The length of a war

The NY Times puts into perspective John McCain's much abused 100 years in Iraq phrase and points out how liberals have been misusing it to attack him on the war.

What should be added an what McCain should be saying is that just as it takes two sides to start a war it takes two to end one. The enemy has given no indication he is ready to stop and the retreat favored by the Democrats and their liberal supporters will not stop the war, but will make it longer because they will fail to engage the enemy on what it sees as its main battlefield.

The FARC war in Colombia has lasted around 40 years and is just now being effectively fought by the Colombia government. It is not a war without end, but it is one that shows how long they can last when you don't have the sustained approach needed to destroy the enemy.

The average counterinsurgency operations is about 11 years and the insurgents lose about 90 percent of those wars. When you have people ignorant of these facts like Nancy Pelosi and many in the Democrat left talking about "war without end" you know they just don't understand warfare and the type of war the enemy is waging. The Obama and Clinton campaigns are both tailored to play on this ignorance and pander to it.

We are not halfway through the normal length of a counterinsurgency fight in Iraq and we are doing quite well. The enemy has alienated the population and we are building an ally in the middle east against radical Islam that the Democrats want to throw away.

Their policy when implemented would be declared a victory for al Qaeda and will help rally jihadis to their cause. It would give hope to a group who has seen much of its hopes crushed in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Democrats have become the last great hope of our enemy.


Popular posts from this blog

Police body cam video shows a difference story of what happened to George Floyd

The plot against the President

While blocking pipeline for US , Biden backs one for Taliban