The US creates Instability in the World

There is an interesting response to an international survey which indicated, among other things, that the greatest threat to world stability is the United States of America.
THAT IS CERTAINLY TRUE --- IF you have a “better red than dead” mentality. However, as a nation we have a really bad attitude toward people who try to tell us what to do. In spite of rumors to the contrary, we are not a particularly peaceful people. Since 1608 we have been engaged in no less than 40 wars and armed conflicts covering about 316 years (computed from a list found at: http://www.historyguy.com/War_list.html. That’s a lot of fighting for a “peaceful” people.
The US won every thing prior to the Korean War. The Korean War continues through today under a truce. Since the implementation of the “truce” we have “lost” almost every armed conflict we have entered. The notable exceptions are, Grenada, Panama, and Desert Storm. Grenada and Panama did not last long enough to really engage the public’s attention.
Some might argue that the rescue of Kuwait was, if not a loss, at least a tie. Although the rescue of Kuwait met all of its stated military and political goals, it could be seen as a failure because the operation failed to reduce Saddam Hussein’s ability to militarily threaten his neighbors; nor did it sufficiently humiliate him so that he was no longer a player on the “Arab street”; nor did it sufficiently scare him to make him willing to abide by the terms of the Peace Treaty that he signed.
We fail because we have lost the national will to win.
In Northern Ireland the British face a religious conflict similar to the one that we are facing in Iraq. Approximately 38% of the population was Roman Catholic. approximately 45% of the population of Iraq is Shiite; as a percentage of the population the British had 3 times as many troops in Northern Ireland as we do in Iraq, but we have to cover 7 times as much territory in Iraq as the British did in Northern Ireland. The British had the advantage of: a stable government, short supply lines, and an enemy that shared a common language and appearance. Even so, it took them 30 years to bring peace to that country (we hope).
30 years to a lasting peace. What is there in the Iraq situation that makes us believe that we can do better there than the British did in N. Ireland?

WEAKNESS NEVER PAYS

When President (41) George Bush negotiated with other World Leaders to respond to Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait with force, one of the agreements was that the allies would not invade Baghdad or try to capture Saddam. As the allies rolled over the incompetent Iraqi army, the “world leaders” prevailed upon the President to refrain from obliterating the Red Guard. The Red Guard was Saddam’s elite fighting force.
History has shown that those two acts of “mercy” i.e. not invading Bagdhad and not destroying the Red Guard, bore bitter fruit. They have cost thousands of American lives and even more thousands of Iraqi lives.
Weakness never pays. We have forgotten Patton’s dictum that, "No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country.” W
Let’s be honest, Secretary Rumsfeld and his generals had a perfect attack plan that was executed to perfection.
President (43) George W. Bush was not incorrect when he said that we had won the war. We did. However what we have failed to do is secure the peace. If we must find fault for this, that fault can be laid directly at the feet of Secretary Rumsfeld and his Generals because they have failed to properly react to the changing conditions. The tough talking Rumsfeld has not actually been as tough as he talks and that is always a fatal mistake.
First: if the Korean and Viet Nam wars taught us anything they taught us that one cannot successfully fight a war when the enemy can be resupplied at will and can hide across a border in a safe haven. In Iraq they have two such borders, one with Iran and one with Syria. It is madness to let this situation continue, and yet, the military leadership does. Unbelievable weakness.
The second piece has to do with General Patton’s point in the quote above. To win a war you do not have to die, but you do have to kill the enemy. Again time after time our military has let the enemy, especially Sadr’s army, continue to live (to fight another day).
I realize that much of our weakness in this area is due to requests from the local government. However, the strong reply is, “We are not going to die for your politics. You were not strong enough to free yourselves, so we gave you your freedom. If you do not like what we are doing then ask us to leave and we will be glad to do so. There is no negotiation about this. We do it our way or we hit the highway.”

More on this Monday

Who N. Korea really screwed

Because the fall-out from the NK test was so small as to be almost undetectable there is some thought that it was a failure. If so, that would explain NK’s haste to fire off another test.

