'Staying the Course' Won't Do by Patrick J. Buchanan

[ToddC]

St. James:

You’ve made the claim. Prove that the US military doesn’t deliberately target noncombatants, and you can accompany that proof with documentation of your ability to percieve the intent of people on other continents whom you’ve never met.

You’re kidding, right? Having been a US Marine, I can tell you the military targets objectives of military value. That is, anyone who has a weapon firing at you and their base of operations.

Do you honestly believe the US military targets non-combatants?

Todd

 

[St.James]

mlchance:

IOW, the claim itself isn’t enough. Perhaps not unreasonable.

Of course I’m being reasonable. I don’t know a person’s true intent, their thoughts, any more than you do, that is to say, I don’t at all.

mlchance:

Next, in compensation for your inability to judge true intent (which you imply is different from stated intent)…,

I don’t accept everything I am told by people on television as truth, do you?

mlchance:

you claim you can examine evidence and draw conclusions from it.

Yes, this is what the scientific method and the US justice system is based upon. What’s the problem?

mlchance:

But: What evidence?

Many thousands of dead non-combatants.

It’s worth stating that I have not claimed that the US military is deliberately targeting non-civilians. I have only claimed that I don’t know what the truth is in the matter. You seem to know the truth although how you’ve come to know the thoughts, the intent, of others is beyond me.

In any case, this discussion is adding nothing useful to this thread.

 

[gilliam]

St. James:

Many thousands of dead non-combatants.

It’s worth stating that I have not claimed that the US military is deliberately targeting non-civilians. I have only claimed that I don’t know what the truth is in the matter. You seem to know the truth although how you’ve come to know the thoughts, the intent, of others is beyond me.

In any case, this discussion is adding nothing useful to this thread.

We are the only nation whose army goes into war with imbedded lawyers to tell the commanders, even at the company level, if they are violating international law. This has never happened in the history of warfare before. We are doing everything we can to keep innocent civilian casulties down.

Contrast that with what the terrorists are doing.

 

[St.James]

gilliam:

We are the only nation whose army goes into war with imbedded lawyers to tell the commanders, even at the company level, if they are violating international law. This has never happened in the history of warfare before.

I know. It makes great PR, doesn’t it?

Everyone knows that lawyers are completely objective and always tell the truth especially when it conflicts with the interests of their clients.

 

[gilliam]

St. James:

I know. It makes great PR, doesn’t it?

Everyone knows that lawyers are completely objective and always tell the truth especially when it conflicts with the interests of their clients.

Don’t be so cynical. The fact that it is happening is quite remarkable. I don’t think you will find any military historian who would disagree with what I am saying.

No military in the history of warfare has tried to keep civilian casulties down as much as our military has. It really is remarkable when you look at it objectively.

 

[mlchance]

gilliam:

Don’t be so cynical.

Cynicism is all he’s got to back up his innuendo that the U.S. military is deliberately targeting non-combatants. It’s a convenient tactic since innuendo is terribly hard to engage in a honest discussion.

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[St.James]

gilliam:

Don’t be so cynical.

About wartime propaganda? That’s really bad advice to anyone who is more interested in truth than they are in blind nationalism.

To Catholics, truth takes precedence.

 

[SHEMP]

gilliam:

No Pat is not right on. We cannot do what Pat wants now and run away from Iraq and leave the innocents in the hands of the terrorists.

Did you read Pat Buchanan’s article? He never once calls for us to run away from Iraq. He wants Bush to answer questions that the public would like answered.

Here are some of what he is calling for:

“But “Stay the course!” is no longer enough.”

Buchanan implies that we can stay the course but we, the people need answers.

*“President Bush needs to go on national television and tell us the unvarnished truth. Why are we still there?” *

“But to invade an Islamic country to force it to adopt democratic reforms is democratic imperialism. If we practice it, we must expect that some of those we are reforming will resort to the time-honored weapon of anti-imperialists, terrorism – the one effective weapon the weak have against the strong.”

And here is Mr. Buchanan’s main request of the president:

“Before addressing his countrymen, the president needs to ask and answer for himself some hard questions. Who told him this would be a “cakewalk”? Who misled him to believe we would be welcomed as liberators with bouquets of flowers? Who led him into a situation where his choice appears to be between a seemingly endless guerrilla war that could destroy his presidency, and walking away from Iraq and watching it collapse in mayhem and the massacre of those who cast their lot with us? Why have these fools not been fired, like the CIA geniuses who sold JFK on the Bay of Pigs?”

Which leads to the ultimate question for the president:

“Finally, the president must answer in his heart this question: Exactly how much more blood and money is he willing to plunge into a war for democracy in Iraq, and at what point must he decide – as LBJ and Nixon did in Vietnam – that the cost to America is so great that we must get out and risk the awful consequences of a mistaken war that we should never have launched?”

