Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Friday, December 08, 2006
Mary Katharine Ham :: Townhall.com Columnist
I know a Marine, and he knows the stakes
by Mary Katharine Ham
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


I know a Marine. He sits in a bar in North Carolina. He came there by way of Fallujah. The same close-cropped blonde fuzz glimmers on his head in the dim light as burned under the hot sun of Iraq. He’s the greatest storyteller I know, spinning tales about his overseas exploits, both combat and otherwise—only with the express permission of the mixed company present, of course.

He speaks with a wit and color that would surprise John Kerry. He is not a quiet man. But I wonder what he would say this week. I wonder what he would say to the Iraq Study Group’s proposed “change in the primary mission of U.S. forces in Iraq that will enable the United States to begin to move its combat forces out of Iraq responsibly.”

I imagine he’d just shake his head at me. He knows what the new “primary mission” is, as does anyone who’s even skimmed the report, and it’s not the type of mission Marines are accustomed to. The mission is to lose. Lose slowly, lose “responsibly,” lose diplomatically, but lose without a doubt. My lively Marine friend would likely be disgusted into silence.

But there’s another kind of man who is not silenced by the prospect of an American military defeat. He’s downright enthused.

Tim Russert’s first word for the report was “extraordinary.” Later in the day, he had much more to say:

This was such a sobering report. Powerful. Passionate. Bipartisan. Unanimous. I think it's not only a wake-up call for the Bush White House, but for the whole country. We are in very difficult straits…

I mean, when you sit here and read these recommendations, it is numbing how passionate, how bold they are, and how bleak the assessment is.

These accolades for a report, which acknowledges that “a slide toward chaos could trigger the collapse of Iraq’s government,” a “humanitarian catastrophe,” and a “propaganda victory” for al Qaeda, but insists that the U.S. should carry out its “planned redeployments even if the Iraqi government” is not ready.

How do people find so much to be gleeful about in such a plan? There is nothing “extraordinary” or “bold” about quitting in the face of an enemy who wants to swallow up our very way of life in one sharia-abiding caliphate by way of suicide and dirty bombing. Smiling and pretending there is honor in giving them a win does not make it so, unless you are in Washington.

I know a Marine. He sits on a low bench at Walter Reed Hospital, white paper crinkling beneath him as he works his left knee back and forth. Below the knee is about 12 inches of tibia, wrapped at the end in gauze and tight bandages while the wound heals.

His left foot took its last step in Ramadi. It landed on an IED instead of Iraqi sand. He was on his way to clear a tower of an insurgent sniper when it happened. His fellow Marines—some double amputees jogging on treadmills and lifting weights—rib him, calling the injury a “flesh wound.”

Across town, Sen. Harry Reid is positively delighted by a report that suggests America “engage constructively” with the neighboring countries who likely fund many of the insurgent forces that hurt my friend and his fellow Marines.

The Iraq Study Group… I feel so good about them. They tried so hard to do the right thing. And their report indicates that they agree with what the election results were on November 7th. There must be a change of course in Iraq. The Iraq Study Group is a rejection of the policies of the Bush administration on war in Iraq. It calls for redeployment. It calls for a change of course, I repeat.

At Walter Reed, I doubt there are many men who think asking Iran and Syria for help is the “right thing.” They have spent years and lives and limbs trying to defeat the insurgent arms of these radical governments and the violence they foment, and now the Washington policy elite and press corps would ask them to team with them in a misguided attempt to quell violence in Iraq.

Only at Washington dinner parties could such a sell-out be worthy of so many smiles.

I know a Marine. He remains in Ramadi while his brother learns to walk again back in D.C. Their mother stands in the rehab room at Walter Reed wearing a t-shirt that says, “Half My Heart is in Iraq.” Both her boys put much of their hearts into winning their missions in Iraq.

But when they leave, it is of very little concern to some people what is left behind them, as long as we leave it behind. Joe Biden on the “new way forward:”

I think the most significant thing about the report is it has moved the debate in a fundamental way, from not if, but when and how we move our forces in Iraq.

Carl Levin explains where all the excitement is coming from:

The report represents another blow at the policy of ‘stay the course’ that this administration has followed. Hopefully this will be the end of that "stay the course" policy. The elections in November were the first major blow at that policy.

