Will Democrats always retreat in the face of an enemy's strategy of weakness?
Insurgency and terrorism are the strategies of the weak. If an enemy has the capacity to use a more effective strategy they will. Insurgency and terror are used because the enemy cannot compete against a combat persisting strategy.
Today's Democrats believe that any conflict where the enemy uses the strategy of the weak is by definition an unwinnable quagmire. By taking that position liberal Democrats have decided to lose the war on terror and go back to the Clinton era (error?) law enforcement approach that gave us the 9-11 attacks. While Kerry says he would focus on al Qaeda and bin Laden, does taht mean he is going to invade Pakistan where most of al Qaeda and its leadership currently reside, or would he like the Bush administration rely on Pakistan to run these people to ground?
If Iraq is a "profound diversion," as Kerry claims, has he considered that it is a diversion for the terrorist who are going there to fight rather than coming to America? At this point the jihadis are directing almost all of their resources toward Iraq and Chechnya. In Iraq we have the US forces in a position to deal with them.
At this point, it should be recognized that the insurgents are engaged in a maximum effort in Iraq that is not sustainable. The insurgents are attriting their own forces while inflicting minimal attrition on US forces. Casualties inflicted by the insurgents have been primarily against non combatants which not only does not attrite the forces they are fighting, but also, turns people they need for support against them. It would be a mistake to assume the current maximum effort as a trend rather than a desperate effort to thwart elections coming in this country and Iraq. However, Kerry has sent the signal that a victory by the Democrats will signal retreat from Iraq, so it would make sense that the insurgents would want to do things to help him get elected.
The kidnapping strategy that is also being employed, while disgusting should be ignored. Pathetic kidnappers begging on the screen are a handy propaganda tool and people at risk for kidnapping need to go through some training on how to deal with the situation. A few months ago when an Italian captive refused a hood and bravely defied the thugs, their propaganda backfired. If all captives did this it would stope the practice. A passive aggresive approach would also work. A captive should tell the thugs why should I do what you ask when you are going to cut my head off anyway? Definance spoils their strategy and begging feeds it.
While the Vietnam war was still underway and well before the communist were releasing prisioners, they turned over a captured Marine. It turns out the guy was teh classic prankster. Though out high school he was always getting in trouble because of practicle jokes directed toward those in authority. He apparently used the same approach to toward his captors who finally got fed up with him and released him. Definace of captors might get you killed, but since they intend to kill you anyway, it will deprive them of their propaganda moment and might even set you free.
Insurgency and terrorism are the strategies of the weak. If an enemy has the capacity to use a more effective strategy they will. Insurgency and terror are used because the enemy cannot compete against a combat persisting strategy.
Today's Democrats believe that any conflict where the enemy uses the strategy of the weak is by definition an unwinnable quagmire. By taking that position liberal Democrats have decided to lose the war on terror and go back to the Clinton era (error?) law enforcement approach that gave us the 9-11 attacks. While Kerry says he would focus on al Qaeda and bin Laden, does taht mean he is going to invade Pakistan where most of al Qaeda and its leadership currently reside, or would he like the Bush administration rely on Pakistan to run these people to ground?
If Iraq is a "profound diversion," as Kerry claims, has he considered that it is a diversion for the terrorist who are going there to fight rather than coming to America? At this point the jihadis are directing almost all of their resources toward Iraq and Chechnya. In Iraq we have the US forces in a position to deal with them.
At this point, it should be recognized that the insurgents are engaged in a maximum effort in Iraq that is not sustainable. The insurgents are attriting their own forces while inflicting minimal attrition on US forces. Casualties inflicted by the insurgents have been primarily against non combatants which not only does not attrite the forces they are fighting, but also, turns people they need for support against them. It would be a mistake to assume the current maximum effort as a trend rather than a desperate effort to thwart elections coming in this country and Iraq. However, Kerry has sent the signal that a victory by the Democrats will signal retreat from Iraq, so it would make sense that the insurgents would want to do things to help him get elected.
The kidnapping strategy that is also being employed, while disgusting should be ignored. Pathetic kidnappers begging on the screen are a handy propaganda tool and people at risk for kidnapping need to go through some training on how to deal with the situation. A few months ago when an Italian captive refused a hood and bravely defied the thugs, their propaganda backfired. If all captives did this it would stope the practice. A passive aggresive approach would also work. A captive should tell the thugs why should I do what you ask when you are going to cut my head off anyway? Definance spoils their strategy and begging feeds it.
While the Vietnam war was still underway and well before the communist were releasing prisioners, they turned over a captured Marine. It turns out the guy was teh classic prankster. Though out high school he was always getting in trouble because of practicle jokes directed toward those in authority. He apparently used the same approach to toward his captors who finally got fed up with him and released him. Definace of captors might get you killed, but since they intend to kill you anyway, it will deprive them of their propaganda moment and might even set you free.
Comments
Post a Comment