From The American Thinker:
I think that the root cause of the popularity for "awfulizing" the Hizballah War is depression: many people are depressed that after 5 years we have not yet vaquished the enemy.
These wobbly defeatists - on the Left AND the Right - need to be reminded that this war - the GWOT - will be a war as least as long as the Cold War, and not as short as WW2. Pulling out now would be premature evacuation, and prematurely evacuating now - as we did in Somalia and Cuba and Korea and Vietnam, and as the Democrat doves would like to do in Iraq - is not the answer.
Look at the Hizballah War this way: it's as if Israel was a champion boxer who - in the sixth round of a 12 round contest - had the scrappy dirty whinning challenger, Hizballah, badly bloodied and on the ropes. And just before Israel can deliver a knockout blow, the ref stops the fight. Before either the knockout blow could've been thrown and before Hizballah had thrown in their towel. The fight's over but not the feud. And because no one will disarm Hizabllah and they won't disarm voluntarily, there will be a rematch. And the next time these two fighters get in the ring, there will be no ref.
BOTTOM-LINE: We must never give in. Never, never, never, never. Never.
The psychologist Albert Ellis ... realized that depressed people have a habit of “awfulizing”—- interpreting small setbacks as catastrophes. Ellis demonstrated that depressed people could learn to re-think their tendency to awfulize. He taught them to tell themselves, “This is a pain in the A**, not a catastrophe.” Ellis made up the word “awfulizing” or “catastrophizing” to talk about this self-destructive mental habit.It's a good short essay which puts the hand-wringers and defeatists - sadly, this time including many on the Right - in their place. In every rational and objective measure the IDF beat Hizballah. Israel was only prevented from inflicting a coup de grace - FOR THE TIME BEING.
The outcome of the Hezbo War is a pain in the anatomy but not a catastrophe.
I think that the root cause of the popularity for "awfulizing" the Hizballah War is depression: many people are depressed that after 5 years we have not yet vaquished the enemy.
These wobbly defeatists - on the Left AND the Right - need to be reminded that this war - the GWOT - will be a war as least as long as the Cold War, and not as short as WW2. Pulling out now would be premature evacuation, and prematurely evacuating now - as we did in Somalia and Cuba and Korea and Vietnam, and as the Democrat doves would like to do in Iraq - is not the answer.
Look at the Hizballah War this way: it's as if Israel was a champion boxer who - in the sixth round of a 12 round contest - had the scrappy dirty whinning challenger, Hizballah, badly bloodied and on the ropes. And just before Israel can deliver a knockout blow, the ref stops the fight. Before either the knockout blow could've been thrown and before Hizballah had thrown in their towel. The fight's over but not the feud. And because no one will disarm Hizabllah and they won't disarm voluntarily, there will be a rematch. And the next time these two fighters get in the ring, there will be no ref.
BOTTOM-LINE: We must never give in. Never, never, never, never. Never.
11 comments:
Yes. I am so with you here. Thank you for saying it, and saying it well.
If that is true then why was so much emphasis place killing Bin Laden and toppling Saddam if they thought this war was going to last for decades.
Basically Bush implied that if we did these two things the GWOT would be won quickly and without much bloodshed. Of course that was another mirage (read LIE) inflicted on a traumatized American public.
BTW what ever happened to getting Bin Laden?
You're more right than you know, inasmuch as it's Hezbollah (read: Iran) and not the U.S. and Israel that are funding the reconstruction of southern Lebanon and thereby winning whatever hearts and minds aren't already leaning their way.
A couple points here:
1. one rational and objective measure would be to see which of Israel's original goals were accomplished...oh, right. none of them. Part of the problem here is that Israel's definition of victory (i.e. getting their demands met and destroying hezbollah) set the bar high enough that all hezbollah had to do to 'win' was survive.
2. We left korea and vietnam early? That's why we lost? korea and vietnam together cost us 85,000 dead american troops...you would have sent more to die? That seems incredibly irresponsible to me. You might want to bring up those wars to illustrate the relative low cost of the iraq debacle...but to argue that we should have stayed in those wars is to ignore the lessons of those wars completely.
Even if it is a question of national willpower, not military might, it's no excuse. we live in a democracy, and any leader that starts a war in a democracy had better be damn sure that the war is short and sweet or the citizenship sees the war as vitally important and necessary. Starting a war that we won't have the will to finish is just as irresponsible. And the people are not stupid cowards unwilling to fight...you just have to give them a better reason than "we're fightin em over there so they won't fight us here" (flypaper theory - disproven by madrid and london bombings, but whatever)
So we shouldn't pull out? Shouldn't give up?
We should keep up the loss of ~13 casulaties a day (just in Iraq) to accomplish what, exactly?
For what purpose should this continue. The prime minister of Iraq wants us out. The US public wants us out. The Iraqi people want us out. So we should stay, just because you have an infantile understanding of history, and completely lack any understanding of the world? Right.
Our occupation of Iraq is a huge liability in GWOT. That can be proven at many levels. But never mind that--we should just stay.
