Neocon, you allege that the Democrats have questioned "[the Bush] motivation, competence, and practically suggested that we were tricked into war by a bunch of Neocons either due to Imperial ambition, a lust for oil, or the urge to help Israel, sometimes all three. If they concede that it made some sense to go against Saddam, they suggest that the Administration is too stupid to adjust to evolving circumstances, although it was smart enough to wage the principal campaign swiftly and decisively."
Yes, and how does that justify your next statement that "[r]ather than honest critics, they come off as partisan fools who learned nothing from Vietnam, and are intent upon demoralizing our troops and encouraging those who attack us to wait for a change in the political winds.........?"
Are you saying that "honest critics" COULD not question the motivation, competence or forthrightness of the neocons that instigated the invasion and occupation of Iraq? In view of the opportunistic and ever-changing "reason" they advance for attacking Iraq, is it somehow required of "Americans" that we accept and embrace actions that are inconsistent with yesterday's rationales?
In view of the Pollyanna projections of the Administration and the ineptitude they've shown in the post-invasion tactics in Iraq, what is it about being "smart enough to wage the principal campaign swiftly and decisively" that rules out the conclusion that the Administration is "too stupid to adjust to evolving circumstances?"
Finally, what is it that we should have learned in Vietnam that should now silence those that are critical of the policy of preemptive use of American military force. In situations like Iraq where the level of risk turns out to have been so much lower than the level they so hysterically trumpeted, was that a useful doctrine that justified the loss of life, the billions of dollars spent and the creation of a breeding ground for terrorists and a killing ground for us and our allies?
Are you so dogmatically myoptic that you cannot see that our failure in Vietnam wasn't the result of critics who were " intent upon demoralizing our troops and encouraging those who attack us to wait for a change in the political winds?" Maybe, just maybe, our failure in Vietnam was due to millions of small statured Vietnamese men and women who died for ideas that were incompatible with the ideas we were trying to impose through the exercise of foreign power?
I think that we should have learned by now that it is a horrible mistake to underestimate the power of little people with different but powerful beliefs. It doesn't matter if YOU believe their beliefs are WRONG, it only matters whether those strong beliefs are deeply held by those willing to fight and die for them. That's the lesson of Vietnam and Russian-occupied Afghanistan, and it is becoming the lesson of Iraq. Will you ever be able to learn it? |
