How to put an irritating, whiny, poseur politician in her place. From Senator Fauxcahontas Warren:
And the reply, from a retired US Marine Corps Gunnery Sergeant who's now a Senior Fellow at the London Center for Policy Research:
Question answered, I'd say!
Peter
10 comments:
Makes sense to ME!
Works for me... :-)
We cant tell you senator, because you are a democrat and your IT guys work for ISIS
Ms. Duff knows what she speaks of!
A real Marine would have said, "To crush your enemies, to see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women!" But the Gunny was close enough.... :)
Outstandingly-stupid question (and one which she should not have even imagined should have been asked), outstandingly-appropriate answer (and one which should not have been necessary, as it is crashingly obvious).
I find myself in the awkward position of defending Warren here. GWOT/OCO/whatever we are calling it this week has been ongoing for 15 years. We are +/- $20T in debt, and the Middle East is largely unchanged by our efforts. I'm betting that if you asked the Pentagon for its Top 10 priorities, "win the bloody war" would be mysteriously absent. Is it it unreasonable that a Senator asks if anybody has an overall plan?
Like most of America, she had probably forgotten we still have troops in AFG until this happened.
Really? You can defend her utter ignorance of the use of proper force?
She asked about strategy, not tactics. Ms. Duff's response (albeit clever and pithy) was about tactics. We do tactics well. We suck at the long game.
Any General/Flag Officer, Diplomat, or Congressperson should be able to list specific, measurable goals we have as a nation. (Anyone remember DIME or WoG?) Any American over there should be contributing directly to those goals and be able to elucidate how he/she is doing so.
Note: I do not have Warren's remarks in context, only what's presented here.
While the validity of the question can be argued, communists like Warren are not seeking truth. The entire premise of the question is to create dispute and discord. Communists get nothing, not even the dignity of a reply.
In terms of war, I subscribe to stringently avoiding any conflict that is not a direct and imminent existential threat to my county.
Build the very best nonpareil military that you can. Communicate directly (and without typical diplomatic obfuscation) that we are uninterested in other countries conflicts, with one codicil: "if you harm us (or one of our citizens) in any way, we will prosecute total war and annihilate you from the face of the earth. If that offends you, too bad. This is your only and final warning."
If GWB had sought a declaration of war in the immediate days following 9/11, he would have received it, because the congressional cowards would have been too afraid to refuse. He did not, and so that was and remains a monumental failure on his part. The continuing insanity of trying to export our form of government has cost us neighbors, friends, brothers and sons.
Using my model either we would all be dead, or only our enemy would be, not a continuing assembly line of body bags of our youth.
Total war makes those who send us to war to put their skin in the game. Many people shudder at the thought of total war, but they are unafraid to send those those neighbors, friends, brothers and sons. My point is either do it with finality, or stay out.
Post a Comment