Winning Iraq

Is it possible to win in Iraq? It depends on the definition of winning. Topple Sadaam? Already done. Build a Disneyland Baghdad? It’s going to take some time. Maybe a reasonable benchmark somewhere in between is more appropriate. Stabilize the government, which will be an ally in the war against Islamic Fascism? I think that’s reasonable.

The source of instability comes from 3 fronts: al-Qaeda and its sympathizers infiltrating into Iraq. Sunni insurgents fighting to regain privileges lost and avoid retributions from acts committed under the old regime. Shiite death squads out for revenge.

How is it possible to settle all of these fronts? As with any war, the key to victory is striking at the heart of the enemy. All of these groups have outside support. Without it, all of them would eventually dissipate through attrition. The key is cutting off the support.

Al-Qaeda has the most complicated and expansive support system of the three. It will be the most difficult to cut off. Fortunately, foreign fighters are only about 10% of the resistance. The government can be stabilized, even with the annoyances caused by al-Qaeda. See Egypt and Saudi Arabia for proof. American and Iraqi forces can continue to kill any al-Qaeda who venture into Iraq for jihad, without their presence causing major problems for the government. Win/win.

The Sunni support system is the next most difficult. Sadaam and his Baath party spent decades stashing money across the globe, in the event they were ever overthrown. Although many top leaders have been either killed or captured, the support system is still in place. Most of it is funneled through Syria. Expanding the war into Syria would help, but it wouldn’t necessarily solve the problem. It would push the front backward, but it wouldn’t eliminate it. However, any disruption in the support system is a plus that will lead to minimizing the Sunni resistance. Anything that is bad for Syria is good for Iraq.

The Shiite support system is not only the most direct, it is also the biggest problem. Iran is sponsoring the Shiite death squads. Iran has been involved in the chaos from the beginning. Before its Shiite puppets were elected to the new Iraqi government, Iran was providing support for the Sunni insurgents. Iran’s goal has been to drive the American forces out, making Iran the dominate power in the region. Ending support from Iran is the key to winning in Iraq.

Even without the situation in Iraq, there are plenty of reasons to attack Iran. It has been at war with the United States since 1979. It is building nuclear weapons. It has directly threatened the United States and some of its allies. Iran is a problem that isn’t going to solve itself.

The entire war on Islamic Fascism goes directly through Tehran. The Iranian regime is sheltering al-Qaeda. The Iranian regime sponsors terrorist organizations. Iran is Syria’s strongest ally. Regime change in Iran would cut off the supply line to the Shiite death squads. It would eliminate a safe haven for al-Qaeda. It would leave Syria on its own, bordered by hostile forces in Iraq and Israel, which would lead to lesser support against those hostile forces’ interests. Regime change in Iran would not only lead to victory in Iraq, it would be a tremendous set-back to the enemy in the war on Islamic Fascism.

The key to victory is toppling the Iranian regime.

Spoiled Rotten

I just finished watching Saving Private Ryan for about the 4th time. If you only count the times I watched the D-Day scenes, probably the 20th time. The sacrifices made during that war saved this country. I think many of those who sacrificed their lives had no idea what they were giving up their lives for. However, they died for the greatest of all causes.

Men went to war because they were drafted by their country. It was their duty. Nobody wants to go to war, except for the exceptional few who know how to find Life’s ultimate playground, but that is a topic for another day. These Men did it because their mothers and brothers and fathers would approve. They only wanted to come home. If killing Germans and Japs was the way home, then so be it.

People today don’t see it the same way. We have become spoiled. We think the U.S. can dominate any war because of our military superiority, and therefore all wars are unnecessary. This is not logical.

Our superior military ability is a direct result of our economic superiority. Our economic superiority is a direct result of our unparalled freedom. The United States is the only country in the history of civilization to so closely approach a pure capitalistic society. It came so close, that despite the fact that it drifts further away each decade, it still reaps its rewards.

We will fade the way of the Romans if we continue to drift. The leftists of this country would love nothing more. The enemies of this country have been denouncing capitalism since they understood that it enhanced human life. We are in the midst of a fight for survival. This is truly a fight for our lives.

This sounds like tin-hat, right-wing, nut-root talk. This is what the mainstream media (aka propaganda) wants you to believe. Just ask yourself what is the true value of life?

If your answer is: universal health care, higher minimum wages, open borders, fair taxes and public schools; congratulations. You are the enemy.

The value of life is life. A human life is an end in and upon itself. It is not a means to an end. Human life is the standard of value. Anything that adds to it is good. Anything that takes away from it is evil. This is a net sum game. If someone steals from someone else, it is at best a push. No value is added to human life. If someone trades with someone else, it benefits both parties. As long as the transaction is voluntary, it increases wealth. Capitalism is good. Socialism is evil. Even the church won’t tell you that.

