"My view all along has been that this is a War of Ideas. And not a war of bombs, bullets, and bayonets. And therefore to lead with a military instrument-and I'm 31 years into that instrument-is the wrong way to go. We should be leading first and foremost with our ideas which I think are much more powerful and better than bin Laden or Ayman el Zawahari's ideas. And we should be leading with other instruments of power such as our economics, our financial might, our law enforcement, our intelligence capabilities, and so forth. The military should be the last instrument we're using.
As we use that instrument, we do, in fact, give bin Laden a recruitment mechanism."
Larry Wilkerson, Colonel, US Army (Retired)
Dave and Kevin, I would appreciate your thoughts on this as it responds directly and eloquently to what you wrote in comments.
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
Colonel Wilkerson Offers Wonderful Pearls of Wisdom
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
Yes, I agree completely with his assessment. Our current strategy is making things worse, not better.
You might be wasting your time with this one, Mark. I think it may be impossible for the right to understand this point of view.
Lead w/ Ideas: ok, let’s have 'em. What ideas should we put forth that would stop an Islamic fundamentalist from blowing up your local café because you’re a decadent westerner? (Though I did read something somewhere a long while back about the effects of cartoons making fun of such and such a philosophy or something and it had the effect of making that philosophy less appealing and thus draining its support. That’s a brilliant, no combat tactic. Kind’ve like pumping classical music in to Nicollett Mall to drive out the loitering gang-bangers. Brilliant! But, look at the type of censorship by the left? Couldn’t show those Danish cartoons... Censor Berkeley Breathed of Bloom County fame… As always, the left puts up road blocks to good ideas but puts forth few of their own.)
Lead w/ Economies: we’re the most dominant economic power the world has seen. We put more into foreign aid and development than any nation in the history of the world. And they hate us for it. Damn us for developing their oil fields for them and putting a Starbucks on the corner.
Lead w/ Financial Might. See above.
Lead w/ Law Enforcement: law enforcement is a tool to capture and apprehend those that have already broken the law. It does little good to protect citizens before a crime except as a deterrent for criminal to consider the consequences. But then again, liberals have watered down the consequences of even the most severe crimes for years.
Lead w/ Intelligence: I agree with that. That is the single best weapon to combat terrorism and stop attacks before they happen. But liberals don’t have a good track record there, either. They decimated the human intelligence apparatus/capabilities during the Clinton years and are constantly undermining our technical intelligence apparatus now. Heck, the leading Democrat candidates don’t even want us to spy on terrorists making phone calls from outside the US to other terrorists outside the US that are routed through the US. How crazy is that?
The military should be the last resort. I agree. But, if you’re afraid to us it, and they know it, it’s not really a deterrent then is it?
Yep. I was right.
As am I...point is proven as you cannot supply the idea. Come on, dick; thrill me with your acumen. Take these ideas off the bumper sticker and apply them to the real world. Make a believer out of me.
To begin with, when you say "What ideas should we put forth that would stop an Islamic fundamentalist from blowing up your local café " you immediately place the struggle in the context of an actual war. We will never win this fight on a battlefield because there isn't one. Not even in Iraq.
You pre-suppose that guns and bombs are the only answer to a lunatic like bin Laden. Yet, bin Laden doesn't use these tactics exclusively. He uses his ideas, his words to combat us...why aren't we?
Economics-they hate us for it because sometimes we force them to do things our way. How "free" is that?
Financial Might-I will give the Bush Admin credit for doing an excellent job disrupting the terrorists financial networks. I think this is one of the main reasons why there have not been any major attacks since 9-11. Funds are low.
Law Enforcement-rip liberals all you want but it was a liberal country that caught the most recent terror plot (Germany). We should be asking ourselves how can we enhance what they have done and bring it to other countries including our own.
Intelligence-The Democrats don't want spying on them (See: Watergate and my namesake) They will continue to use the legal methods avaialable under the Constitution as opposed to one of questionable legality. (See the John Ashcroft hospital visit debacle)
I would never be afraid to use it and my ol buddy Mark here has mentioned a few things over the years on where we could use it now. Pakistan comes to mind.
