Donate to Ace of Spades HQ!
Top Headlines
President of the American Vaping Association is a fan of the ONT and Misanthropic Humanitarian
Well, he's a fan of the ONT quoting him. Still -- I think that's something!
Can we start quoting Demi Rose, fellas? AIM HIGHER
Get the fainting couch for Little Benny Shapiro!
Oh wait, don't bother getting it; he's not troubled by this at all, strangely enough
Thanks to Deep State is in Deep Shit
169 127 Ilhan Omar loves this country so much that as soon as she got here she wanted to experience the rich cultural heritage of West Virginia by marrying a relative. None of you love America enough to do that!!
Posted by: Broseidon - New Work Computer, Same Work Ethic
Justice on Trial is the #1 bestseller in the country, per Publisher Weekly's not-cooked list
Jonah Goldberg said a week ago that if he "heard" of Mollie Hemingway's book, he'd recommend it, maybe. Maybe ask him if he's heard of it now.
465 Thank god these people no longer influence anything except each other.
Posted by: William Eaton

484 The really funny part of all of this is that of course none of this cuck performance art will ever buy them entry into the exclusive clubs of the Left.

Jonah Goldberg bewailed the chant, and his next 8,000 Twitter replies were liberals saying it was his fault because he wrote "Liberal Fascism" and the title hurt their feewings.

Posted by: Ian S.
Wes Pruden, Washington Times editor and columnist, dies at 83
Thanks to "Ha" for alerting me. (And no, that's not any kind of insult to Pruden; "Ha" is the name he always goes by. A bit awkward in this context but it is just his screen-name.)
LOL reply to the sanctimonious David French, bewailing the country's divisions: "O! Why is the country so divided!?" shrieked the Russia Truther.
Liberal atheist AllahPundit just can't stop attacking Christians
It's "racist" to attack any group you don't belong to, but the liberal atheist AllahPundit attacks conservative Christians, accusing them of Godcrime, four or five times per week
It's also cool that he's quoting Real TruCon Conservatives like MSNBC flunky Michael Steele, too
It's like AllahPundit is saying Christians aren't real Americans and should go back to their own countries, except he says it 5 days a week
The Washington Monument "For three nights, July 16, 17 and 18 -- the Smithsonian's National Air and Space Museum will project the rocket's image onto the east face of the monument." [CBD]
I'm avoiding the full pile on, because I understand this person is nice and personally loyal, but a Leading NeverTrumper and Fusion GPS conspiracy theory promoter just tweeted, about Stevens' death: Man, the confirmation hearings over John Paul Stevens' replacement is going to be pure fire!
This wouldn't be such a big deal except we keep being told by this crew that they're the Smart Ones who Really Understand Politics. In fact, they're almost all unaccomplished and a bit dim. They mistake "Famous among a tiny subculture addicted to Twitter" for actually famous. Or actually accomplished.
A friend cracks: "Maybe she got this wrong because she was reading from Fusion GPS' dossier on Stevens."
You know, people involved in writing and communications might want to consider that Twitter Is Not Their Friend. It encourages lazy writing and thoughtless #HotTakes. Why bother checking to see the last decade that Stevens worked as a justice when precious seconds for getting in your #EarlyHotTake are slipping away!
Really Super-Forgotten 80s Mystery Click
Hint: it's King Creole and the Coconuts doing "My Male Curiosity"
Let's face it, you weren't going to get it anyway
Here's a topic: Can you think of bands that seemed to get a lot of promotion in movies and tv but didn't go anywhere? I seem to remember David Johannson (especially in his "Buster Poindexter" persona/act) getting a lot of tv/movie push and not being very good; Oingo Boingo too. (Danny Elfman eventually made it as a composer, but not as a rocknroll front man.)
Recent Entries
Swave And De-Boner ONT
Is This Something?
Matt Peterson: It's Time to Get Serious and Get Woke
The Federalist: Democrats Called for Seb Gorka to Be Deported Over Sham Twitter-Based Claims, and Jerry Nadler Even Opened an Investigation Seeking to Deport Him, and the Media Cheered
David Steinberg: Real Reporters Like Myself Knew About Ilhan Omar Three Years Ago and Even Sent Our Information to the Media.
The Media Chose to Bury It and Lie To You.
Before Finally Claiming It Was Their Own "Exclusive."