We fight a war amongst ourselves at least as much as we fight those who want to kill us. I don’t see the difference between a socialist who wants to steal my money and an Islamic Fascist who wants to take my life. They both share the same philosophy. I look forward to when this country has the balls to declare war on both.

Election Recap

“Americans can always be counted on to do the right thing, after they have exhausted all other possibilities”. – Winston Churchill

“The Democrats may have won the battle, but they have not yet lost the War”. – Me. Last night.

The results of last night’s mid-term election surprised me. My most recent post, predicting the results of the election 3 days in advance, clearly shows this. One note on my (very) Amateur Analysis; I noticed after watching election coverage for 6 hours yesterday that I made a few factual errors in my analysis. Karl Rove is the senior political advisor to President Bush, not the chairman of the RNC. Also, Democrats picked up a few seats in Clinton’s mid-term election of 1998. These weren’t the reasons that my prediction was wrong, but I want to point out the incorrect facts.

Last night was a protest vote against several things, mostly the war in Iraq. Right or wrong, the country sent a message to the Republicans. It isn’t crystal clear what the message was, but in general the message was Do Something Different.

The Democrats will make a fatal error if they interpret this message as Get Out under any circumstances. Victory is still the only acceptable circumstance. Unfortunately, the Democrats have a history of premature withdrawal (and I’m not talking about Monica’s blue dress).

The Democrats have been playing to lose the war ever since they realized that they would get no credit for winning and they would benefit if we failed to win. I really don’t know what they will do now, but I am fairly certain it will be the wrong thing. I see no indicators for them bucking this consistent track record when it comes to military adventurism. The Democrats have been wrong on every decision since WWII when it was their call to either get us in or take us out. For the record, the Republicans haven’t been much better, but their errors in judgment were usually preceded with insistence by the “loyal opposition” of the Democrats.

Fortunately, the Democrats still really have no say in how the war is conducted over the next 2 years. Congress can declare war and the Senate can ratify treaties, but the military answers to the Commander-in-Chief. They can defund the war, but that would be political suicide. Even Nancy Pelosi isn’t moonbat enough to do that.

I’m not delighted with the results of the election, but I’m also not certain it was a complete catastrophe. 2004 was a much more important election and 2008 will be even more important than that. If the Democrats only be themselves, in a brighter spotlight, for the next 2 years, they shouldn’t have control for long. Plus, several Republicans deserved to lose this election. If it weren’t for September 11th, I most certainly would have made a protest vote this year too.

Therein lies the problem with these election results. It shows that most Americans still do not recognize the threat against this country. The key political issues of the September 10th era pale in comparison to the War. There are a variety of reasons for this and we have nearly 2 years to hash them out.

I firmly believe that at least 60% of this country would vote for the party with the best plan for combating Islamic Fascism (aka the War on Terror), if they better understood the history and intentions of our enemy. 20% will vote for the party of their affiliation regardless and 20% will vote for their closest special interests. However, 60% is more than enough to dominate an election. 18 of the seats Democrats picked up last night in the House were decided by less than 5000 votes, which works out to around a 52-48 split on average.

I chose to drop out in 1996 when Clinton won his 2nd term. I had the same feeling this morning that I had a decade ago, but I’m not dropping out this time. You won’t find me working the phone banks or handing out flyers for any politician, but I intend to keep learning, and hopefully teaching, until we either win or I’m dead. I’m not sure which will come first.

Amateur Analysis

I am not a political expert by choice. I try not to follow politics, because I become too irritated. However, I’m attracted to politics like a moth to a light bulb. My interests are in history and war. We are living within both. The ancient Chinese had a curse that said “may you live in the most interesting of times”. Pop some corn and turn on the TV. We are living in interesting times.

The elections on Tuesday matter. The world is watching. I’m not saying that the war will be won or lost on the upcoming election, but I am saying that a very interesting world now has its attention focused on the United States mid-term elections. I can’t help but follow this story.

3 days before the election, here is my prediction of the outcome…

First, the amateur analysis. The country is not happy about the war. There are various reasons why the country is not happy, but it’s hard to find anyone who is pleased with what is happening. This includes me. I was very pleased with the way we took Afghanistan. I was elated at the way we took Iraq, at least as far as removing the government from power. The combat phase of Iraqi Freedom ranks up there with the Six Day War in its military performance. The insurgency phase is a pain in the ass and I don’t think we are fighting it correctly. However, that doesn’t mean I want to cut and run. Like I said, there are various reasons for being unhappy with the war in Iraq, but being unhappy doesn’t necessarily mean you think the party in power should be replaced.

