The American Spectator

Such a damn shame. It didn’t have to be this way. When we had the bad guys on the run, that was the time to go into over-drive and make sure that they could not rise from the ashes of their enmity towards us. It was time to completely flush out the stables of the Middle East and disinfect the region so that the infection would not return. Because of this government’s half-hearted actions, another generation of America’s best will have to go in harms way to rescue their parents from their mistakes.

p>Well, I shall hope that Beverly, or Elaine, or Diane, or some of the other regulars to this font of wisdom will better define the problem than I have. Now I am going to get my optimism prescription refilled. I am almost out. br> — Ken Shreve /p>

Mr. Babbin has given the four options that have most recently been discussed in the media. It might help at this juncture to review a past option that was proffered by the Democrats and their Generals and John McCain that vastly more troops were needed to stabilize Iraq. The current situation in Baghdad puts the lie to that strategy. First, most of Iraq is stable. Baghdad is not. We could put thousands more troops into Baghdad and the insurgents would either continue to fight or hide for a while. We have enough troops in Iraq. The present commanders have been and are right about troop levels. In fact if our conventional forces were used in the manner of WWll, Baghdad would be a parking lot.

p>Second, the recognition that we have enough troops, enough material, and enough morale to get Baghdad stabilized points to the correct strategy. Take off the gloves! We can’t you say; the rest of the world and the press will not allow it, will resist and support our enemies, turn public opinion against the war. Well we can if it is crunch time. Crunch time is allowing the Iraqi Army and its strongest General to destroy the militias quickly, then let vetted survivors join the Iraqi Army and debrief them to find out how Iran supplies them with money and weaponry. This general should also be given authority to order Predator missiles and selected artillery to fire at targets selected by him. And the word should go out that there will be no safe havens or neighborhoods for belligerents which will induce more tips and intelligence to zero in on troublemakers. Only then can policing start. There are only soldiers on a battlefield. Police exist only in a stabilized society. Each have their role to play. Bur soldiering must come first. br> — Howard Lohmuller br> Seabrook,Texas /p>

I always get the impression that our senior officers are operating under the specter of the patsy Schroeder era in Congress. Under her tenure, congress effectively neutered future generations of military officers, at least in their thinking about the conduct of war.

What we wound up with are managers and administrators, but no warrior killers, or too few of them and they are not in charge. Just remember the fate of the black colonel who fired his pistol next to that spy’s head while it was in a bucket…I guess we showed him. In the face of brutal slaughter of their own people we are bound and determined not to cause civilian deaths while we fight a war. This sounds pretty absurd especially when these “civilians” aid and abet the terrorists by allowing them to blend back into their neighborhoods after an attack on our men. They will continue to do this because they see no downside to it.

It must be the job of the senior officers there to see to it that there is a serious downside to supporting the enemy. We need to spread the pain around into their midst to graphically demonstrate that aiding and abetting will get them killed very quickly and in large numbers. I would not permit one armed person to enter or leave a house or mosque without calling an airstrike to completely destroy said building and all occupants. Case closed, this is war. I would unbed the press also.

p>Love your stuff.