New York Times: Google and FaceBook Are Tracking Your Every Click on Pornographic Websites
Woman Suffers Stroke Due to Orgasm Brought on By Sexually-Skilled Lover
Powerline/David Steinberg: Case Closed -- Omar Ilhan, Born Omar Elmi, Married Her Brother For Purposes of Immigration Fraud
This Is Not Who We Are: A Soy Odyssey
Damn Those Glorious, Yet Sexist, Men For Being the First Into Space and on the Moon
Recent Comments
rickl: "[i]Meanwhile at the Chik-fil-A in Nashville... [/ ..." [view]

bluebell: ""Mom, Daddy said 'f**k' isn't a bad word." Muc ..." [view]

Pug Mahon: "Everyone dies one day. Everyone. Even wolves. But ..." [view]

ThePrimordialOrderedPair: "[i]"The 2.6 million is the rock bottom estimate. T ..." [view]

LeftCoast Dawg: "14 Lucky 13 Posted by: Drink Like Vikings at July ..." [view]

Alberta Oil Peon: "I wasn't able to view the pics of your woodwork, W ..." [view]

klaftern: "I invented Chik-fil-Eh when I was 6. In Canada. ..." [view]

Tonypete: "Little kids being funny? You know what four yo ..." [view]

junior: "@518 But are women allowed to engage what one woul ..." [view]

Moron Robbie - New AIDS cases in '99 = 40K/yr. New HIV cases each year since? Take a guess[/b] [/i]: "I'm not trying to be a PITA, either, I'm just wond ..." [view]

Jim[/i][/b][/s][/u]: "Books don't die. e-Books lie. Jim Sunk ..." [view]

bluebell: "Love that last pic. Well done, Alex. ..." [view]

eleven: "sock off ..." [view]

Aetius451AD Work Laptop: "It was like traveling to Nice USA instead of Shi** ..." [view]

Nostrafreakindamus: "But I knew that it would be. ..." [view]


Bloggers in Arms

Talk Of The Town with Steve Noxon
American Digest
The Anchoress
Belmont Club
Betsy's Page
The Bitch Girls
Blackfive, Paratrooper of Love
Blonde Sagacity
California Conservative
Chicago Boyz
Classical Values
Cold Fury
The Country Store
Cowboy Blob
Cranky Neocon
Da Goddess
Daily Lunch
Daily Pundit
The Daily Recycler (Vidblog)*
Daleks Weblog
Daly Thoughts
Ilyka Damen
Damn the Man
Dave Munger
Dave's Not Here
Dawn Eden
Day by Day (Cartoon)
Demure Thoughts
Enter Stage Right
Eternity Road
Dean Esmay
The Fat Guy
File It Under
Ghost of a Flea
Grim's Hall
Hell in a Handbasket
Victor Davis Hanson
Hugh Hewitt
The House of Payne
JamieR (Classics)
Just One Minute
Le Sabot Post-Moderne
Lileks/The Bleat
Likelihood of Confusion Law Blog
Michelle Malkin
Memeorandum (Metablog) Mind of Mog
My Pet Jawa
Oh, That Liberal Media
Outside the Beltway
Patterico's Pontifications
The Perfect World (Discussion Forum)
The People's Cube
New Hampshire Review
Protein Wisdom
The Pundit Guy
Q & O
Riehl Worldview (Carnivorous Conservative)
Say Anything Blog
Seraphic Press
Roger L. Simon
Six Meat Buffet
Ten Fingers Six Strings
Traction Control/US Citizen
Two Crackas in My Soup
Twisted Spinster
An Unamplified Voice (Music/Opera)
Viking Pundit
The Wardrobe Door
White Pebble (Politics/Poetry)
Whitney Gaskell (Author)
Michael Williams/Master of None
Faces From Ace's
The Rogues' Gallery.
Syndicate this site (XML)

Powered by
Movable Type 2.64

Breaking: Chief Justice Rehnquist at Bethesda for Cancer Treatment | Main | Former Libertarian Candidate for President Endorses Bush
October 25, 2004

Willpower (Push-Posting)

Pardon me for pushing this up in the queue so it posts today, but it's been a while since I've posted anything close to substantive. It's not the greatest essay, but I think it's worth reading, and I'm annoyed I printed it on my least-read day (Saturday).

