If you would like to add a comment to any of the threads here on AADB, registration with blogspot.com is not required. Simply click on the ‘comments’ link at the bottom of an essay, and either enter a nickname under ‘choose an identity’ or post your comment anonymously. Serious comments are always welcome.

REQUIEM

Below are the two final essays to be posted on Allegiance and Duty Betrayed. The first one is written by a friend -- screen name 'Euro-American Scum' -- who, over the past four years, has been the most faithful essayist here. He has written about everything from his pilgrimage to Normandy in 2004 to take part in the 60th–year commemoration of the invasion, to his memories of his tour in Vietnam. His dedication to America’s founding principles ... and those who have sacrificed to preserve them over the past 200+ years ... is unequaled. Thank you, E-A-S. It has been a privilege to include your writing here, and it is a privilege to call you my friend.

The second essay is my own farewell. And with it I thank all of the many regular visitors, and those who may have only dropped in occasionally, for coming here. I hope you learned something. I hope a seed or two was planted. But, even if not, I thank you for stopping by ... 25 March, 2010

7/13/2007

Seal the Borders!
(The Ongoing Refrain of the Realists Among Us)

iran border.jpg
one of the few well-patrolled areas of Iraq's border with Iran

I was not necessarily in favor of our invading Iraq back in 2003 – thought there were other, more treacherous, regimes that needed our ‘attention’. But, once there, we needed to fight this war as if we wanted to win it. Instead, we are pulling another (one hand tied behind our backs) Vietnam – and allowing the political/media/academic leftists to turn it into such on the home front as well. A country cannot afford a series of Vietnams. It saps the strength, siphons respect, contorts the public reality, and causes irreparable chinks in the armor.

An enormous percentage of the ‘insurgent’ violence occurring in Iraq today is the result of constant infiltration over the roughly 1,100 mile border between Iraq and Iran, and Iraq and Syria. Yet on this front (as well as the U.S./Mexico one with which we are all too familiar), the president appears to be border-security-impaired.

In early 2004, the venerable Donald Rumsfeld observed:

My impression is that the border with Kuwait is very secure, and the border with Jordan and Turkey is secure, while the borders with Syria and Iran are not secure … we need more border patrol – Iraqi border patrol – to help do that job.

It’s three years later, and I would venture to guess that the border situation has not changed at all. And the most likely explanation for this lack of border control is lack of manpower. I suggest adding more manpower, rather than placing the manpower we already have on the ground at increasing risk by not doing so … and using advanced technology (such as remotely controlled aircraft, strategically placed monitoring equipment and the like) to pick up the slack.

The man at the helm doesn’t seem to comprehend how to keep a leaking boat afloat.

Domestically, as regards the U.S./Mexico border, he seems bound and determined to convince us that, rather than sealing the leak, it’s much more desirable to concoct hair-brained methods to design a boat that will float while continually taking on water.

In Iraq, he is convinced that ever more feverish bailing (unfortunately, accompanied by increasing loss of innocent life) will keep the boat afloat, while the leak remains forever unattended.

Meanwhile, the media have been playing up the anti-war sentiment as evidenced by recent polls, and interpreting it as meaning that the public wants us out of Iraq.

I don’t believe that. I believe that the anti-war numbers are much the same as the Bush disapproval numbers. There are, as always, leftists and useful idiots who would have no use for a Republican (even if it’s in name only) president’s policies, no matter what they are. But Presidnet Bush's anti-war/disapproval numbers are historically unique in that they also include people like many of us, who support the military, and maybe even support remaining in Iraq, but do not approve of the way in which the war is being prosecuted. We want our proud and courageous military unleashed to do what they were trained, and want, to do.

I wouldn’t be at all surprised if 15-20% of those who are labeled as ‘anti-war’ fall under that category for the reason above, and the media certainly would not be of a mind to make that portion of the 'anti-war sentiment' known.

So the president is taking it on the chin from the usual suspects on the left, as well as from a new contingent on the right that wants him to govern like a conservative should (as regards much more than his handling of the war). With both forces working against him, I doubt that his approval rating will ever again rise above forty percent, and justifiably so.

What America, and the free world, needs now – perhaps more than ever before – is leadership that doesn’t pander, waver, or relent to political correctness. President Bush, and all but one of the current declared candidates who are seeking to replace him next year, represent none of the above. This is not the stuff of which optimism is borne.

~ joanie

11 comments:

john galt said...

The man at the helm doesn’t seem to comprehend how to keep a leaking boat afloat.

Domestically, as regards the U.S./Mexico border, he seems bound and determined to convince us that, rather than sealing the leak, it’s much more desirable to concoct hair-brained methods to design a boat that will float while continually taking on water.

In Iraq, he is convinced that ever more feverish bailing (unfortunately, accompanied by increasing loss of innocent life) will keep the boat afloat, while the leak remains forever unattended.


That says it all.

With all that Bush is doing on the domestic front to erode his base, staying in Iraq is going to become a dead issue. He's screwing his base and Iraq as well.

robmaroni said...

This could have been Bush's shining hour but he is losing it, I don't know whether it's just incompetence or caving in to pressures that he shouldn't be listening to. But 3000+ American lives and the tens of thousands that will be lost in a bloodbath if we leave before the job is done might turn out to be his legacy because as you say Joanie he wouldn't "unleash" our forces to do what they have to to win.

Anonymous said...

Thank you.

SharonGold said...

"Republicans Revolts Against Iraq Surge"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,2122417,00.html

Anonymous said...

The answer to most of Bush’s foreign and domestic problems is border security, not his endless sniveling complaints about the results of wide open borders he wont lift a finger to fix.

Anonymous said...

You can't win a war if you allow your enemy safe haven.

DaveBurkett said...

Especially Iran needs to be dealt with yesterday, but it looks like Bush isn't the man to do it, and Hillary sure as hell ain't either.

LouBarakos said...

Bush won't get tough with Iraq. It might upset the Arab world. Or we may accidentally kill women and children, and then he'll have to put our troops on trial for murder.

As long as we think this way, we haven't got a prayer of winning this thing. And as long as we haven't got a prayer of winning this thing, we're doomed.

Anonymous said...

The Rumsfeld quote is right on. And his successor doesn't even understand what it means.

calbrindisi said...

Cheney Pushes Bush to Act on Iran:

http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=11863

(Cheney in a wheelchair is better than Bush on a horse.)

Anonymous said...

This Bush presidency has proved that the US State Department runs the US.