Only in the halls of Congress could a military loss for America in Iraq be considered only a political loss for George W. Bush. There are few who would argue that Iraq doesn’t need a new policy, a new strategy—perhaps one with more teeth than the present one—but not the kind George Stephanopoulos lauds:

If I had to pick out one recommendation that could have the kind of teeth you're talking about, it's recommendation No. 41. The study group says that the United States government should tell the Iraqi government that the United States is going to carry out its planned redeployments even if the Iraqi government doesn't meet the benchmarks. That is a real threat of withdrawal. That could be a significant change of course. It's going to be important to see what the President's reaction is to that single recommendation because that's the clearest one that indicates a path out of Iraq.

Only in a Washington TV studio, perfumed with hairspray and haughtiness, could running away before the job is done be considered tough and resolved.

I know a Marine. He is packing his stuff this week. On Saturday, he will bend down, kiss his wife good-bye, and deploy again for Iraq. He will not leave with a mind to allowing the collapse of Iraq’s government, a humanitarian catastrophe, a propaganda victory for al Qaeda, the diminishing of America’s global standing, or negotiations with the enemy, just because it means we can get out of Iraq quickly.

He’ll go with a mind to win, and he will not find boldness, passion, toughness, glee, or honor in anything less. That is a practice for Washingtonians, not Marines.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Mary Katharine Ham is a contributor to Townhall Magazine.

Be the first to read Mary Katharine Ham's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

Bush
has handled this badly, and now my country has to suffer another defeat. My President doesn't lose this war, America loses the war, all of us! Some people just do not get it.

I bet politics was like this during Nam too, I was 14 when it ended, my brother was there but I was not politically aware.

Politicians on both sides make me want to puke! No wonder ALL of these vile creatures are held in such low regard. I am sick of this, but I suppose I will be dead by the time sharia makes it all the way into law.

I am not sure why this strategy or tactics were used so ineffectively, but we need to get some general's that are warriors over there, not clerks and jerks running the show.

We spend more $ than 40 of the top militaries in the world combined, and we can not even defeat a bunch of sand farmers with the leadership we have in place. Their collective wills are flacid.

My old platoon SGT used the saying, "its time to go into the hiring and firing business", I bet that one star over there will do the job if you do not want to".

I hope Bush dumps the top 6 generals who came up with, and had to implement this strategy-then start FIGHTING!!

11h

I know a Marine....
I know a Marine... who went to Iraq at eighteen and fought for his country and came back a man.

I know a Marine.. attending college at 21
...the country whose leaders talk of quitting and surrender.

I know a Marine who will remember forever his young comrades who fought and died...

I know a Marine who will run for office in ten years...

I know a Marine who will remember who lost Iraq..

pity the poor Democrats

Ham, I know a Marine.
The article highlights a glaring reality about the way our country chooses to fight wars since Vietnam and previously Korea. That is , that the political gain or loss by the party in power or the party seeking power takes precedent over the means we employ to achieve victory in war.
We won in WWII by completely destroying our enemy's will to fight. We did this by bombing the cities that housed their industrial complexes. These cities also contained hundreds of thousands of men, women, children and babies.
As horrible as this image is, this committment is what is required to win. Only when the civilian population of a nation, province, or area has had enough, been beaten to the point that they no longer support their leaders and even turn against them, is a war or battle won.
When our political leaders succumb to media pressure, world opinion and approval polls while proscecuting a war, and implemeting strategy , we can never win.
We are facing a relentless enemy, radical Islam, only by destroying them and those that harbor them, will we survive as we are.

charlie
I hope that you truly crush the libs. Count on my vote!

Patton had them pegged back in 45 and they have no changed a bit.

The ol cut and run crowd.

A Marine Once Said
A Marine Once Said:

The morale of soldiers comes from three things: a feeling that they have an important job to do, a feeling that they are trained to do it well, and a feeling that their good work is appreciated and recognized.

