You Don't Support the Troops

I support the troops, but…

But nothing…you don’t support the troops.

How can allegedly educated people be so bloody naïve? Have you no understanding what showing up for anti-war protests and pushing for a unilateral and unconditional withdrawal from Iraq is doing to the troops that you claim to support? You are giving the enemy a reason to keep fighting. By giving the enemy encouragement, you are contributing to casualties of the very troops you allegedly support.

Do you not understand that in this day and age the enemy browses the Internet, watches CNN and follows every nuance of Western pacifism? What you clearly do not understand is that war is won in the will. If you truly cared about the troops, you‘d take a look at what the enemy is saying on their web sites. Every time you protest, they rejoice and believe that their victory is that much nearer. In your vocal opposition to the war, they recognize that you haven’t the stomach to see the fight through. All they have to do is hang on until you stupidly elect a candidate who claims that he will "end the war" by withdrawing our troops no matter what the conditions are on the ground.

In 2004, just prior to the Spanish elections, they blew up the Madrid train station killing 191 people. Spain did exactly what the terrorists wanted, they voted in a government that immediately withdrew their troops from Iraq. Had the Spaniards had intestinal fortitude, they would have increased their troop strength and sworn to battle on no matter what. The terrorists would have been taken aback at the strength of will a Western country was showing. Things might have been much different.

Just before General Petraeus testified before Congress, there was an up-tick in violence, including the largest single terrorist attack of the war. Over 500 Iraqi civilians were killed and 1,500 wounded. Any bets on whether the attack was planned with our politics in mind? Any bets on what is going to happen come say, September and October?

Here is the road we are headed down thanks to the weak-willed who say they “support the troops”, but not the war. Already two of the top leaders of Hamas (Ahmed Yousef and Khaled Meshal) have “endorsed” Obama. Gleb Pavlovsky, a key advisor to Vladimir Putin and his hand-picked puppet Dmitri Medvedev has “endorsed” Obama. Hugo Chavez, while not directly endorsing Obama, has attacked McCain. The Iranian state television has also been vigorously attacking McCain as has the North Korean state-run newspaper Rodong Sinnmun.

In 2004, a weekend before the Presidential Election, Osama bin Laden made a television appearance in a naked attempt to influence the election. What all these instances have in common is that they believe that the Democrats will be weaker and more willing to avoid conflict at any price. Obama is making that case with his declaration to cut and run no matter what the circumstances on the ground are.

So the next time you attend a peace rally and claim to support the troops but…

But nothing! SHUT UP! You do NOT support the troops because you are giving the enemy hope and reason to keep fighting. YOU are showing the enemy that we do not have the will to win. So when there is an up-tick in violence prior to the 2008 elections, keep in mind that your failure to truly support the troops is responsible. The enemy is certain that you will show your gutless stripes and elect someone who will give them the victory you are denying your own troops.

The Iraq War

Let’s see, was it worth it? Oh, I’m talking about the current war. It's a relevant question for me because I may be over there again in a few weeks. (My other option is Afghanistan.) There are those who continue to undermine the war effort with pacifist drivel. By worth, we have to be talking geopolitical worth.

For those who think we should not have removed Saddam, consider these facts. His regime was directly responsible for 500,000 - 1,000,000 Iranian deaths plus almost 1,000,000 of his own people during the Iran-Iraq war.

One of over 500 identified mass graves in Iraq from the Saddam era.
This one contained over 1,000 bodies.

To this add 500,000 - 1,000,000 deaths due to programs to wipe out the Marsh Arabs, Shiites, Kurds and anyone else in opposition to his regime. To date we have found over 500 mass graves throughout Iraq containing an estimated 300,000 – 500,000 Iraqi men, women, and children. It will take years to survey them all.

So the Saddam regime is responsible for 1,000,000 – 2,000,000 Iraqi deaths, plus at least 500,000 Iranian deaths. Ok, maybe not in the same league with Hitler and Stalin, but probably in the top ten modern era.

Child victims of the gas attack on Halabja, Iraq March 1988

None of this even takes into consideration arguments about WMD. You can argue if you will, that we haven’t found them, but you can’t argue that he never had them. 15 – 19 March 1988, his regime used sarin, tabun, VX (nerve agents), blood agents and mustard gas against Kurdish civilians in Halabja, Iraq killing 3,500 – 5,000 immediately. Another 30,000 died later. Keep in mind that this was a directed, deliberate attack on unarmed civilians.

Pacifist handwringing and U.N. resolutions did nothing to prevent any of this. Nor did it bring Saddam to justice.

At the time of 9/11, virtually every pundit and analyst predicted that a wave of terrorist attacks was imminent. Almost seven years have passed and we are still waiting. Why? Because the terrorists are on the run everywhere. Why? Because we are hunting them down and killing them everywhere. The U.S. invaded Iraq in March 2003. Pacifist pundits predicted that terrorists would soon attack in retaliation. Five years later, nothing here…nothing against a U.S. target.

Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo and the Iraq war are creating a “new generation of terrorists” the pacifist left says. In 1993 we had the first World Trade Center bombing. In 1998 there were simultaneous bombings at two U.S. Embassies in East Africa. In 2000 the USS Cole was damaged in suicide boat attack. In 2001 we had the events of 9/11. All of this occurred prior to the Iraq War, Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo – eight years, five major terrorist attacks. Since the war – seven years, no major terrorist attacks.

Another result of the Iraq War has been the turn-around of Libya. In September 2003 on the anniversary of 9/11, the Libyans finally came to agreement on settling with the families of the Lockerbie bombing victims. After which, the UN lifted sanctions. At the same time, Libya renounced and dismantled their WMD programs and allowed for UN inspectors to verify and certify that those programs were dismantled. Libya allowed the type of unfettered access to inspectors that we never saw from Saddam. Seems Gadhafi figured a resurgent U.S. was no longer to be messed with. And gee, it has worked out pretty good for both sides. He is selling us oil again.

In geopolitical terms, you have to answer the initial question with a resounding YES!