Thursday, June 05, 2008

What he said...

Glen Beck on Iraq:

"This is not about politics. Our winning this war does not mean that you have to vote for John McCain. I might not even vote for McCain.

Some Democrats have claimed responsibility for the success of the surge, saying that they forced Bush into changing strategies. Fine.

Nancy Pelosi says some of the success of the surge is based on the "the goodwill of the Iranians." Whatever. We can argue about that later. After we've won.

I'm not asking you to think the war was a good idea, I'm just asking you to think winning the war is a good idea. We know where we've been. Now, let's all honestly look at where we are. We haven't seen a situation this promising for some time..."

Can't be better stated.

In other news, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed said at his hearing today in Gitmo that he wants to become a "marytr".

I'm ready to allow him that glory...

5 Comments:

At 4:59 PM, June 05, 2008, Blogger The Oracle said...

Having served in Operation Iraqi Freedom as an officer in the 3d Infantry Divsion (which I believe is on its third rotation in theater), and having many friends participating across a wide spectrum of involvement (from infantry company commmander to division staff officers), I can agree with GEN Petraeus' statements to Congress on the progress of operations. And I can appreciate Mr. Beck's enthusiasm.
As many actively serving Soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines can attest, the campaign is fought across many lines of operation, and each mission that is executed over there contributes to the progress of the campaign, just like in every campaign ever fought by every military in every conflict. This campaign is waged without a jaded perspective towards the overly optimistic or the overly pessimistic. We all hope that someday there will be a 'tipping point' where we can look back and say, "Gee, that was the day when things started to come together," but until that day arrives, we'll continue to do what we think is right on the ground, continue to observe the effects that our actions have across hundreds of factors, and modify our operations accordingly.
Now, with all that said, I will say this: soldiers can watch the news over there, whether it's via satellite TV or electronic media. They can read the same headlines that we read (or report). I would venture to say that a soldier or unit whose entire mission while over there is to engage the populace in missions such as rebuilding infrastructure (schools, hospitals, bridges, power, sewer, telecommunications) or guarding it, and are largely respected and appreciated by the folks who inhabit that country (it could be Iraq, it could be Afghanistan -- it makes no difference), read the headlines and can find nothing about the results that they have achieved while over there. In the same vein, there are staff sections within any large unit (normally brigade and above) whose job it is to communicate their accomplishments through public affairs/media channels to the folks back here. I daresay that when they read the headlines that broadcast a focused subset of the real of that makes a lot of implications (sometimes sensational, sometimes inaccurate), they have to scratch their head and wonder what got lost in translation.

 
At 5:43 PM, June 05, 2008, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Amen. Those of us in the military who've actually spent some time in that part of the world should be the final authority on what is or is not happening there...not Katie Couric or Barak Obama who can't get off their multimillion dollar salaries long enough to get the real truth out.

 
At 10:04 AM, June 06, 2008, Blogger Tony Alva said...

Oracle: Appreciate the perspective you bring. Other than Michael Yon and a hand full of other more prominent Mil Bloggers, we rarely see the real progress being made. I think the sentiment in Beck's piece is one the good people of this country need to understand better. “Supporting the troops” means supporting their mission to SUCCEED, especially now since there seems to be some feeling that we may be closer to the tipping point you mentioned than we’ve ever been before. Many have convinced themselves that you can somehow support the players in some meaningful way yet hope for them not to win. I've never been able to understand that.

Thanks for dropping by and as always, on behalf of myself and my family we appreciate your service to our nation. Please pass along our best to your friends back in your unit.

 
At 9:46 PM, June 07, 2008, Blogger fred said...

what does "winning" mean when you are in a country that doesn't belong to you?

every time i hear we need to "win" in iraq, i cringe.

there is no way to win this war. we can lose by leaving or we can lose by staying.

it's lose/lose

there is no "win" scenario

fred

 
At 10:42 AM, June 09, 2008, Blogger Tony Alva said...

Fred, why wouldn't leaving Iraq free of Saddam and his sons and a stable secular oil producing nation not be winning vs. pull out, let AQ regain all that they've lost, have a meddling Iran push the place into a raging civil war? Yes, it will have come at a terrible cost, but why not succeed to a level of stability? Even lame ass MSM is now reporting that AQ is in retreat. Sunni's have paid a terrible price for their early alliences with AQ, and are now more than ever poised to join the gov't.

I'll never understand the postion you're pimping here. I don't argue at all with yours and others opposition to get into this mess, but there is no turning back the clock. It is what it is and all that can be done now is rid the place if AQ and stablize the country by doing what we're doing right now. After years of making little progress, I'm becoming guardedly optimistic about progress. I'm hoping the Iraqi gov't can get it together and do what needs to be done on the strength of AQ's retreat.

Yes we get it, Bush should have never taken us there. It has costed 5000 lives, the GOP the house, and it will cost the GOP the Whitehouse, but now Obama will have to actually DO something instead of just blather about not voting for the war. What will he do? Will he immediately withdraw our troops and reverse all the progress made since the surge? He says he will, but that will be the first retraction he will make in his first 100 days as the road of reality rises up to meet him. I'm betting he doesn't withdraw anybody. I hope he puts pressure on Maliki to get his shit together. I'll support our new president if that's what he does you can bet.

BTW, who said anything about "owning" the country.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home