If the United States chooses to cut and run in Iraq, then we are all but finished as a military power in the world. We have the best trained, best equipped, and highest-spirited troops in the entire world. But the soft underbelly of the military has always been the public's willingness to actually fight and prevail in a difficult struggle.

It must be pointed out that, despite all the bad headlines and gnashing of teeth from Henny Penny's like Andrew Sullivan, the Iraqi insurgents are offering our troops a token resistance. By that I do not mean they do not kill our troops. Of course the do. And to a family who has lost a beloved son or daughter, there is no such thing as a token resistance. I cannot grieve like the families of the lost grieve for their loved ones, but I do feel the pain of war, at least as much as a stranger can.

But nevertheless the Iraqi terrorists are not actually fighting a war that can be won in military terms. They dare not attack our troops in force; they have no conceivable plan to attrit our forces or our supplies anywhere near close to our capacity to replace them. The "war" they fight is not one of winning ground, or winning battles. It's of winning hearts and minds, as it were, or at least capturing them-- and by killing a thousand of our brave soldiers in a year, they have succeeded beyond my expectations.

Certainly they have captured the heart and mind of Andrew Sullivan (the most influential man in America, bar none). And they have captured the hearts and minds of John Kerry, John Edwards, and nearly the entirety of the Democratic Party, both leadership and membership.

I've known, as so many others of course did, that the key to this fight would not be our military's ability to execute effectively, and often brilliantly, but to prevent, or at least delay, the American public's quasi-Spanish impulse to cut and run and "declare victory" if confronted with anything more difficult than, say, the first Gulf War. Of course the first Gulf War was not easy; our troops fought the fourth-largest army in the world then. But that war was quick and decisive and -- especially given the number of troops involved -- involved very few casualites at all.

But what would happen if we had to face an enemy that could not be defeated in 100 hours? What then?

I had hoped that this country would rise to the challenge, and perhaps it still will. Certainly there are those who understand the stakes in this battle, and the catastrophe that would flow from a defeat. But it does seem that 40% of the population -- and perhaps 50-55% -- have no stomach whatsoever for any war that involves more than 100 hours and/or 100 American war dead.

One question I've posed to Andrew Sullivan -- although he's avoided answering it, or even acknowledging it -- is this: If you were only a supporter of this war given the assumption that it would be very brief and almost casualty-free, what the hell were you doing supporting the war in the first place? That is an extraodinarily irresponsible and naive position to take. If a war is not very important -- so unimportant that it only should be fought if we can secure a decisive victory within 100 hours and with only 100 men dead -- then that, Mr. Sullivan, is a war that should not be fought, and you had no business -- none -- adding whatever rhetorical fire you could muster to the debate.

What on earth did you think you were doing urging the nation into a war that you would only continue supporting under the most blithely-optimistic of conditions?

Sullivan is not a warhawk. He's a bird of paradise. And that's far worse.

There is no question that this war is tougher than I imagined, or than most imagined. But the truth of the matter is that I -- and many other less frivolous hawks than Sullivan -- expected to suffer a high number of casualties in this war. Of course I hoped against hope that we would not. I prayed for a Gulf War success, but I also knew that Saddam's soldiers would fight harder to keep Baghdad than Kuwait City.

The casualties did not come in the schedule I imagined. I expected to suffer at least 500 casualties for the Siege of Baghdad alone, perhaps a 1000 if chemical or biological weapons were used, which I thought they probably would be. Many military commentators predicted similarly dire casualty numbers -- numbers like 2500-3000 were tossed out, and comparisons were made to the legendarily ferocious Leningrad campaign (which, of course, lasted three bitter, bloody years).

