"It is fatal to enter any war without the will to win it."
- General Douglas MacArthur (1880 - 1964)
Our Senator, Ernest "Fritz" Hollings, wrote an op-ed for the local newspaper this morning. In it, he decried his president for misleading him about Iraq, thereby causing him to vote in a way he wouldn't have had the truth been known:
"Saddam was not reconstituting a nuclear program, and in no way was he connected to 9-11. There were no terrorists in Baghdad, no weapons of mass destruction and Saddam was no threat to our national security."
Stephen Rittenberg over at Horsefeathers might say the Honorable Fritz has forgotten much of what members of his own party had to say about that some time ago.
He goes on to quote Bush out of context a couple of times, then he says:
"My goal is to stop the killing and injuring of our GI's. To support the troops, we need more troops - at least 100,000 more. Get in, clean out Baghdad and the Sunni triangle. Get law and order. Then get a constitution and victory."
Hmm, I thought that's what we're trying to do, but 100,000 more troops? Now that does sound like another Vietnam in the making. Senator Hollings makes it sound so simple.
The debate over the war is heating up, as Clifford D. May points out in a column over at Townhall.com. He says we have two choices: 1)Win the war in Iraq, or 2)accept defeat. I'm inclined to agree with him.
3 comments:
My vote goes for choice #1
Too bad we haven't seen the quotes from Horsefeathers plastered all over our headlines!
I see three choices: 1) put a helluva lot more troops in there -- enough to make the place a little more secure -- maybe 100,000 or more -- and risk turning Iraq into another Vietnam 2) keep things as they are and put up with the steady drip, drip, drip of wounded and killed 3) get the hell out and leave an unstable mess
I didn't say they were good choices. The only hope we really have is to make friends with the rest of the world again and get everyone involved in this.
Post a Comment