and they don't even realize it. Very strange birds, those Freepers. They seem to turn on anyone who is not in 100% lockstep with their fearless leader.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1023597/posts-SNIP-(William Kristol and Robert Kagan)
The immediate danger is that the American mission in Iraq may be the first and most dire casualty of this administration's parsimony. In these pages a few weeks ago, Lewis Lehrman felicitously observed, "prudence counsels that to desire the Bush Doctrine is to desire the indispensable means to make it effective." So far, the Pentagon has shown little interest in developing and deploying the indispensable means to make the Bush Doctrine effective. The stunning victory in the war to remove Saddam has been followed by an almost equally stunning lack of seriousness about winning the peace, despite the vital importance of creating a stable, secure, and democratic Iraq. That is what the Bush Doctrine of "regime change" means, or should mean: Not blowing out the bad regime and then leaving others to pick up the pieces, but staying long enough to ensure that a good regime can take its place.
-SNIP--SNIP-To: rmlew
But we must also face the reality that we are a nation at war, and normal troop deployment schedules can no longer hold in every instance.
If this war in Iraq is so critical to the survival of this nation that we must change "normal troop deployment schedules" for our military personnel, then I would suggest that this war is also critical enough to the survival of this nation that Mr. Kristol and Mr. Kagan can put on their f#cking uniforms and go over there themselves.
In light of the fact that almost nothing in this war has gone the way the folks at The Weekly Standard predicted (or wished), I'm surprised someone liek William Kristol can even show his face in public anymore.
-SNIP--SNIP-To: rmlew
An extroadinary piece emanating from the citadel of neo conservatism - the philosopy and its popularizers who led us into Irak.
If this is an attempt to pin the tail on the Bush admistration, it should be resisted as any policy or criticism broached by those who are blindfolded. The problem in Irak is not the lack of troops, but of intelligence or of original conception - the conception of the Weekly Standard.
The Weekly Standard wants us to stand and die for their conception, but what does victrory there mean? America will sustain casualties, but only if it sees the point.
8 posted on 11/17/2003 1:37 PM PST by nathanbedford
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies >
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: nathanbedford
Ah, some of us "paleocons" predicted this months ago. The worm has turned and "neocons" will abandon and blame Bush for Iraq- a war they lead him too.
9 posted on 11/17/2003 1:40 PM PST by Burkeman1 ((If you see ten troubles comin down the road, Nine will run into the ditch before they reach you.))
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies >
-SNIP-Maybe they will start to do some research on the subject and really enlighten themselves.
Jay
Edited To Include Link