Other than the war, life in the United States is good. Taxes are lower than 6 years ago. Inflation is lower. Unemployment is lower. Wages are about the same, but wage increases always follow unemployment decreases. Interest rates have dropped to a 30 year low, risen a bit, and then stabilized. The rate is still lower than 6 years ago. The economy is rocking. The United States has created more jobs in the last 6 years than all of Western Europe combined.

How should each side play this scenario? The obvious answer is the party out of power should play up the war. This is what they are doing. However, is this smart?

People may be pissed about the war, but are they willing to vote their local Congressman or Senator out of office? Some will. Most won’t. At least, not for that reason alone. Elections in this Constitutional Republic are won district by district. National issues affect turnout, but local issues win elections.

The chairmen of the Republican and Democrat parties couldn’t be more different. Karl Rove and Howard Dean are a ridiculous mis-match. Rove is behind the scenes. He is a big-picture strategist. He is a great fund raiser. Dean is always on TV. He jumps on every issue of the day. He is not good (by Big League Politics standards) at raising money. The national committees are poorly matched.

The trend favors the Democrats. The party in power loses seats every mid-term election, except for Bush in 2002. That was the first time the party of the President gained seats in the House and Senate, during a mid-term election, in the last hundred years. Even Reagan couldn’t do it. Bush can’t do it again, but he showed that he can outperform history.

The historical gain is something like 12 House seats and 3 Senate seats gained for the party out of power. The Democrats need 15 and 6 to take control. The polls show they will get close to 20 and 8. I think they will get 8 and 4.

The Republicans will maintain control of the House and Senate and the rest of the world will gnaw at its wrist in disgust. Ha!

Politics

I hate politics. Actually, it’s a love/hate relationship. I used to love politics. Back in the college days, when I was first forming my own political opinions, I loved discussing different issues and listening to debates on different topics. It intrigued me not only to voice my thoughts and hear thoughts similar to mine being voiced, but I liked hearing how the opposition reached its conclusions. Debate was a way of feeling my way through a labyrinth of ideas.

I solidified, modified and altered my opinions accordingly, the more I learned. I loved learning about ideas and philosophies. I loved critiquing different epistemologies, including my own. I formed a core belief system that I still have and still continue to modify to this day. However, I hate politics.

In my more idealistic days, politics were a pure form of debating philosophy. I used to believe that we all sought the truth, but were at different stages at arriving there. I would get frustrated with my left-wing friends who just didn’t seem to see my point on issues such as why minimum wage laws are wrong or that progressive taxes are bad. I could site economic theories that supported these positions, but my discussion partner either didn’t understand or didn’t want to understand.

I didn’t realize until I was a seasoned old man that it was almost always the latter.

I always gave people the benefit of the doubt. I always blamed myself for not being able to explain my arguments in an understandable fashion. I would occasionally get frustrated when I thought I made a good point, but it fell on deaf ears. The frustration was mainly with me, for getting so close but not quite doing it perfectly.

I realize now that I never had a chance.

I gave up caring about politics when Bill Clinton won his second term. I was heavily into politics in 1992 and I knew Bill Clinton. Not many things that happened in the next 8 years surprised me. However, I understood how the voters in 1992 elected him. I helped elect him by voting for Ross Perot. I had had it with Bush Sr. after he surrendered to Colin Powell and Sadaam Hussein in Gulf War I and broke his promise on No New Taxes. I could see how Clinton won.

However, after 4 years everybody in the country pretty much knew Bill Clinton the way I did in 1992. There could be no excuse for him winning a second term. However, he received more votes in ‘96 than he did in ’92. After the election, I said screw it. This country is fucked and there is nothing I can do about it.

I absorbed myself in other things. I continued to learn, however, I stopped trying to instigate debates. I cancelled my subscriptions to Newsweek and National Review and started reading authors such as Ayn Rand and Thomas Sowell. I began my personal education, but left out the step of debating ideas with opponents. I no longer respected my opponents. I could tell that they were chanting bumper sticker slogans while I was trying to describe ideas such as the philosophy of death. I knew if I couldn’t convince them that minimum wage laws cause unemployment, I could never convince them that socialism was the greatest evil ever known to Man.

I lived happily in my own philosophical world, letting in those who showed signs of caring and slamming out those who didn’t. I was fine with this arrangement. Then September 11th happened. The War has brought me back to politics.

My frustrations are unchanged, except for the fact that I no longer blame myself when people don’t see my point of view. My disdain for my opponents may be greater than it was, because the stakes are higher. We are no longer debating minimum wage laws. We are discussing the future of America. My left-wing friends still take the wrong position. I can tolerate a higher than necessary unemployment rate, caused by an ill-conceived minimum wage law. I can not tolerate anyone who wants to see this country destroyed, caused by siding with the enemy. Although most anti-Americans don’t even realize who they are, this is because they refuse to think for themselves.

I now hate my left-wing friends. I absolutely hate politics.