 

[gilliam]

St. James:

About wartime propaganda? That’s really bad advice to anyone who is more interested in truth than they are in blind nationalism.

To Catholics, truth takes precedence.

The truth is that what is happening is quite remarkable. I don’t think you will find any military historian who would disagree with what I am saying.

No military in the history of warfare has tried to keep civilian casulties down as much as our military has. It really is remarkable when you look at it objectively.

 

[gilliam]

SHEMP:

*“President Bush needs to go on national television and tell us the unvarnished truth. Why are we still there?” *

Well, dah, if we leave the terrorists and Baathists take over. I think Pat knows that but doesn’t care.

The rest is just Pat trying to say “I told you it was going to be a mess”…that doesn’t help anyone, except maybe Pat’s political ambitions.

 

[St.James]

gilliam:

The truth is that what is happening is quite remarkable. I don’t think you will find any military historian who would disagree with what I am saying.

No military in the history of warfare has tried to keep civilian casulties down as much as our military has. It really is remarkable when you look at it objectively.

The total number of civilian casualties is what I focus on. I’m not interested in propaganda about how “humane” our military is in it’s method of attacking other nations.

Focus on nationalist propaganda is not an objective perspective of this matter.

 

[gilliam]

St. James:

The total number of civilian casualties is what I focus on.

Right now the people who are killing the most civilians are those kidnapping people and exploding car bombs. As long as the Iraqis fixate on creating a new country, you can fixate on anything you like.

 

[St.James]

gilliam:

Right now the people who are killing the most civilians are those kidnapping people and exploding car bombs.

This statement is false.

 

[mlchance]

St. James:

The total number of civilian casualties is what I focus on. I’m not interested in propaganda about how “humane” our military is in it’s method of attacking other nations.

Like I said: The tactic is, “I don’t like the facts, so let’s accuse people of lying.”

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[St.James]

mlchance:

Like I said: The tactic is, “I don’t like the facts, so let’s accuse people of lying.”

– Mark L. Chance.

From where does this alleged ability to know the thoughts of others originate?

 

[gilliam]

St. James:

This statement is false.

This isn’t hard to show, all you need to do is listen to the news to know it is true.

 

[Nichevo]

St. James:

The total number of civilian casualties is what I focus on. I’m not interested in propaganda about how “humane” our military is in it’s method of attacking other nations.

Focusing only on one aspect of the casualty list is rather short sighted and betrays an agenda. Our humanitarian assistance is by no means propaganda; and I can back this up with first person on the ground resources not the sound bytes and info blurbs that you hungrily await to be fed to you by the mainstream media like a dolphin at Sea World who waits for food rather than finding it for itself. What do you know of the operations being undertaken by Civil Affairs units and the work being done by the State Department? If you can not cite anything beyond what the media tells you, I advise you to shut up. You’re wasting bandwidth in a vain attempt to tell us all about the big bad military monster that is the United States. A “monster” that has done far more to advance freedom for peoples of all races and creeds than most of you protesters have ever done. I am rather disgusted with the people who think that peace at any price is better than affecting change and who think that placating dictators and murderers rather than taking a stand and taking action is the more Christian thing to do.

I’ve had people both Iraqi and Afghani thank me for the infinitely small part I played in their liberation. Perhaps you would like to talk to them. I would be more than happy to arrange an opportunity for you to meet with some of these civilians whose name you profess to speak in.

Focus on nationalist propaganda is not an objective perspective of this matter

Nor is spouting sound bytes and body counts, that’s rather like a shortcut to thinking.

 

[St.James]

Nichevo:

I am rather disgusted with the people who think that peace at any price is better than affecting change and who think that placating dictators and murderers rather than taking a stand and taking action is the more Christian thing to do.

…I advise you to shut up.

I don’t feel that choosing a weak non-threatening arab nation in which to begin a military campaign based on false pretenses to spread capitalism to an area of the world that rejects it is a Christian thing to do at all.

You are welcome to your opinion, however. And unlike yourself, I won’t tell you to shut up if your opinion differs from mine.

 

[gilliam]

St. James:

I don’t feel that choosing a weak non-threatening arab nation in which to begin a military campaign based on false pretenses to spread capitalism to an area of the world that rejects it is a Christian thing to do at all.

Saddam was a capitalist. A despotic, monopolistic capitalist, but a capitalist none the less. The new government in Iraq may be a lot more socialistic than Saddam ever was. Now they have that chance.

You want us to free Saddam, leave and let him take over again, is that your solution? I guess I don’t know what you propose we do now.

 

[Nichevo]

Touche, I apologize for the shut up remark. That was out of line. I do strongly disagree with you however, telling you to shut up was wrong and is not normally the way I argue with people. I do hope we can continue the debate.