A Marine Once Said:

We're not retreating, Hell! We're just attacking in different direction!
General Oliver Smith, USMC

A Marine Once Said:
For over 221 years our Corps has done two things for this great Nation. We make Marines, and we win battles.
Gen. Charles C. Krulak, USMC

A Marine Once Said:
Retreat hell! We just got here!
Captain Lloyd Williams, USMC

A Study Group Once Said:
Let's Cut & Run, Don't give the Marines a chance to win it.
ISG



Nitty-Gritty, part 65
We never went to Iraq to destroy the Iraqi nation(assuming one even exists), or the Iraqi people. We went to Iraq to remove a thug and promote our vision of how the Iraqis ought to order their lives...through a democracy. It was to serve as a model for others in the mideast to emulate. This "democracy" thing. Given these constraints, it is impossible to succeed militarily without the support of the people of Iraq. If victory in Iraq meant killing millions of Iraqis, our military could accomplish that task with relative ease. It wouldn't much matter what the Iraqis thought. But that was not why we went there.
My question is: Why is it up to our best and brightest, our soldiers, to sacrifice their lives and limbs in order to prevent the collapse of an Iraqi government that presumably has the support of most Iraqis? And if it doesn't have the support of most Iraqis, what does that say about the rationale for the entire mission, including this president's vision of a "democratic Iraq"?
We never understood what we were getting into on Iraq. We assumed once Saddam was removed, Iraqis would automatically embrace our presence and clamor for democracy. But as events there have sadly demonstrated, it was our dream, not theirs. I don't think we had any concept that Iraqis would display primary allegiance to tribes and religious sects once Saddam was deposed. In fact, Iraqis had always had these primal associations. All Saddam did was keep a lid upon overtly expressing them.
I think we are learning to our chagrin, in both Iraq and Afghanistan, that these are tribal peoples. Tribal customs, rules and histories, along with allegiance to religious sects, are the foundations around which these people function. Our notions of democratic pluralism embodied in the authority of a nation-state run counter to their tribal culture, and it was quite arrogant and presumptuous of us to ignore that and think they would automatically embrace our vision of how they should live.


The war in Iraq...
...has already been won. We defeated Saddams military and kicked the bums outta office.
But if we pull the troops out now we, the American people, will be the ultimate losers.

Just look at who comprises the ISG ( Idiots Stupid Gomers ). Nothing but a bunch of friggin clowns in 3 piece suits.

The ISG should be comprised of current combat soldiers and recently returned vets from Iraq and Afghanistan. The guys with up close and personal perspective on what we we face instead of a bunch of old creaky has beens who fail to see reality and worry more about their pensions than what is best for America. Their report would be laughable if it weren't so dangerous for our country.

The report from these wimpy bonebags is just plain old lefty stink. It never ends. The "let America fail" crowd has infiltrated every aspect of our way of life and it is an absolute travesty.

While our brave young warriors are putting the "hurt" on blood thirsty terrorist scum, we need to confront the cut and run scum back here at home.

The ISG report is good for one thing, starting a fire in your fireplace or barbeque pit.


Semper Fidelis.

"keep five yards"

WAR
I would like to see a townhall discussion on how to win a war such as this.
The enemy doesn't have and identy unless quoted and coddled by the media.
He is perfectly willing to use,kill and maim anyone to further his cause. How to separate him from the masses?
I truly believe that soon this war will move here,and we still have no idea how to stop it.
Note; only on the internet did the potential mall killer be identified as another disciple of the religion of peace.

It's over, then?
Do the election results really signal another defeat for the US and victory for the "Blame America First" crowd? Is it all over but for the howls of "Baby Killer" and spitting on "the few, the proud" returning from there? Is history really repeating itself? Have those who, early on, declared this war to be another Vietnam-type "quagmire" succeeded in making it so through their propaganda in the media?

That's how the enemy (both internal and external) are reading the election results.

Say it ain't so! The next opportunity is 2008.

Baker & Hamilton:
JAMES BAKER:
Born in Houston, Texas to James Addison Baker Jr. and Ethel Bonner Means, Baker was educated at The Hill School, a private college-preparatory school in Pottstown, Pennsylvania, and Princeton University where he was elected to receive membership of The Ivy Club; receiving a bachelor's degree in 1952. He then served in the United States Marine Corps for two years as a lieutenant, after which he attended The University of Texas School of Law, where he became a member of Phi Delta Theta and received his J.D. in 1957. Baker took a job with the law firm Andrews & Kurth, L.L.P., where he remained until 1975.

