I meant to say that
Patton over at Opinion8 grudgingly links to an essay by Stephen Green, the VodkaPundit. But it's well worth the pain, my friend, because this one is really good.
Green discusses the future for the war on terror, and makes some really good points.
If you think war has become complex, peace is messier still and always has been.
Nobody ever knows what the peace will look like. Let's use our examples from earlier. Even as late as Appomattox, who could have predicted the KKK, Jim Crow, or Radical Reconstruction? No statesmen in 1914 knew that the war they were about to unleash would result in 20 million deaths, Russian Communism, or Nazi Germany. World War II? If you can find me the words of some prophet detailing, in 1940, the UN, the Cold War, or even the complete assimilation of western Germany into Western Europe. . . then I'll print this essay on some very heavy paper, and eat it. With aluminum foil as a garnish.
NOTE: That's what gets me about all the complaints that President Bush "didn't have a plan" to "win the peace" in Iraq. Oh, blow me. Nobody ever has a plan for the peace. Or if they do, it will prove useless. "No peace plan survives the last battle" is the VodkaPundit corollary to Clausewitz's dictum that no battle plan survives first contact with the enemy.
By now, you probably know where I'm going with this little history lesson: How do we define victory in the Terror War, and what will the peace look like.
Let's get the second part out of the way first.
What will the peace look like? I don't have a damn clue. And neither do you. And if you meet anyone who claims to know, feel free to laugh at them really hard. So hard, you get a little spit on their face. Sometimes, justice can be small and spiteful ask a meter maid. Anyway.
This is spot on. Ditto.
What we're fighting is an ideology.
First off, let's brush aside the Loser Notion that if we kill terrorists, we'll only breed more terrorists. So what? Every dead terrorist is, well, dead. And we can always build more bombs and make more bullets. For 30 years now, the US Army has trained to fight in a "target-rich environment." Bring'em on.
Now that we have defeatism out of the way, let's get on with defeating the enemy. "But the enemy is an ideology," you've been told, "and you can't fight thoughts with bullets."
Yes and no.
Some people forget (because they backed/worshipped/served-as-useful-idiots-to the other side) that we have fought an ideology before, and we won. The Cold War was, above all else, an ideological conflict. It was the Great Civil War of Western Civilization. On the one side, you had Western Capitalism, and on the other, International Communism. Obviously, things weren't that cut and dried. The US certainly doesn't (to my constant dismay) enjoy a laissez-faire economy, and the European NATO countries even less so. And despite a totalitarian regime, even the Soviet Union tolerated a little samizdat capitalism. Nevertheless, with the exception of France, countries took sides and stayed there.
Which socio-political system was left standing after 45 years of conflict? Oh yeah, baby despite what you hear on American campuses, the West won. We won completely. We knocked their dicks in the dirt. The bad guys gave up, in the end, without even firing a shot like Saddam Hussein in his hidey-hole.
Go read the whole thing, it's worth your while.
§ 2 Comments
[ You're too late, comments are closed ]


I don't agree with everything
I don't agree with everything he said, but I wouldn't defenestrate him, either.
There's a difference between "not planning for the peace because the VodkaPundit Corollary applies" and "not planning for the peace because who fucking cares about the peace," and from what I can see, the neocon mindset favors the latter. Which is why they're douchbags. Kissinger and Macnamara must be running a school somewhere.
Grudging link? Hardly.
Grudging link? Hardly.
I was just trying to provide cover for having linked an article containing the imperative "Oh, blow me".
More importantly, I'm foolish enough not to believe that the peace wasn't planned for (intentionally or otherwise), but instead that such plans always tend to look a bit shoddy, even in near retrospect.
And the only way to truly avoid that would have been unacceptable - a whole lotta people would be dead who are not presently.
(I'm presently crafting a strategy to link to the very post on which I'm commenting, because after "Oh, blow me", my second to-do list item was an article containing "defenestration".)