Sunday, July 30, 2006
Sunday Talking Head Shows
I think everyone on This Week with George Stephanupalogus is wrong about what's happening in southern Lebanon (except the Israeli ambassador)--but there could be a Tet Offensive irony developing here. First the ancient history--our soldiers in Viet Nam before January, 1968, were always hoping that the Viet Cong, a guerilla organization, would come out and fight like men, because we could slaughter them and win decisively. Had they kept fighting a guerilla style, they still could have lost but it would have taken a really long time. So the Communist forces in South Vietnam make a huge miscalculation, come out and fight like regular forces at Tet, in the belief that such an offensive would cause the South Vietnamese to rise up against their admittedly corrupt government, and the Commies could win decisively. But what the Viet Cong did was give up their advantage and get slaughtered in return for no uprising. It was a near total defeat and the North Vietnam generals, particularly their best, Gen. Giap, were leaning towards ending it in failure. But then, miracle of miracles, the world media, including our own guys, portrayed it not as the hoped for decisive defeat of the VC but as a defeat for us, and we bought it. The North took heart and kept up the fight and we lost heart, pulled out and then ultimately betrayed our former allies, the South Vietnamese. All kinds of bad happened as a result of those developments.
Hezbollah is like the VC, and it is a huge mistake for them to defend territory and fight toe to toe with the IDF, no matter how tough and well trained they think they are. That fight can only end in utter defeat and humiliation for them if the Israelis aren't stopped prematurely (either by timid leadership or by a unilateral ceasefire). But the talking heads are already calling it a defeat (somehow). They're worried that this struggle will cause more hatred in the Arab world against the Israelis. The ambassador, Daniel Ayalon, said the obvious about that. When the bulk of the Arab world will only be satisfied with another Holocaust in Israel, it's impossible for them to hate Jews more.
I'll humbly set some goalposts for victory: Southern Lebanon cleared of Hezbollah to the Litani River and a 'robust' international force (including some Muslims if possible) in place to keep Hezbollah out and disarmed of long range missiles north of the Litani. I doubt that even Baghdad Bob could spin that into a Hezbollah victory, (although I think that Noam Chomsky probably could with the linguistic legerdemain he employs).
The Fox News Sunday show has the same decidedly not robust Nicholas Burns trying to put a smiley face on this regrettable and sad situation. I can't write about what he's saying because, unlike Barbara Billingsley in Airplane, I don't speak jive.
Oh, man, even Fred Barnes and Bill Kristol are saying it's inevitable that Israel will stop too soon and it will be perceived as a Hezbollah victory. I hope the wise Israelis will see how important finishing the job south of the Litani has become. They haven't survived several attacks by overwhelmingly larger forces designed to wipe them off the map by making stupid mistakes. I'm hoping history will predict the near future events. The panel discussion ends with Kristol disgusted but wordless in the face of Juan William's moral equivalence argument. Resolve, Bill, and all neo-cons, we need a little resolve. If it takes generations of difficult struggle to defeat those who kill people merely because they are not their particular type of Muslim, that's what it's going to take. And the alternative? A fortress America? Don't make me laugh. We have, what, 5,000 miles of porous, unguarded border? There is no alternative.
Chris Matthews has a complete lefty panel, again. They seem busy building up Hezbollah when they're not bashing the President or declaring defeat. Andrew Sullivan seems clear eyed about the situation in Lebanon but is totally pessimistic about Iraq. I admit to being a little down about Iraq--we can hand them democracy but we can't stop them from killing each other over the dime's worth of difference between Sunni and Shia Muslim. I can't see an effective way to stop it and I haven't read one either. Defeatism is now running rampant among the panelists. On this show, whatever the Americans do, it's wrong. Now they have the ability to psychoanalyze the President. Sullivan needs to look to himself about alternative reality, I think, first.
John Edwards can defeat Hillary Clinton for the Democrat president nomination? Sullivan is again a welcome whiff of reality. Gore is the only credible candidate? Has Rove done another Jedi mind trick here? Kerry was a horrible candidate, Thank God, but he was only marginally worse than Gore. Bring it on with Al, please.