GUESS WHEN YOU BECOME AN ATTORNEY, YOU LEAVE SEMPER FI BEHIND, AND BECOME SEMPER I
Lee Herbert Hamilton (born April 20, 1931) was the vice chairman of the 9/11 Commission, and currently serves on the President's Homeland Security Advisory Council, having previously served in the United States House of Representatives for 34 years.

Born in Daytona Beach, Florida, Lee Hamilton graduated from DePauw University in 1952, where he was a member of the Alpha Tau Omega fraternity, and from Indiana University law school in 1956. He worked as a lawyer in private practice for the next ten years.

Hamilton was elected to the House of Representatives as a Democrat in 1965. He chaired many committees during his tenure in office, including the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, the U.S. House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, the Joint Committee on Printing, and others. As chair of the Select Committee to Investigate Covert Arms Transactions with Iran, Hamilton chose not to investigate President Ronald Reagan or President George H. W. Bush, stating that he did not think it would be "good for the country" to put the public through another impeachment trial. He was one of the top choices for the running mate of Bill Clinton in the 1992 Presidential election. He remained in Congress until 1999.

DEM=TRAITOR







A very well known Marine once said
"We’re surrounded. That simplifies our problem of getting to these people and killing them"


Losing The War At Home
We keep hearing how the mid-term election was a referendum on the Iraq War. Perhaps it was, but the politicians failed to understand the message.

The public is tired of the war because it was promised that our soldiers would be allowed to fight it. The gloves were going to come off, and the terrorists would find no quarter.

Now, soldiers are afraid to fire their weapons, because every death precipitates into a court martial investigation.

Perspective on Iraq
The conflict in Iraq, in any other period of history, would be little more than a footnote in the history books. In casualties and time, it most closely resembles the Philippine Insurrection. Unless you are a military history buff, you probably never heard of it. This is not to take glory from the brave service members who are serving honorably now, as those unremembered heroes served in the Philippines over 100 years ago. However, a certain amount of perspective is called for. Some recent studies claim that more Americans have been killed by illegal aliens here at home, in the last three years, than have died in combat in Iraq. Some people are calling Iraq a disaster, while the real disaster is right here at home. I hope enough people wake up before 2008.

Wars list
Here is a list of the major wars the US has fought in its' history. Examining this list gives insight of what we are in for, don't you think?
The Democrats had only one choice; win or be hanged:-)
The Republicans won cause they knew it was essential to the safety of this nation:-)
************************************************
John Adams -Quasi-War With France(1798-1800)Federalist(stalemate)
Thomas Jefferson -The Barbary Wars(1800-1815)Democratic-Republican(first war against Moslems-won)
James Madison -War of 1812 (1812) Democratic-Republican(won)
James Polk -Mexican-American War(1846-1848) Democrat(won)
Abraham Lincoln -Civil War(1861-1865)
Republican(won?)
William McKinley -Spanish-American War(1898)Republican(won)
William McKinley -Philipine-American War(1899-1902)Republican(won)
Woodrow Wilson -World War One(1917-1918)Democrat(won)
Franklin D. Roosevelt-World War Two(1941-1945)Democrat(won)
Harry S. Truman -Korean War(1950-1953)
Democrat(won)
Eisenhower-Kennedy-Johnson-VietNam War(1956-1975)Republican-Dem-Dem(won,lost,lost)
George HW Bush -Desert Storm(1991)Rep(withdrew)
George HW Bush -Operation Enduring Freedom(2001-Present)(continues;win?)
George HW Bush -Iraqi Freedom(2003-Present)(continues;win?)

Sorry, Error:-)
Korean war correction made:-)
*********************************************
Here is a list of the major wars the US has fought in its' history. Examining this list gives insight of what we are in for, don't you think?
The Democrats had only one choice; win or be hanged:-)
The Republicans won cause they knew it was essential to the safety of this nation:-)
************************************************
John Adams -Quasi-War With France(1798-1800)Federalist(stalemate)
Thomas Jefferson -The Barbary Wars(1800-1815)Democratic-Republican(first war against Moslems-won)
James Madison -War of 1812 (1812) Democratic-Republican(won)
James Polk -Mexican-American War(1846-1848) Democrat(won)
Abraham Lincoln -Civil War(1861-1865)
Republican(won?)
William McKinley -Spanish-American War(1898)Republican(won)
William McKinley -Philipine-American War(1899-1902)Republican(won)
Woodrow Wilson -World War One(1917-1918)Democrat(won)
Franklin D. Roosevelt-World War Two(1941-1945)Democrat(won)
Harry S. Truman -Korean War(1950-1953)
Democrat(lost)
Eisenhower-Kennedy-Johnson-VietNam War(1956-1975)Republican-Dem-Dem(won,lost,lost)
George HW Bush -Desert Storm(1991)Rep(withdrew)
George HW Bush -Operation Enduring Freedom(2001-Present)(continues;win?)
George HW Bush -Iraqi Freedom(2003-Present)(continues;win?)

