“This may become the first time in the history of the United States Congress that it has voted to send a new commander into battle and then voted to oppose his plan that is necessary to succeed in that battle,” the president said.
-George W. Bush
The Democratically controlled Congress is doing all it can to ensure we lose this war. Why don’t they just come out and admit it? They want us to lose because it keeps them in power. Despite some Democrats calling for a troop increase within the last year, Dems are now opposed to this plan. The war is not going well, yet sending in a stronger force and changing the strategy is not a viable option. So what are their alternatives?
- Troop withdrawal (cut and run)? We lose.
- Cut off funding for the war? We lose and our troops are endangered.
- Keep troop levels the same and don’t fund the troop surge? This is the most likely and most baffling scenario. How can we support keeping troop levels the same when it is clearly not working?
- The latest Dem strategy is called the “slow bleed” headed by the disgraceful John Murtha.
Led by Rep. John P. Murtha, D-Pa., and supported by several well-funded anti-war groups, the coalition’s goal is to limit or sharply reduce the number of U.S. troops available for the Iraq conflict, rather than to openly cut off funding for the war itself.
The correct strategy is not to give up, and it is not a modest troop surge. We should have an overwhelming troop surge with no restrictions in battle. The correct strategy is to follow the Powell Doctrine and take the gloves off our troops.
When a nation is engaging in war, every resource and tool should be used to achieve overwhelming force against the enemy, minimizing US casualties and ending the conflict quickly by forcing the weaker force to capitulate.
This is clearly not happening. The enemy deserves no mercy.
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds
BlogoSquare