That makes a LOT of sense. Take two of these, and call me in the morning.
Lately, I have been saying we have "failed" in Iraq, because I know no longer believe that Iraq will be a human rights respecting democracy as a result of the actions we have taken.
That was, to me, the most important thing we were trying to accomplish.
Now, I recognize that there is strategic value in the fact that we have Iraq and Afghanistan as bases. We basically have Iran surrounded, and if we do what we need to do, that will be of utmost importance.
But, the idea was that we would start a domino effect of Democratization in the islamic world. the theory was that Democracy would not attack us, and this would be the way to eliminate, or at least greatly reduce terrorism.
i can't see that that is going to happen as the result of the war as we have fought it, nor of the peace as we have made it.
It is profoundly depressing to think these thoughts. But, the thing is, you are lying to yourself if you do not face facts.
If anyone can talk me out of these conclusions, i would feel profoundly indebted. But, it would require real fact-based arguments.
Reliapundit, why do you think Iraq is on its way to being a real human rights respecting democracy? Is it possible for an Iraqi citizen to convert to Christianity?
By the way, i know you are primarily referring to the reactions to the Hizbollah war, but i bring in Iraq, because I think most of us who are as upset as we are, are so because of the cumulative effect of watching our civilization give in over and over and over to the will of Islamofascists.
We are failing on Iran. We are failing on Syria. We are failing on Hizbollah. We are failing on Iraq and afghanistan. We are allowing ever more Islamic students in to the US to study. We are still mired in the whold "War on Terror" meme and bush has not used the phrase "Islamofascists" again since Saudi Arabia warned him. we are putting up with Pakistan telling us they can't find Bin Laden. we are putting up with Sudan telling us they can't control the Janjaweed. we are putting up with somalia telling us they are now a Sharia state. We are putting up with Russia and china using the Iranian nuclear ambitions as a proxy attack on the United States. We are putting up with France promising thousand of troops and delivreing 200.
Look, I could go on.
find me a effing victory in here somewhere.
PASTO U R "AWFULIZING." THAT'S WHY U R DEPRESSED.
DEMOCRATIZATION IS A PROCESS NOT AN EVENT.
IRAQIS ARE BETTER OFF.
FREETHINKER:
2 - by abandoning cubans in 1962 and south vietnamese in 1975 and by bailing out of the war in the korean peninsula (BUT AT LEAST WE KEPT TROOPS THER, UNLIKE SOUTH VIETNAM) we strengthened the enemy and condemned millions of our brithers and sisters - cubans, vietnames and notrth koreans - to slavery under socialist tyranny.
1.5 MILLIONS boat people fled vietnam. 65 MILLIN were trapped.
nobody riskes their lives on dinghy to get into cuba.
noko is the worst hell on earth. now that the talkiban and saddam are gone. "tho the socialist mugabe is giving kimjonil a run for his money!)
so i feel that we did not do the right thing in these cases.
lookit FT: we lost 450,000 citizens in WW2, mosty after D-Day and even after the Battle of the Bulge.
war sucks. but ya gotta fight until you vanquish the enemy.
israel coulda and they were prevented from doing so. nevertheless they did do more damage to hzb than hizb did to israel.
hizb wanted/needed the ceasefire.
and i agree: we live in a democracy and if the people vote in the appeasing dove/dems, then they can and will appease the enemy and abandon our allies: the nascent democracies of afghanistan and iraq and lebabnon and even israel.
from ahistyorical perpective appeasement has never worked: it only delays the inevitable and makes it worse.
appeasement never made or kept the peace. winning wars does.
thanks for reading and commenting!
So, we have a cease-fire in the Israel / Hezbollah thing. While watching the evening news these last few days, I learned that the Bush Administration has allocated something like $50 million in aid to Lebanon to help with the obvious humanitarian crisis that now exists there. No problem there.
However, the average Habeeb on the street in Lebanon doesn't see million of dollars being transferred from the US Treasury to the Lebanese government or other aid agencies. What they are seeing, though, is Hezbollah front and center with bulldozers, dumptrucks, food and housing assistance. Hezbollah is responding quicker to the crisis in southern Lebanon than FEMA responded to the crisis in New Orleans.
If the future of America's efforts to promote democracy and human rights in the Middle East hinges largely upon winning the hearts and minds of the citizens of Middle Eastern countries, then where the hell is America in all of this? I don't mean to downplay the cash assistance offered by the Bush Administration, but it seems to me that if Bush was really forward-thinking, he would have had a disater releif team ready to go the instant hostilites ended. If the Lebanese were to see Americans (not volunteer or NGO types, but the US Army or other obvious agents of the American government) helping to clear rubble and rebuild roads and bridges or hand out food or provde temporary housing, even on a small scale, that would send a message to the local population that America really is interested in promoting a positive future for those people and that would send a message that a wire transfer from our treasury to a Lebanese bank could never accomplish.
I think Bush missed a real opportunity here.