C-141 Crew Dog.
Exactly.

Now the anti-war crowd is going to surface and indeed, already has.

Click on my handle and check my blog for the story on a liberal loony spitting on a troop just back from Iraq.

SF values already coming out.

Mac
Well, possibly I mis-stated in a few of those descriptions, but you got the point?:-0
The reason I designated certain ones 'lost' is the way the troops were treated upon return from their battles, and the fact that no real headway was made because of the War Department's abuse of leadership by restricting soldiers to firing on the enemy only when blown up..
There was no intention whatsoever of putting down any soldiers, only the ones that forced the warriors to 'play nice':-)

Mac
Same to ya, ole buddy! Keep ya head down and the ammo close at hand and in the words of some guy from long ago:
Drink lots of ice water and carry a big stick, cause somewhere over the hill there is a helluva fight:-)

How to "redeploy"

The four step approach being called the way to go!

1. Remove the stars from the flag,

2. Remove the blue background,

3. Remove the red stripes, and

4. Wave rapidly in plain sight.

This is a cure for the "problem" in Iraq. To heck with the citizens of the country that voted three-fold more that we did. That voted under the threat of the militants in their midst. Let the Iraqi people fend for themselves. Now that is a nice moral thing to do is it not?

Ed

Mac
You are sooooooo funnie:-)
Dat wuz gut,,bery bery gut!!
Does ewe gote sum morr???

Mac
She must got de flew. Maybee hers not feals sew gut. Orr, purhapps shea gotta sumptin elze gwine own. Mite knot bee herr? Im-poster maybee?

Oh Kimberly....
Wow... that was lame, even for you!

I know this is difficult for you to imagine, but unlike your liberal heroes, many columnists on the right don't have to make up "stories" to bolster their message.

MOST service men and women... even in 2006, vote Republican. That says all you need to know about whose policies they see as most supportive to their cause.

I'm sure you wish it weren't so... but sometimes facts can be inconvenient things when you cling to false notions.

Merry
Whazup..Hope all is well with you and yours!
God bless!
Good post.

I know a marine.....
What gall the press and the politicians have in even thinking that the Baker committee came up with a viable option. Imagine that? it should have been their blood and their limbs blown up on te streets and sand of Iraq! What a disdgrace thse people are. Harry Reid the little man that he is has no sense, courage or honor and the smae can be said of the other creeps.....this is more than I can stand! We have the capacity to destroy the enemy and win this war no doubt about it but political considerations are getting in the way if fighting this war. guys like Levin, Leahy, Reid, Durbin, Kerry, Kennedy, Pelosi, and the other mental giants have, in my opinion, given aid and comfort to the enemy from day one and in that process have undermined the presidnet and the war effort and the mi8litary! This is traitorous that's all I have to say about this losy situation!
Peter Lubrano

Do these people know we're at war?
I cannot understand how the high profile democrats and our liberal republicans can pay allegiance to political correctness and defer to the enemy by claiming that the Muslims are a docile people and they have peacful religion, etc.
Not one of these people has the courage to call a spade a spade! What the hell, these folks have vowed publicly that they want to destroy us so what is the problem hey? Let's finish what we sarted and for starters bring down Sadr and his militia then tell the powers thast be in Baghdad, hey guys if you dont' take care of these people we will, that's it!
Peter Lubrano

Ms. Ham
Thank you for the reminder. Its enough to make me cry. These MEN can not be appreciated enough. May God bless and keep them, giving them continued courage and strength.

Coolnout
... I think your handle would be more difinitive if you removed the third "o" from it. :-)

Tim Russert's Spots Don't Change
At least some things remain the same. Russert's a deceiver. But a consistent one at that.

Twelve pieces of silver, for that limelight of media accolade. For Russert's no idiot. But merely a charlatan.