The quick fall of Baghdad allowed me to adjust my expectations and hope for a relatively lightly-fought mopping up period. That, of course, did not happen. While we avoided the high casualties in the major-force conventional battle, we have suffered an unexpectedly high number of casualties in the small-unit guerilla insurgency. That fact fills me with sadness, for all the American soldiers and innocent Iraqis butchered. Nevertheless: We have still suffered fewer casualties at this point than I expected.

I would like the number to be zero. I would have been thrilled if it had merely been 100. I would like the number to stop increasing right now, so that not another American son or daughter is killed or maimed in fighting.

But I never expected fewer than 1000-2000 casualties in the entire campaign.

What number, praytell, did Mr. Sullivan expect? When he was so passionately, and so emotionally, making his case for all the wond'rous benefits that would flow from an American invasion, what number of American dead was he envisioning? What number of American dead did he have in his mind as the break-point between a war that was virtuous and necessary and a war that was too painful and not worth fighting at all?

He never told us when he was so stridently urging this nation into war. He can correct this oversight by telling us now-- and telling us, too, why he never informed us of how very conditional his passionate support for war was.

I do not like talk of "exit strategies." If the country is willing to accept something short of actual military and political victory in a war in favor of a face-saving "exit strategy" in which we pretend we've won, then that is simply not a war we should be fighting. Either a war is so important that it must be won, or else a war is simply not necessary. Half-measures and pretend-victories can be had through diplomacy and sanctions; we do not need to feed our boys into the meatgrinder to acheive what Kofi Annan and Jimmy Carter could work out for us without war.

I was serious about this war when I agitated for it, and I remain serious about it. I thought it was so important that we had to kill our beloved sons and daughters -- and that's of course what one does in war; when one urges for war, one is, implicitly, urging for American battle deaths as an unavoidable conseqence -- in order to win victory of Saddam, and try to set the Middle East on a path that will not result in an exchange of nuclear fire. The loss of one or two American cities-- one almost certainly my own, New York. And then, soon after, a nearly genocidal nuclear strike on much of the Muslim world.

I was serious. I remain serious.

It now appears that many of the people who argued along with me for war were not so serious at all.

Since Mr. Sullivan is so big on demanding apologies, I will demand one in return: I demand your apology for exhorting this nation into a war about which you were never morally serious nor intellectually thorough.

I think that those who advocate war for legitimate self-defense have a defensible position. I think that those who are dedicated pacifists are at least morally and logically consistent, even if I disagree with them strongly.

But I cannot recognize the position of Andrew Sullivan, and John Kerry, as legimiate or honorable. Their shared position is unserious, highly partisan, and morally obscene. Those who would urge the nation into a war, or vote the nation into war, without contemplating the possible difficulties and pain of the struggle are cowards-- and worse than cowards. A man who would send another man to his death for a cause he does not think is important is a villain. What else can one call it?

Sullivan routinely accuses Bush of living in a fantasy world. What world was Sullivan living in when he was urging war on Iraq, I wonder? A world, apparently, in which enemy soldiers do not fight back, and in which there are no (fairly trivial) crimes committed by US troops. A world in which wars are fought according to "plans" and in which such "plans" are executed smoothly; a world in which war is not simply the managing of one crisis until the next, and in which the term "FUBAR" has no meaning.

A world in which we storm into Baghdad, pull down a statue, and then Saddam's goons and Zarqawi's terrorists say, "You know, in retrospect, the Americans really did have a point." And then lay down their arms.

The war was never to be fought in that fantasy world of Sullivan's construction. It was never to be as pretty as he made it all sound in his glowing predictions of easy victory and seamless transition to democracy. I hope that in the future Sullivan confines his war-mongering to the fantasy worlds that exist only in his mind and on his blog, and urges dovishness and peace at any cost in the real world in which the rest of us live.

Update: Dave at Garfield Ridge offers:

A side note: you know how creepy this war is? I've worked for nearly a decade at the Pentagon. I don't think I've ever seen an amputee in uniform before.

This year alone, the count must be up to a dozen.

*But they're still in uniform.*

As horrific as war is, these men understand why we're fighting. So much so, that despite their suffering, they've found a way to stay in and continue their service. I couldn't be half as brave if I were drunk.

And some people just want to give up, and go home.

posted by Ace at 12:22 PM