Sullivan says that the new legislation in response to the Hamdan decision is tantamount to withdrawal from the Geneva conventions. God, I hope so. As I've argued perhaps too many times, our adherence to those international treaties has been one sided for over 60 years. The sooner we recognize that reality and react to it, at last, the better.
Hezbollah is like the VC, and it is a huge mistake for them to defend territory and fight toe to toe with the IDF, no matter how tough and well trained they think they are. That fight can only end in utter defeat and humiliation for them if the Israelis aren't stopped prematurely (either by timid leadership or by a unilateral ceasefire). But the talking heads are already calling it a defeat (somehow). They're worried that this struggle will cause more hatred in the Arab world against the Israelis. The ambassador, Daniel Ayalon, said the obvious about that. When the bulk of the Arab world will only be satisfied with another Holocaust in Israel, it's impossible for them to hate Jews more.
I'll humbly set some goalposts for victory: Southern Lebanon cleared of Hezbollah to the Litani River and a 'robust' international force (including some Muslims if possible) in place to keep Hezbollah out and disarmed of long range missiles north of the Litani. I doubt that even Baghdad Bob could spin that into a Hezbollah victory, (although I think that Noam Chomsky probably could with the linguistic legerdemain he employs).
The Fox News Sunday show has the same decidedly not robust Nicholas Burns trying to put a smiley face on this regrettable and sad situation. I can't write about what he's saying because, unlike Barbara Billingsley in Airplane, I don't speak jive.
Oh, man, even Fred Barnes and Bill Kristol are saying it's inevitable that Israel will stop too soon and it will be perceived as a Hezbollah victory. I hope the wise Israelis will see how important finishing the job south of the Litani has become. They haven't survived several attacks by overwhelmingly larger forces designed to wipe them off the map by making stupid mistakes. I'm hoping history will predict the near future events. The panel discussion ends with Kristol disgusted but wordless in the face of Juan William's moral equivalence argument. Resolve, Bill, and all neo-cons, we need a little resolve. If it takes generations of difficult struggle to defeat those who kill people merely because they are not their particular type of Muslim, that's what it's going to take. And the alternative? A fortress America? Don't make me laugh. We have, what, 5,000 miles of porous, unguarded border? There is no alternative.
Chris Matthews has a complete lefty panel, again. They seem busy building up Hezbollah when they're not bashing the President or declaring defeat. Andrew Sullivan seems clear eyed about the situation in Lebanon but is totally pessimistic about Iraq. I admit to being a little down about Iraq--we can hand them democracy but we can't stop them from killing each other over the dime's worth of difference between Sunni and Shia Muslim. I can't see an effective way to stop it and I haven't read one either. Defeatism is now running rampant among the panelists. On this show, whatever the Americans do, it's wrong. Now they have the ability to psychoanalyze the President. Sullivan needs to look to himself about alternative reality, I think, first.
John Edwards can defeat Hillary Clinton for the Democrat president nomination? Sullivan is again a welcome whiff of reality. Gore is the only credible candidate? Has Rove done another Jedi mind trick here? Kerry was a horrible candidate, Thank God, but he was only marginally worse than Gore. Bring it on with Al, please.
Sullivan says that the new legislation in response to the Hamdan decision is tantamount to withdrawal from the Geneva conventions. God, I hope so. As I've argued perhaps too many times, our adherence to those international treaties has been one sided for over 60 years. The sooner we recognize that reality and react to it, at last, the better.
# posted by Roger Fraley @ 8:39 AM 
Comments:
<< Home
Great post. One point I would make is this...
Andrew Sullivan seems clear eyed about the situation in Lebanon but is totally pessimistic about Iraq. I admit to being a little down about Iraq
It sure is a lot easier to be optimistic 19 days into a conflict than when you are 1200 days into one with no resolution in sight.
Thanks for you comments on Chomsky v. Buckley. The lunch eating was largely attributed to Chomsky's superior base of knowledge, but nevertheless, it is always interesting to me how two sets of eyes can see the exact same thing so differently.
