Go Down Surrendering
“Losing hurts more than winning feels good.” Christopher J. Fettweis of the U.S. Naval War College is clearly on the side that lately, is accustomed to losing, all about the losing and eager to lose more. But if it hurts so bad, not sure what the rush is to lose more.  Â
The secret to understanding in Fettweis’ upchuck of an LA Times op-ed piece, “Post-Traumatic Iraq Syndrome,” is that he doesn’t think winning feels good enough to make it worth not losing. I think. That’s all I get out of this that makes any sense.
I guess my other big question is, what is a surrender enthusiast of this sort teaching at the U.S. Naval War College?Â
The endgame in Iraq is now clear, in outline if not detail, and it appears that the heavily favored United States will be upset. Once support for a war is lost, it is gone for good; there is no example of a modern democracy having changed its mind once it turned against a war. So we ought to start coming to grips with the meaning of losing in Iraq.
Encouraging acceptance of a defeat that not only hasn’t happened yet, but doesn’t have to happen, doesn’t seem to be a very desireable lesson plan for U.S. military commanders.
Meanwhile, same show, different episode: watch the fun as Bryan at Hotair ignites the petard Al Gore is sitting on. From back when he was the Blue pitbull the Dems sicced on a Bush.Â
Posted by Jules Crittenden at 11:26 pm on Tuesday, June 12, 2007
6 Responses to “Go Down Surrendering”
Leave a Reply
Trackback URLYou must be logged in to post a comment.
June 13th, 2007 at 8:10 am
Jules,
In his commentary, Professor Fettweis states that “when Saigon fell, no dominoes followed…” Is he delusional?
What about the almost immediate fall of Laos to the communists? What about the bloodbath of historical dimensions in Cambodia led by Pol Pot and his cutthroats? What about the communist insurgencies that continued to burgeon and fester well into the 1980s in both Thailand and Malaysia before finally being defeated? What about the Thai government almost immediately expelling US forces from its air and naval bases in the wake of the fall of South Vietnam?
We and our allies may experience the same frustrations if we precipitously pull out of Iraq.
Greetings. I have been reading your wonderful blog for some time, but finally have been moved to comment directly. I followed in the wake of your and 3ID’s advance in Iraq with OIF 1 while serving with a V Corps unit. Your posts on those days have brought back lots of memories. BTW, I am pretty certain that we were both students at ISB in Bangkok at the same time.
June 13th, 2007 at 10:01 am
I guess my other big question is, what is a surrender enthusiast of this sort teaching at the U.S. Naval War College?
Either he’s kept around as an example of idiocy (some sort of balance, I suppose), or removing him from Federal employment is harder than booting Ward Churchill.
June 13th, 2007 at 12:35 pm
Web Reconnaissance for 06/13/2007
A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:48 pm
Either way, the Iraq syndrome is coming. We need to be prepared for the divisiveness, vitriol, self-doubt and recrimination that will be its symptoms. They will be the defining legacy of the Bush administration and neoconservatism’s parting gift to America.
So, after all that, it’s really all about BDS.
June 13th, 2007 at 3:31 pm
Either way, the Iraq syndrome is coming. We need to be prepared to the divisiveness, vitriol, self-doubt and recrimination that will be its symptoms. They will be the defining legacy of the Bush administration and neoconservatism’s parting gift to America.
No. It is the defining legacy of losing the war in Viet Nam and the lessons not learned from what was a national defeat, not a military one. It is the defining legacy of the kind of thinking exhibited in the teaching of men like this professor. It is the defining legacy of the rejection of reason and the Enlightenment. It is the defining legacy of embracing the philosophy of Just War theory, with its proportionality and willingness to sacrifice our own people in the attempt to infuse altruism into war (the result of attempting to spare civilians has been the slaughter of civilians by the enemy). Note that the professor does not question the ideas that brought us to this point–many of which are his own. He never questions his premises.
Bush isn’t blameless, but the President of the United States is not a dictator. When I ask myself what happened to the Bush Doctrine, I find the answer at Foggy Bottom, among the upper echelons at the Defense Department, in the traitorous personal politics ruling the CIA and other intelligence institutions, in Congress–among both parties, in the media, and especially among the professorate in our institutions of higher learning. In other words, the blame lies in the whole rotten philosophy that has been ruling this country for far too long; the complaint is that no one can make it work.
June 13th, 2007 at 8:08 pm
Sniveling degenerates have been showing up all over the military education system.
We have a new generation of majors and Lt colonels coming up through the ranks that will replace all these peace time professional bureaucrat generals as they go out to pasture.
Before this long war is over, we’ll see more than a few of those academics in the military system that were either leftist devotees to being with, or became compromised by the bullshit leftist propaganda over the years, get handed their walking papers.
Be ready for “insiders” talking crap and pronouncing that “democracy has died” when this happens. Our modern traitors are such drama queens, that way.