« Crime Wave Strikes Rumford, Maine! | Main | NYT: "Dozens of fighters retreated to a checkpoint around 12 miles north of Ajdabiya..." »
March 21, 2011
Why bother?
You know, ever since we stopped short of Baghdad in 1991, the political attitude toward military operations is "winning is not an option." -- Daily scoreboard « Don SurberPosted by Vanderleun at March 21, 2011 7:03 PM. This is an entry on the sideblog of American Digest: Check it out.
Your Say
Never limit your options in war.
Take advantage of any opportunity that arises to knock your enemy permanently out of the fray.
There's no such thing as a limited war.
The pursuit of victory is the only exit strategy.
Posted by: Alan Kellogg at March 22, 2011 12:15 AM
You really owe it to yourself to check out the articles from The Objective Standard, but especially the ones on war and foreign policy.
http://www.theobjectivestandard.com/topics/foreign-policy-war.asp
and most especially this article below.
http://www.theobjectivestandard.com/issues/2006-winter/no-substitute-for-victory.asp
Read it and then ask what do you call politicians that won't defend America, liberal and conservative. The most humane war is a swift, decisive one that resolves the reasons for the war in the first place. Victory is imperative, even for the enemy. The Confederacy was served well by being decisively defeated by Union forces. We have weak and stupid men making weak and stupid decisions.
Posted by: Scott M at March 22, 2011 2:53 AM
"Winning is not an option" is a slogan for people uninterested in keeping their heads upon their shoulders.
Which is fine with me for I intend to have them in front of me in any battle; they will not be allowed to retreat. Excellent berms they provide; impervious to small arms fire.
Posted by: Peccable at March 22, 2011 3:21 PM