If you have the time, I have some military/technology questions over at Prague Twin that perhaps you or one of your readers might be able to help me answer.
Thanks in advance. Keep up the great work.
Andrew Sullivan seems clear eyed about the situation in Lebanon but is totally pessimistic about Iraq. I admit to being a little down about Iraq
It sure is a lot easier to be optimistic 19 days into a conflict than when you are 1200 days into one with no resolution in sight.
Thanks for you comments on Chomsky v. Buckley. The lunch eating was largely attributed to Chomsky's superior base of knowledge, but nevertheless, it is always interesting to me how two sets of eyes can see the exact same thing so differently.
If you have the time, I have some military/technology questions over at Prague Twin that perhaps you or one of your readers might be able to help me answer.
Thanks in advance. Keep up the great work.
Roger,
If you continue to carp about Vietnam, I will continue to remind you that not only was it a land war in Asia but more importantly it was a war of Vietnamese self determination that began long b/f US involvement and end after our w/drawal.
The South Vietnamese government was "admittedly corrupt." Exactly why were we in Vietnam? Here's a better question: why are we in Iraq?
We can agree that Saddam Hussein is a monster. We can also agree that the US supported him when it suited our policy to contain the Iranian revolution. Where was it I read that even as US tanks rolled into Bahgdad, Saddam was obsessed w/ whether the Iraqi Shiites were rising in revolt.
Now, Iraq is not any kind of international player, but is instead a playground for Islamic Jihadists. Iran is bent on becoming a nuclear power and it doesn't take a Katushya rocket scientist to connect the dots between Hezbollah and Iran.
Did you see the cartoon in the RMN on Thursday? "Rockets for Hezbollah: $55 million; Guns for Hezbollah: $30 million; misc. cash for Hezbollah: $20 million (and then a picture of grinning mullahs) The joy of a proxy war with Israel: Priceless."
October 10 will mark the 1326th anniversary of the Battle of Karbala and the martyrdom of Husayn. During this period, the Shia have come to view themselves as the oppressed of the Muslim world.
It will take generations of difficult struggle which has no prospect of success unless there is a fundamental transformation of society in Iraq from a tribal one to a cosmopolitan one.
This is not a problem that can be fixed by neocons or liberals or anyone else besides the Iraqis. So long as the Battle of Karbala remains as fresh in the minds of Shiites as the the Battle of Kosovo does for Serbs, there is no hope Roger.
We in in the west, have largely overcome our religious intolerances. There are recent exceptions such as anti Semitism, perhaps more aptly described as hatred of Jews, and the troubles in Northern Ireland.
So long as the the society in Iraq remains tribal in nature, democracy stands no chance. The 3 to 4 billion dollars a week that we have spent and lives of of more than 2,500 of our servicemen and women, upon which no $ value be placed, coupled the physical sufferingof thousands of wounded will be wasted, all b/c this administration
was either unwilling to read history or unable to understand it.
You may describe my attitude as defeatism. I consider it realism.
There are only 2 choices: 1. w/draw w/ dispatch as favored by Rep. Murtha and others. This has the advantage of saving American lives and resources. 2. stay until the whatever passes for the Iraqi governments asks us to leave.
I favor the latter, if for no other reason than the people who are our true enemies need to know that our resolve will not waiver after a few years of conflict. These enemies are not rational and do not think rationally.
I suppose that in one way we agree in that we must think like Chinese, not in terms of years or decades, but in terms of generations.
So long as we agree on what we must do, again, I challenge you to defend the proposition that the Battle of Iraq was necessary or strategically optimal in the larger war in which we find ourselves.
T
If you continue to carp about Vietnam, I will continue to remind you that not only was it a land war in Asia but more importantly it was a war of Vietnamese self determination that began long b/f US involvement and end after our w/drawal.
The South Vietnamese government was "admittedly corrupt." Exactly why were we in Vietnam? Here's a better question: why are we in Iraq?