Well, we are in a state of war, so yes, I referenced this in terms of combat. This is not a standard war with battlefield maps, but it is a war, nonetheless. But, as I predicted, you didn’t actually put forth an idea on how to deal with this situation, combat nor otherwise, did you? Why not? You say bin Laden has ideas, and surely he does. But, if you listen to him, most are ideas in combat and ancillary combat terms. For example, he is an avid student of Vietnam and references it often. Specifically how the enemy waged guerrilla combat and utilized the “useful idiots” in the US to win a battle of attrition, getting the public to waiver, thus causing internal instability/strife because he knew he could not win militarily. So, I ask you again, what’s your great idea? Even a little one… (And building a time machine to return and undo past sins doesn’t count in the real world.)
Economically, we force other nations to “do things our way” about the same way that a Wal-mart does. We present a bigger, better deal and customers choose to do business with us. Do we apply leverage? Sure, what business doesn’t want to get the best deal possible? But, nobody is forced to do business with us. And to characterize it as “un-free” just doesn’t make sense. But I suspect you’re from the “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need” ilk, so you’ll have a very different view from the get-go.
Germany is indeed liberal in many respects, but don’t deceive yourself; when it comes to internal protection, European nations are far more likely to ruffle a few feathers than the US.
Spying? Jumping Jehosophat, man, wake up! Who’s been spying on the democrats? The current administration is at best trying to spy on the bad guys and the Dems have throw up road block after road block; but I defy you to find one instance of misuse of the Terrorist Surveillance Program. Give me just one. The only domestic spying in decades has been the leading Democratic candidate’s misuse of the FBI. Call the TSP questionable all you like, but at least it’s against the bad guys; what’s Hillary’s excuse? And with the Clinton’s track record, do you really think they’ll have any qualms about a wire tap here or there?
Pakistan is indeed an interesting problem/option, but a very, very risky one. I would entertain some ideas there. But history has shown that Democrats don’t have a long attention span when it comes to war. They got us into Vietnam, lost interest when the public turned and then left the Vietnamese people to the concentration camps. You do that in Pakistan and you’re leaving Islamic fundamentalists with the bomb. Tread lightly…
Let’s put this gem in this thread as well. Note how German authorities found out about the recent planned attack over there. They eavesdropped on a phone call from Pakistan to Germany. This is the exact equivalent of the NSA program that is ritually described over here as "domestic spying" and "unconstitutional". Further, it was the NSA program that brought the German terrorists to light: The arrests were the culmination of an investigation that began a year ago, when U.S. officials alerted German authorities to e-mails intercepted from Pakistan.
That could also illustrate the difference between war-fighting, the administration's primary approach to terrorism, and criminal prosecution, the Democrats' predominant if not exclusive method. In a war-fighting model, you're trying to get information about terrorist plots before they mature so you can prevent them from taking place. In a criminal prosecution model, you're trying to punish terrorists for acts they've already committed. Take the Padilla case - the government was able to achieve both ends in that one. But the RESULT of the administrations actions ended up giving us the optimal result: first, do what it takes to learn the facts, so that if there are plots that may be carried out imminently, they can be foiled.
Regarding Vietnam - the barbaric nature of the Communist Khmer Rouge was painted over in soothing tones by much of the American press then as well. In one dispatch from the NYT, its correspondent Sydney Schanberg described a ranking Khmer Rouge leader as a "French-educated intellectual" who wanted nothing more than "to fight against feudal privileges and social inequities". A bloodbath was unlikely, Schanberg reported: "since all are Cambodians, an accommodation will be found". As the last Americans were withdrawn, another upbeat article by Schanberg appeared under the headline, "Indochina Without Americans: For Most, a Better Life" (Go look it up). In short order, the Khmer Rouge proceeded to march nearly two million of their fellow Cambodians to their deaths in the killing fields. Also in short order, Schanberg went on to greater glory and a Pulitzer prize.
Those who opposed the American war in Indochina are pretty humble nowadays in the face of the appalling aftermath: genocide in Cambodia and horrific tyranny in both Vietnam and Laos. The corruption and incompetence of the South Vietnamese and their American allies were heavily concentrated on in the press back then as well and the inhuman Hanoi regime was not focused on as much. But after the Communist victory came the refugees to Thailand and the floods of boat people desperately seeking to escape the Cambodian killing fields and the Vietnamese gulags.
Again, there are intentions and there are results.
