you for your honesty with regards to cutting through the BS and saying the truth flat out, namely, that when it comes to this so-called war on terror, we (people, nations, societies and more) can’t delude ourselves into believing that anything other than all-out global annihilation is what some waging this war truly believe is necessary to ‘win’, if in fact it is something that can indeed be ‘won’ or that those in charge are at all interested in doing something so prosaic as ‘winning’.
August 28th, 2007 at 6:03 pm
no war=good war….
I get what you’re saying though…
they cant just sit around with another mess like Iraq on their hands…incomplete…A for effort but incomplete…
ugh.
I can also see it from a damned if you do -damned if you don’t perspective…much like what Bush has in front of him…
But they shouldn’t have stuck their noses in it in the first place.
I don’t know what it is, but a naive part of me just wants to wish there would be no more fighting and everyone would just help each other out instead of killing each other for cash or oil or democracy or whatever they say they’re there for these days…of course we all know that a(n) Utopian society wouldn’t be as shiny as it first appears.
I’m also kinda freaked out about who is going to decide to whip out their nuke, and what the global ramifications of that could be.
They wouldn’t do that would they?
ummm tell me they aren’t going to do that…
August 28th, 2007 at 6:53 pm
[quote comment="24709"]Matt:
I suggest we start overwhelming you with “LoveMail” each morning…..might be a nice change of pace, albeit a tad odd…..?…[/quote]
but totally worth it to counter the hate messages he’s getting. And come on who doesn’t like a nice email every once in awhile (or every day :D)
August 28th, 2007 at 8:57 pm
Well, at least we have ourselves some new members for The Fletcher Memorial Home (ala Pink Floyd). Our current administration here in the states has brought about a lot of new members who are “colonial wasters of life and limb.”
Why not keep things going for awhile? I’m sure the 2/3 of Americans who are overweight could really get a nice workout running around in the 110 degree desert after they all get drafted.
Hell, maybe the Army could even use that as a weight loss program, that way, instead of the Army having to pay you to join the military, you could pay the Army, since they would be helping you lose weight in the process. It really is a win-win situation.
How quickly we forgot about the post war dream… (Sorry, I was listening to Pink Floyd, while typing this.)
August 28th, 2007 at 9:06 pm
We should be sure to inter all Persian folk on our side of the pond like we did the Japanese, you know, to prevent them from taking any action against our wanton slaughter of their people.
August 28th, 2007 at 11:08 pm
Hey! Relax everyone! Everything is going to be fine….The Democrats are in control! As soon as George heads back to Texas, the war will be over. After all most people call it the “So called War on Terror”, so it must be true. There are no factions who wish ill towards the USA or Israel, right. I mean acts of so called terror have never happened elsewhere, correct? So if the US heads home in a year or so and parks it’s Carrier Fleets close to home, Europe will take care of itself. Same with Asia-heck- China may stop trying to poison our tooth-paste!
One day, the American soldiers will be coming back home, and the World will live happily ever after!!!!!!
p.s. concerning the “LoveMail” etc. I’m new here, but from what i’ve seen, Mr. Good could probably do with Less email of any sort! He should probably stop reading it. If you need to cheer him up, do it here…….btw…Thanks Matthew for running this site…..We need dialogue; not diatribe!
August 29th, 2007 at 7:46 am
It’s pretty frightening to hear you campaigning for all-out war with no quarter given, even if it is only tongue-in-cheek.
More frightening, though, is knowing that a) you may, unfortunately, be right, and b) someone may just take your advice.
August 29th, 2007 at 8:02 pm
In general, to be bare honest, the whole war itself is rediculous. Everything about it.
And why Canadians are being sent off into this war that has nothing to do with our nation alone, goes far beyond belief. I wish for another election; and the NDP should definately get in, as they need a chance in the Government for once. All its been is Liberal, Conservative, Liberal, Conservative!
At least NDP got a seat in the White House.