If NK thought that setting off its nuke would make the world quiver in fear it was wrong. Japan is clearly angry as is China. Japan has first hand knowledge of the meaning or nuclear devastation. NK cannot survive without significant support from China and is seen as a client state of China. At a time when Western companies are doing billions of dollars of business with China the government of China would at least like to appear as a civilized state. NK has embarrassed them before the World. If NK sets off another test China may decide that it is time for “regime change”.

Meanwhile the impotent UN has made a small response attempt and a second NK test might actually tempt it to stand up. Sort of international Viagra.

On the other hand, the US could, without resorting to the more aggressive actions that I have mentioned before, actively and publicly urge Japan to change its Constitution so that they could accept nuclear armaments from the US and could have a standing army. The US could publicly station a submarine off the NK coast in international waters (we could hit them from almost anywhere but this is would a public reminder that they play this game at their own risk).

South Korea is in a difficult position. Seoul is within artillery range of N.K. and NK’s army is about 3 times as large as SKs.

N Korea Jumping to Conclusions

So here it is Tuesday and its beginning to look like it wasn't a nuclear explosion after all. What we should learn from Viet Nam and Iraq is that trying to give people Democracy just doesn't work. Plus we don't have the manpower to insert ourselves all over the world anyway.

So what we have to do is remove the physical impediments to a people freeing themselves. What we ought to do is reduce the nations armed forces to nothingness and drop enough arms and munitions to the populace that they can carry out a successful revolution if they want to. If the don't they won't.

Giving people a chance at freedom is not the same as giving them Democracy.

School Safety

There are many comments in the blogosphere about keeping our schools safe. Some are using the recent tragedies to promote their own pollitical agendas (pro-gun, anti-gun, etc.). Some commentators are suggesting very expensive solutions.

Can we all agree that the first step is to keep hostile gunmen from getting in the school? If so, as a first step lets lock the exterior doors. If necessary lock the interior doors. This can be done in less than a day.

Create a sallyport at the main door. A basic sallyport WITH a black and white visual monitor would cost less than one thousand dollars and could be constructed in less than 2 days in most schools. A sallyport is basically a hallway that connects two doors. The second door cannot be opened until the first door is closed and locked.

None of these incidents would have happened if these simple, inexpensive steps had been taken.

Speaker Hastert should NOT resign

Unless or Until there is some factual evidence that the Speaker either committed or covered up some criminal activity it is important to support him. This is a nation of laws not innuendo. We cannot have a stabile government if every rumor and accusation is acted upon as if it were fact.

However, there is enough question here to merit investigation. The Speaker has swiftly and forthrightly take the first step of asking the AGs office to determine who knew what when.

The second part of that question should be who knew about the IMs and when. Was that information withheld? If so, regardless of the reason, that is child endangerment and the individual(s) responsible should be prosecute

Speaker Hastert should NOT give in to the pressure from either Ds or Rs. It is important for the country that the Speaker show courage under fire. If he resigns it will be seen as admission of guilt. It will only encourage the jackals and the craven.

The Mark Foley Bandwagon

It seems that everyone (especially the democrat's) want to paint all congressional Republicans with the Mark Foley paint brush. I don't know that you can blame them its a heck of an issue -- maybe. Well, its an issue if the Rs tried to cover it up, its not if they did not.

I'm not sure what else Hastert can do at this point. He has requested that the Attorney Generals office (FBI) investigate EVERYONE involved Rs and Ds and everyone in his office no exceptions. He has also requested and investigation by the authorities in Florida. This is far more than the Roman Catholic Church ever did under similar circumstances.

In all honesty we should say that so far all that has been released are examples of "grooming" behavior. That is behaviors that are intended to be seductive in nature. At this time we have not been given any examples that show the attempted seduction was successful. Which is to say that so far there is no evidence of an actual criminal act being committed (morally reprehensible yes, but "criminal" no evidence yet). I personally think that evidence of a crime will be found but so far, no. This appear to be a particulary informative place:
http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/news_theswamp/2006/10/hastert_wants_f.html