RODERICK:
http://www.time.com/time/columnist/waller/article/0,9565,176290,00.html
Web Exclusive | TIME MAGAZINE
Bush Prepares the Generals for a Long War
At a high-level Pentagon meeting the President asks for help for Army reservists — and their employers
Posted Tuesday, Sep. 25, 2001
Wars are easy to start. But they can be difficult to sustain. George W. Bush understands this, and so has been furiously managing expectations, pressing the case with almost everyone he talks to that this will be a long war against terrorism. Even his generals are getting the pitch.
_____________________________
Roderick, that was just weeks after 9/11 that Bush was prom ising a LONG WAR agauinst terrorism.
SO: STFU.
BTW: he said the same thing in his MISSION ACCOMPLISHED SPPECH:
We have difficult work to do in Iraq. We are bringing order to parts of that country that remain dangerous. We are pursuing and finding leaders of the old regime, who will be held to account for their crimes. We have begun the search for hidden chemical and biological weapons, and already know of hundreds of sites that will be investigated. We are helping to rebuild Iraq, where the dictator built palaces for himself, instead of hospitals and schools. And we will stand with the new leaders of Iraq as they establish a government of, by, and for the Iraqi people. The transition from dictatorship to democracy will take time, but it is worth every effort. Our coalition will stay until our work is done. And then we will leave — and we will leave behind a free Iraq.
The Battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September the 11th, 2001, and still goes on. That terrible morning, 19 evil men — the shock troops of a hateful ideology — gave America and the civilized world a glimpse of their ambitions. They imagined, in the words of one terrorist, that September the 11th would be the "beginning of the end of America." By seeking to turn our cities into killing fields, terrorists and their allies believed that they could destroy this nation's resolve, and force our retreat from the world. They have failed.
In the Battle of Afghanistan, we destroyed the Taliban, many terrorists, and the camps where they trained. We continue to help the Afghan people lay roads, restore hospitals, and educate all of their children. Yet we also have dangerous work to complete. As I speak, a special operations task force, led by the 82nd Airborne, is on the trail of the terrorists, and those who seek to undermine the free government of Afghanistan. America and our coalition will finish what we have begun.
From Pakistan to the Philippines to the Horn of Africa, we are hunting down al-Qaida killers. Nineteen months ago, I pledged that the terrorists would not escape the patient justice of the United States. And as of tonight, nearly one-half of al-Qaida's senior operatives have been captured or killed.
The liberation of Iraq is a crucial advance in the campaign against terror. We have removed an ally of al-Qaida, and cut off a source of terrorist funding. And this much is certain: No terrorist network will gain weapons of mass destruction from the Iraqi regime, because the regime is no more.
In these 19 months that changed the world, our actions have been focused, and deliberate, and proportionate to the offense. We have not forgotten the victims of September the 11th — the last phone calls, the cold murder of children, the searches in the rubble. With those attacks, the terrorists and their supporters declared war on the United States. And war is what they got.
Our war against terror is proceeding according to principles that I have made clear to all:
Any person involved in committing or planning terrorist attacks against the American people becomes an enemy of this country, and a target of American justice.
Any person, organization, or government that supports, protects, or harbors terrorists is complicit in the murder of the innocent, and equally guilty of terrorist crimes.
Any outlaw regime that has ties to terrorist groups, and seeks or possesses weapons of mass destruction, is a grave danger to the civilized world, and will be confronted.
And anyone in the world, including the Arab world, who works and sacrifices for freedom has a loyal friend in the United States of America.
Our commitment to liberty is America's tradition — declared at our founding, affirmed in Franklin Roosevelt's Four Freedoms, asserted in the Truman Doctrine, and in Ronald Reagan's challenge to an evil empire. We are committed to freedom in Afghanistan, in Iraq, and in a peaceful Palestine. The advance of freedom is the surest strategy to undermine the appeal of terror in the world. Where freedom takes hold, hatred gives way to hope. When freedom takes hold, men and women turn to the peaceful pursuit of a better life. American values, and American interests, lead in the same direction: We stand for human liberty.
The United States upholds these principles of security and freedom in many ways — with all the tools of diplomacy, law enforcement, intelligence, and finance. We are working with a broad coalition of nations that understand the threat, and our shared responsibility to meet it. The use of force has been, and remains, our last resort. Yet all can know, friend and foe alike, that our nation has a mission: We will answer threats to our security, and we will defend the peace.
Our mission continues. Al-Qaida is wounded, not destroyed. The scattered cells of the terrorist network still operate in many nations, and we know from daily intelligence that they continue to plot against free people. The proliferation of deadly weapons remains a serious danger. The enemies of freedom are not idle, and neither are we. Our government has taken unprecedented measures to defend the homeland — and we will continue to hunt down the enemy before he can strike.
The war on terror is not over, yet it is not endless. We do not know the day of final victory, but we have seen the turning of the tide. No act of the terrorists will change our purpose, or weaken our resolve, or alter their fate. Their cause is lost. Free nations will press on to victory.
RTWT you moron:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/05/01/iraq/main551946.shtml
Post a Comment