The American Spectator

Reader Mail

(Page 2 of 14)

Has the word "victory" been sincerely used of late? Are the McClellans of the CYA Pentagon replaced? And, why weren't they a long time ago? Are our troops allowed to fire back at the snipers (AKA terrorist killers) in the mosques? Or will they continue to be restricted from actually WINNING?

No, I too am very dubious about the outcome of this mess -- can't help but wonder if the State Department (which Dr. Rice was supposed to straighten up?), the CIA, and FBI can get their collective acts together and maybe get this fiasco resolved. At least Bush cast aside that silly pacifist plan of the supercilious Jim Baker.

p>Hate to be repetitious, but, I had 16 weeks of basic training and, damn it, I was ready to fight. The Iraqis have had a couple years, and they're not ready yet? Damn. br> -- Frost /p>

Philip Klein concludes "With a healthy dose of skepticism, let's hope and pray that President Bush's policy proves effective."

Hell, no! That kind of thinking is appropriate only when the policymaker is the Almighty Himself, not the registered occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, regardless of his party.

Klein writes of "details" being the number of guys with M-16s, should it be 20,000, or should it be 30,000. I suggest that the important "detail" is what does the National Command Authority plan to do with the guys with the M-16s? Are they going to hunker down in the Green Zone? Or are they going to drive their up-armored Hummers around Baghdad, hoping a series of wired 155mm shells aren't detonated when they drive by? Or are they going to ruthlessly implement the solution pioneered by General Sir Gerald Templer in Malaya in the 1950s, studied and practiced by Colonel H R McMaster in Iraq's Tal Afar in 2005, and presented to the President last year.

Klein also writes "Those who believe that the battle against Islamic fundamentalism is the most important calling of our time must once again choose between a president who agrees but won't dedicate adequate resources to the daunting task of defeating this pernicious enemy, and an opposition party that does not take the threat seriously." The not even remotely loyal opposition party and its willfully ignorant constituents aside, distilling the fundamental failure in Iraq to "won't dedicate adequate resources" is egregiously simplistic. As the peerless Ralph Peters (Lt. Col., USA, Ret.) has repeatedly noted, the day this Administration halted the Marines in Fallujah, ostensibly because the Leathernecks' aggressiveness in dispatching the enemy was not acceptable to the Iraqi "authorities", this Administration lost both its strategic and tactical way, and has yet to regain it.

p>Maybe courtesy of Templer and McMaster this Administration will finally do what is right, paraphrasing Winston Churchill, after all other alternatives have been exhausted. br> -- Frank Natoli br> Newton, New Jersey /p>

topics:
Taxes, Education, Trade, Bill Clinton, Business, Islam, Abortion, Books, Hollywood, Movies, Constitution, Law, Military, Iraq, Iran, Russia, Israel, NATO, Africa, Fascism, Nuclear Weapons, Oil