Baker and Cuttin' 'n' Runnin'
I don't know why people are so surprised at the Iraq Report, considering who was involved.

This is not the first time that James Baker has been, shall we say, misguided.

The first time was in the mid 1980s when he pushed for and presided over the destruction of the US dollar via the Paris Accord (I think that's the name; maybe it's the Louvre Accord), when the world decided that a strong dollar was a bad thing and Baker convinced Reagan that they were right. I can remember the dollar was 1:1 with the British pound at one point there, and was the strongest currency in the world. This was also the time when our nation was the strongest.

Now Baker is proposing to destroy our effort to protect ourselves.

Maybe his next act will be active intervention on the side of the enemy. The thought of this man and his ilk as "The Grownups" makes me very, very afraid.

Barry

I Know a Country
I know a country. It lies west of the Atlantic, east of the Pacific, south of Canada and nroth of Mexico, where they weren't afraid of doing the right thing no matter what the Russerts or the Schumers or the Bidens or the Clintons or the Euro-Socialists or the NY Times said. The thing is though I just don’t know where that country is anymore. All apologies those who died on September 11.

Know a Marine, BE a Marine!
Armchair hawks won't cut it either. YES, We've got to Win in Iraq but I have no more respect for the sideline cheerleaders than I do for the sideline defeatists.
My son served for 14 months in Afghanistan and Iraq. He is More Patriotic, because of his volunteerism, than any of the stay-at-home hawks. He believes that we must win in Iraq BUT he is able to criticize the Bush Implementation.
If some of you are only willing to focus on how to defeat the Democrats(and other Bush critics) then I am certain you contributing as little to our victory as the 'Cut&Run' crowd are.
Be ProAmerican, Volunteer! Talk to your sons and daughters about making their contribution.
I am disgusted to hear from military experts that we don't have 20-50 thousand more troops to place in Iraq, for a D-Day type push. Why Not?
America, Volunteer! Don't just talk about the Marine you met in your local bar....Buying a soldier a drink isn't enough of a contribution.

C-141 Crew Dog
posted, "soldiers are afraid to fire their weapons, because every death precipitates into a court martial investigation."

Right on.

A government which conducts a war must allow its soldiers a sufficient latitude in which to successfully operate. Certainly, there will be civilian casualties. In modern warfare, it's inevitable. No one fights battles way out in the sticks in an open field anymore.

21st century war consists of annihilation of the enemy's infrastructure as well as his soldiers. That mandates destruction of civilian homes and lives.

The new doctrine of warfare should be immediate and devastating destruction of the enemy's stronghold on a massive scale, regardless of civilian casualties. This must be done quickly and without mercy.

To conduct these long, drawn-out limited-scale conflicts only serve to demoralize the public (and the soldiers!) and delegitimize the government.

That's one lesson I learned in Vietnam.

I Know a Country
I know a country. It lies west of the Atlantic, east of the Pacific, south of Canada and north of Mexico, where they aren't afraid of doing the right thing no matter what the Russerts or the Schumers or the Bidens or the Clintons or the Euro-Socialists or the NY Times say. The thing is though I just don’t know where that country is anymore. All apologies those who died on September 11.

C-141 Crew Dog is 100% Correct
I'd appoint you the next Secretary of Defense.

C-141 Crew Dog said: The new doctrine of warfare should be immediate and devastating destruction of the enemy's stronghold on a massive scale, regardless of civilian casualties. This must be done quickly and without mercy.

The quicker the better. Unfortunately, Bush’s war strategy is one of non-war.

"Bush's war strategy is one of non-war"
Yep, No War in Iraq and No War at Home.
Instead of 'Overwhelming Force' and a sufficient number of forces used, Bush decided to lull the American people with "We're Winning but even FoxNews isn't telling you".
No wonder Mary Katharine Ham thinks that drinking with a Marine is her sacrifice to patriotism and the Bush Twins have yet to visit a single VA hospital to express their gratitude to our returning heroes.
Pres. Bush needs to remind his daughters and the rest of America that WE ARE AT WAR! That is the first step toward Victory.

Coolnout
Coolnout writes: Sunday, December, 10, 2006 10:31 AM
AchmedSlayer
Is it true that your only a 4'8", 240lb, raw meat eating cromagnum?
**********************************************
Actually, no, that is not quite correct.
A 4'7",286lb, raw meat eating cromagnon.
Your spelling is as attrocious as your humor.