Just my opinion here, many modern day humanists who claim to possess a genuine concern for human beings throughout the world are in fact quite content to allow their fellow global citizens to suffer under the most hideous state apparatuses and conditions. When asked why we shouldn't confront the Ba'ath party, the Taliban or the various other tyrannies throughout this world, you’ll no doubt hear vague notions of cultural tolerance (forcing women to wear a veil and stay indoors is such a quaint cultural tradition), the sanctity of national sovereignty or even a creeping suspicion of America's intentions. When all else failed, they will retreat to the fragile moral ecosystem that years of living in peace and liberty has provided them. It’s easy to write off war because civilian casualties are guaranteed or temporary alliances with suspect forces will be made. Humanists relish contently in their self righteous declaration of opposition against all military campaigns against dictatorships, congratulating one another for refusing to taint that aforementioned fragile moral ecosystem that many still cradle with all the revolutionary tenacity of the members of Rage Against the Machine (who I listen to btw).
One thing is for certain, as disagreeable or as confusing as war may be, consider what peace vigils against genocide have accomplished lately. Consider that there are 19 year old soldiers from the Midwest who have never touched a college campus or a protest who have done more to uphold the universal legitimacy of representative government and individual rights by placing themselves between Iraqi voting lines and homicidal religious fanatics. Often times it is less about how clean your actions are and more about how pure your intentions are.
Just for kicks...I saw the full page Moveon.org ad from 9/10/07 in the New York Times and since it is now OK to question peoples patriotism I think I’ll start with moveon.org.
Dave, please. Vietnam? We lost Vietnam because Lyndon Johnson was a buffoon who listened to bunch of like minded morons in the Pentagon. Jane Fonda and John Kerry did NOT lose the Vietnam War, much as I'm sure you would like them to have done so. We also lost because, in the words of several generals since that time, the US Army doesn't know how to fight guerilla wars.
You also need to read either of John Perkins' books on how the US does business in the world which is similar to the Mafia btw and that's regardless of whether a Democrat of Republican is in office.
Gang Bang, yes it was the LEGAL NSA program that everyone in our governemnt supports, including myself, not the illegal one that Cheney-Gonzalez et al wanted to inflict upon us. They made the changes because Richard Ashcroft knew it was illegal.
I am really having hard time trying to understand why two people I know to be conservative are advocating government interference in our lives.
Not to attempt to speak for Dave or HMHC, but I believe you are mischaracterizing their position. It's not like they are big fans of government interference. (They in fact consistently argue against it.) Such characterization is yet another tool used to make a tenable position look silly. What they, and many others like them, are supporting is the utilization of a powerful - arguably, the most powerful - tool in fighting terrorist activity home and abroad.
Can that tool be abused? Absolutely. Has that tool been abused? Undoubtedly. Could it actually be "interference in our lives" as you state? I suppose, although I suspect only in the loosest sense. Speaking only for myself, I'd rather use the tool to win and then apologize for and correct any abuses, rather than discard the tool out of fear of abuse or some moral dilemma. Particularly when the alternatives presented by opponents are lacking in what I would call actionable items.
As a history buff, I can debate the ins/outs of wars all day long, but the short of it (per Vietnam, anyway) is that, yes, we didn't do a good job of fighting their guerilla tactics but more importantly (and more to my point) that the military was micromanaged by congress and then had their legs cut out from under then when congress de-funded the war.
I would also submit that any comparison between Iraq and Vietnam is unwarranted. Two completely different situations in two completely different times. To say that if we pull out of Iraq there will be carnage in the region as there was in Vietnam (and I am not at all convinced that us pulling out of Vietnam was the reason for said carnange) ignores the basic differences between the two countries.
I don't think it is a coincidence that the 2 wars (Vietnam and Iraq) where people demand civilians not be killed are also the 2 wars we are having trouble winning. Why did the kamikazees stop? Because Truman dropped the nuke...destroying their will to fight. No, I'm not advocating nuking the middle east, just pointing out that fact.
It also is becong quite clear to me that it isn't good news when politicians get too involved in war efforts because a large number of them will no doubt be trying to cover their ass more than anything else and many of them aren't looking for victory...they are looking toward the next election.
You have no proof that any NSA program has interfered in my life or yours. Besides, I highly doubt that any Democrat who wins the white house will completely scrap the NSA program...self interest trupms all here...the country would not react well to, say, getting hit 6 months after some politician went in front of the nation proudly proclaiming they scrapped the program.
We did kill Vietnamese civilians, though. Way more than Iraqi civilians...of course they are killing each other as well.
I agree. Anyone who is elected, save Ron Paul and Dennis Kuecinich, will continue the program. I have no problem with this...mostly...it's the extra stuff that the Bushies were up to that I have a problem with...
Post a Comment