... you wonder how much of this can be verified, and how much cannot!
Even though I have disagreements with Rumsfeld and Bush on how the war is being conducted, I've always believed in Rummy's insistence that the military become lighter, faster; more "SpecOps" oriented. This has to be done without reducing the conventional forces, however - hence, you have complaining retired generals. If the budget was controlled by a conservative president and a conservative congress this alteration of the armed forces would have already been done, because we would have had the money to do so. Alas, that time and effort has been squandered.
Both Conventional and SpecOp forces are needed for the work in Afghanistan and Iraq. And before you ask, nobody died and made me the Joint Chiefs, but I do have a little knowledge in this area. Conventional forces are there to show and exert massive, devastating force when necessary; the SpecOps are there to mingle with the people and figure out what lies just beneath the surface - to bring the stew to a simmer and not let it boil over. The SpecOps can do a great deal of good; and/or, a great deal of damage at specific locations. The Conventional troops, with their heavy armor, aircraft and artillery are good at doing damage over large areas. Obviously, technology has commingled this concept some; so these two forces work well together also.
Without both types of forces, in required quantities, Afghanistan and Iraq will just become a never-ending boiling stew that constantly gets replenished by foreign potatoes and meat. The "heat" has to be turned down, either by "cooling" or by igniting excess "fuel". I believe this means doing something about the Muslim world overall; Syria, Iran, Indonesia, the entire Arabian peninsula; all must come into play, either by hook or crook. This is a global world war we're involved in - it requires massive action. If the stew can't be brought to a simmer, maybe it's time to simply kick over the whole pot, into the fire. I'm not sure that Rummy and George are willing to go that far.
You may ask, hasn't Rumsfeld and President Bush done all this already? My answer would be "no", not to the extent needed. Besides, the question remains - is what they're doing really working?
1 comment:
"This is a global world war we're involved in - it requires massive action. If the stew can't be brought to a simmer, maybe it's time to simply kick over the whole pot, into the fire."
I agree. I don't think this "long war" strategy is going to work. Our political climate is poisoned against and araby pumps the oil. We need action sooner rather than later. But of course, we have to be strong enough to endure the public relations disaster that would ensue.
Post a Comment