We can agree that Saddam Hussein is a monster. We can also agree that the US supported him when it suited our policy to contain the Iranian revolution. Where was it I read that even as US tanks rolled into Bahgdad, Saddam was obsessed w/ whether the Iraqi Shiites were rising in revolt.
Now, Iraq is not any kind of international player, but is instead a playground for Islamic Jihadists. Iran is bent on becoming a nuclear power and it doesn't take a Katushya rocket scientist to connect the dots between Hezbollah and Iran.
Did you see the cartoon in the RMN on Thursday? "Rockets for Hezbollah: $55 million; Guns for Hezbollah: $30 million; misc. cash for Hezbollah: $20 million (and then a picture of grinning mullahs) The joy of a proxy war with Israel: Priceless."
October 10 will mark the 1326th anniversary of the Battle of Karbala and the martyrdom of Husayn. During this period, the Shia have come to view themselves as the oppressed of the Muslim world.
It will take generations of difficult struggle which has no prospect of success unless there is a fundamental transformation of society in Iraq from a tribal one to a cosmopolitan one.
This is not a problem that can be fixed by neocons or liberals or anyone else besides the Iraqis. So long as the Battle of Karbala remains as fresh in the minds of Shiites as the the Battle of Kosovo does for Serbs, there is no hope Roger.
We in in the west, have largely overcome our religious intolerances. There are recent exceptions such as anti Semitism, perhaps more aptly described as hatred of Jews, and the troubles in Northern Ireland.
So long as the the society in Iraq remains tribal in nature, democracy stands no chance. The 3 to 4 billion dollars a week that we have spent and lives of of more than 2,500 of our servicemen and women, upon which no $ value be placed, coupled the physical sufferingof thousands of wounded will be wasted, all b/c this administration
was either unwilling to read history or unable to understand it.
You may describe my attitude as defeatism. I consider it realism.
There are only 2 choices: 1. w/draw w/ dispatch as favored by Rep. Murtha and others. This has the advantage of saving American lives and resources. 2. stay until the whatever passes for the Iraqi governments asks us to leave.
I favor the latter, if for no other reason than the people who are our true enemies need to know that our resolve will not waiver after a few years of conflict. These enemies are not rational and do not think rationally.
I suppose that in one way we agree in that we must think like Chinese, not in terms of years or decades, but in terms of generations.
So long as we agree on what we must do, again, I challenge you to defend the proposition that the Battle of Iraq was necessary or strategically optimal in the larger war in which we find ourselves.
T
# posted by 
: 2:03 PM
: 2:03 PM
I thik we should listen to Bill Kristol. I mean he was so right about Irag (sarcasim) hes bound to get this one right, its the law of averages. Really, why hasn't someone taken him and Barnes and the rest of that crew and tarred and feathered them? Hey Bill, tell us again how we'll be welcomed with open arms and how:
"And on this issue of the Shia in Iraq, I think there's been a certain amount of, frankly, Terry, a kind of pop sociology in America that, you know, somehow the Shia can't get along with the Sunni and the Shia in Iraq just want to establish some kind of Islamic fundamentalist regime. There's almost no evidence of that at all. Iraq's always been very secular."
"And on this issue of the Shia in Iraq, I think there's been a certain amount of, frankly, Terry, a kind of pop sociology in America that, you know, somehow the Shia can't get along with the Sunni and the Shia in Iraq just want to establish some kind of Islamic fundamentalist regime. There's almost no evidence of that at all. Iraq's always been very secular."
# posted by : 5:07 PM
: 5:07 PM
"I admit to being a little down about Iraq--we can hand them democracy but we can't stop them from killing each other over the dime's worth of difference between Sunni and Shia Muslim."
Now don't you think one of the great brains in the Bush administration should have known this before we began our great adventure?
Now don't you think one of the great brains in the Bush administration should have known this before we began our great adventure?
# posted by : 5:13 PM
: 5:13 PM
To the last anon--I guess it was the triumph of hope over experience. And we're not completely done in there. The Iraqis could wake up to nationalistic interests (after all the oil wealth could make life very pleasant if they would stop fighting and start pumping.
Post a Comment
<< Home