Required!
That all who praise the cut and run method of handling things in Iraq and pass policies that carry out these plans meet with the Soldiers who gave so much more than their time, who gave valuable parts of themselves and explain to them that their sacrifice means nothing in the whole political scheme of things. That all that matters is that the sissies and cowards in control of the legislature and elsewhere get to wear dry diapers for a while.

I am curious though of how the sissies and cowards will react when the radical islamists are instituting sharia law via the good mr ellison.... at gun point!

ImprecisePsychic
I believe your handle fits you well. Not withstanding your son's patriotism and service to our great country.

I disagree greatly with your premise, about armchair warriors being the same as those that are outright anti-patriotic. I try to make this simple for you. The anti military crowd is pulling against the military tug-a-war rope. While using your term, armchair warriors are merely sitting on the side line.

If your a betting man, with a little intelligence, I believe that you would rather not have a sizeable crowd, actively working against you.

You know as well as anyone, that a sizeable portion of the democrat party hates our military. Not to mention the leadership of the party. I say somewhere in the neighborhood of 15 to 30%.

Oh! By the way, my son has already enlisted, along with his best friend.

Just for the record
We are not at war in Iraq

The Iraq government is battling an insurgency, and we are assiting. ITs their war, not ours.

The question is how long are we going to support them. Its about time the Iraqis learn to stand on their own.

TooMuchSense, CONGRATULATIONS!
You and I are part of a number of Republican parents: Sadly Fewer Than Those Who Profess Patriotism.... who have encouraged our children to serve during this war.
TooMuchSense, are you as appalled as I am that our own president has not encouraged his pampered daughters to make any contribution? A visit to a VA hospital perhaps?
And your numbers of 15-30% of Democrats hating our military, How Do You Imagine That? And I will repeat for you, in simple terms: Support of Our Troops is more than simply adding insults to a blog.
Your son and his friend are doing their part. They have my appreciation and my prayers. During the 14 months of my son's mission, I learned to pray constantly. God Bless You.

one more thing
As far as combantants go, there are a lot fewer marines dying in OIf that Soliders, and a lot less soliders than contractors.

Its nice marines are doing their part, but its not all about them.

naked pagan
I beg to differ.

The Marines showed up the 10th Mountain in Afghanistan. Just your average jarhead outdoing the 10th Mountain in a mission that they train for.

Marines are taking less casualties because we train for war and don't spend a lot of time on bullsh*t like Consideration Of Other's Training, our boot camp isn't coed or watered down, EVERY Marine is trained as a rifleman FIRST, women Marines run the same PT as the males, our physical fitness test is tougher, 3 miles versus two, our rifle marksmanship standards are TOUGH, 200, 300, and 500 yard lines vice a 200 as in the Army, we have a proud tradition so much so that NO ONE wants to be the one to "screw the pooch", and we DON'T give away the Eagle, Globe, and Anchor like the Army gives away black berets.

You can say what you want, and I would never denigrate the Army's efforts, but there is a league of difference between the Army and the Marine Corps.

Col Hackworth's awesome book, "About Face" describes the decline of the Army after Vietnam and the takeover by the perfumed princes, like Weasley Clark.

Gunny
I dont expect anything less from you...but a large portion of the casulaites are coming from IEDs on MSRs, and the Army (and KBR contractors) are the ones on the the roada

Another issue is the use of force...there is an old army adage that if all you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail, but in truth, killing people is not making things any better. We are killing plenty of people, something like a thousand to 1, and it hasnt slowed the OPFOR down at all.

If you can point me to a web site that shows how much the marines make up of the total force is, as well as their make up of the total casualites vs other branches, I'd like to see it,

nevermind
I found it:

http://www.icasualties.org/oif/Service.aspx

and here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multinational_Force_Iraq

Marines have one division to the Armys 4, yet have half the casualites the army has. There are a number of ways you can intrepet this, but my point is this is not a marine corp operation

I know a President......
.... and he doesn't have a clue what the stakes really are.

I know a President......
.... and he doesn't have a clue what the stakes really are.

Lydia
Yeah, it is evident that the dear old President is definitely NOT a Marine:-)
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.