[Vision2020] Tet Offensive

[Sunil Ramalingam]

Wow, Tony, you're quite a piece of work.  You accuse me of failing to engage 
in fair-minded dialog even as you change the topic.

No Tony, the original question was not 'whether devastating military force 
is a viable option in defeating a very dangerous adversary.'  I don't 
disagree with that when it's being used on military forces, not on 
civilians, and especially when our adversary has started the war, as Japan 
or Nazi Germany did.  But that was never the point in this discussion, and 
Iraq didn't start this war.

The original question is 'How do you define victory in Iraq?'  I ask this 
because my point is that when you use devastating force at the same time you 
claim to be trying to win hearts and minds, you will fail to accomplish the 
latter.

Japan comes up because you and Pat bring it up.  Pat keeps saying that 
because we succeeded in Japan we can do so in Iraq, and I think that's a 
false comparison and entirely barren of the truth.

You ask, ' But why do you see no merit whatsoever in this administration's 
efforts to free this viciously oppressed population?'

I don't think we went to Iraq to free the Iraqi people.  That was not the 
Administration's reason for asking for authority to attack Iraq.  If you are 
interested in honest dialog you will have to concede this point.  
Humanitarian rationales were tossed in like the parsley garnish on the side 
of last night's dinner plate.

No, the reason for the war was because Iraq was supposed to be an imminent 
threat because they had WMD.  Not WMD programs, or the ability to resurrect 
such programs, but because they had such weapons.  And even when the 
inspectors who were on site said they could find nothing, Bush went ahead 
with the war.

The Administration has been changing war rationales ever since, giving one 
story after another, all the while building massive permanent bases in Iraq. 
  When someone repeatedly changes their story, I say to myself, 'He's 
lying.'  And that's what they're doing here - lying. Why are we building 
those bases, Tony?  If we're trying to free them, why do we need a massive 
long-term presence there?  Why do we need the biggest embassy we've ever 
built anywhere?  If Clinton had changed his story this way, both of us would 
be able to spot him lying.

'And why have you so little patience for those who would support our 
leadership in that objective?'

Because people are dying.  Because this idiot plan is not going to work, and 
they're going to keep dying.  And  'those who would support our leadership 
in that objective' cannot point to a single place in the Middle East where a 
plan like this has worked.  Do you think your blind faith in an unproven 
theory is a good enough reason to ask someone else to die?

Sunil


>From: "Tony" <tonytime at clearwire.net>
>To: "Sunil Ramalingam" <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com>
>CC: <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Tet Offensive
>Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 14:01:49 -0800
>
>Sunil, It is more likely that Pat and I simply disagree with the point you 
>are making than that we are ignorant of it altogether.  We are as aware as 
>you of the bitterly divided nature of Iraq's population.  But remember, 
>Sunil, the original question that gave birth to the historical example of 
>Japan was whether devastating military force is a viable option in 
>defeating a very dangerous adversary.  Clearly in the case of Imperial 
>Japan, it WAS. For you to refuse to acknowledge that historical reality is 
>to fail to engage in a fair-minded dialog.  Of course, because of the 
>divisive nature of Iraqi culture, any solution, military or otherwise, is 
>clearly going to be a greater challenge.  But why do you see no merit 
>whatsoever in this administration's efforts to free this viciously 
>oppressed population?  And why have you so little patience for those who 
>would support our leadership in that objective?
>
>Curious,    -T