Contributor Post Created with Sketch. The Long War Continues

 

Time magazine, Sept. 25, 2001:

Wars are easy to start. But they can be difficult to sustain. George W. Bush understands this, and so has been furiously managing expectations, pressing the case with almost everyone he talks to that this will be a long war against terrorism.

…He wanted his generals to hear the same message he was delivering to Americans. “This will be a long campaign,” he told the senior officers in the room, “and the people in uniform are very important to it.”

…”We have to be resolute,” he told the senators gravely. “If after the World Series, America forgets our mission and our duty, we’ll lose.”

George W. Bush in USA Today, Sept. 8, 2002:

This will be a long war, and unprecedented challenges await us. But we have made tremendous progress.

Our government bears essential responsibilities in this struggle: to wage an effective and relentless war against terrorists, protect the homeland and strengthen America’s economy. We have acted on those fronts, and we will continue to do more.

President Bush, July 12, 2007:

As the war against Islamist terror continued through President Bush’s two terms, his warnings of a “long war” were roundly mocked as foolhardy rhetoric from a neocon imperialist. President Obama promised to “end” that war, as if such a decision were entirely up to the United States.

President Anti-Bush won a peace prize, pulled troops out of Iraq and continues to remove them from Afghanistan, even as he bombs and drones suspected terrorists in Somalia, Yemen, Sudan and Pakistan. He destroyed the mad Qaddafi regime in Libya, but turned that nation into a Mogadishu on the Med. And last night he expanded U.S. military operations into Syria, inadvertently helping another tinpot he promised to eliminate a year ago.

Few expect Obama’s air-only approach to end the terrorist reign of ISIS, but the administration’s “anti-war” supporters are praising his pre-emptive military action against the newest rogue regime. Even as his Pentagon promises that this is “only the beginning”:

Mayville detailed the Pentagon’s strategy to “degrade and destroy” ISIS, which will focus primarily on Iraq before shifting to the Syrian theater. “Look at what we’re trying to do regionally,” he said. “We are focused first in Iraq because we have a partner in Iraq to work with; the Iraqi Security Forces, the Iraqi government.”

“We are trying to disrupt their support bases while we enable in Iraq the Iraqi Security Forces — with the help of partners — to dislodge and ultimately remove ISIL from Iraq,” he added.

“Could this take years?” NBC reporter Jim Miklaszewski asked.

“I would think of it in terms of years, yes,” Mayville replied.

The Long War continues.

There are 28 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Scott Wilmot Member

    Jon Gabriel, Ed.: The Long War continues.

    Indeed it does, Jon. Pray that St. Michael the Archangel defends and protects our soldiers in this battle.

    • #1
    • September 23, 2014, at 5:21 PM PDT
    • Like
  2. Nick Stuart Inactive

    1. What, if anything, did Obama actually ask Congress to authorize?
    2. How is this actually being paid for?
    3. What, if anything, is being done to replace the matériel and equipment being consumed?
    4. Do anyone besides military families care about the danger they’re being put in by a malignant narcissist who gives them a salute with his middle finger wrapped around a latte?

    • #2
    • September 23, 2014, at 5:33 PM PDT
    • Like
  3. Valiuth Inactive
    ValiuthJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Nick Stuart:1. What, if anything, did Obama actually ask Congress to authorize? Nothing but then again I don’t hear anyone of them complaining. 

    2. How is this actually being paid for? The same way all our wars are paid for. I don’t recall us worrying about this under Bush. Is ISIS worth fighting? If so than it is worth paying for this war. 

    3. What, if anything, is being done to replace the matériel and equipment being consumed? Seriously!? I think the Pentagon knows how to order more bombs and cruise-missiles. It will be in the next budget.

    4. Do anyone besides military families care about the danger they’re being put in by a malignant narcissist who gives them a salute with his middle finger wrapped around a latte? Obama is finally getting off his behind to confront ISIS and our side is jumping to this. Maybe a bit of positive reinforcement might be warranted from us. After all our troops would be in even more danger if we were more committed to this fight with ground troops. Our army is well trained and its commanders are some of the best in the world. They are about as safe conducting this war as anyone could reasonably expect to be in a war. If anything Obama is to timid with our troops since I think politically the last thing he wants to be associated with is body-bags coming back from Iraq. 

    • #3
    • September 23, 2014, at 6:03 PM PDT
    • Like
  4. Nick Stuart Inactive

    Valiuth:

    Nick Stuart:1. What, if anything, did Obama actually ask Congress to authorize? Nothing but then again I don’t hear anyone of them complaining.

    Yes, very disturbing that nobody seems to be stepping up to accept reponsibility for this war we’ve now gotten ourselves into.

    2. How is this actually being paid for? The same way all our wars are paid for. I don’t recall us worrying about this under Bush. Is ISIS worth fighting? If so than it is worth paying for this war.

    It was paid for under Busy by deficit spending, which was evidently the plan. Bush got funding for the military, the Left got funding for their pet programs, the debt soared. But Congress at least went through the motions of appropriating the money. Presumably that’s how it’s going to be done this time around too, just curious what this sausage is going to look like after it comes out of the factory.

    3. What, if anything, is being done to replace the matériel and equipment being consumed? Seriously!? I think the Pentagon knows how to order more bombs and cruise-missiles. It will be in the next budget.

    Will it? Obama shut down production of the F-22 that he’s now using for his bombing campaign. If (when) they’re shot down or wear out will they be replaced? I don’t take that for a certainty. I think Obama’s perfectly capable of pushing the military to a high burn rate of materiel and equipment without making any effort to see to it replacements are authorized.

    4. Do anyone besides military families care about the danger they’re being put in by a malignant narcissist who gives them a salute with his middle finger wrapped around a latte? Obama is finally getting off his behind to confront ISIS and our side is jumping to this. Maybe a bit of positive reinforcement might be warranted from us. After all our troops would be in even more danger if we were more committed to this fight with ground troops. Our army is well trained and its commanders are some of the best in the world. They are about as safe conducting this war as anyone could reasonably expect to be in a war. If anything Obama is to timid with our troops since I think politically the last thing he wants to be associated with is body-bags coming back from Iraq.

    Obama evidently was finally dragged into this by bad optics and unfocused media and public concern about what’s going on in the Middle East. I wouldn’t trust him to take care of a dog I didn’t like, let alone be Commander-in-Chief of troops in harm’s way. I’m not convinced that, at this point, doing nothing wouldn’t be the least bad option. One of the lessons we can take from past wars is that they can be very unpredictable once they’re started and with people like Obama, Kerry, and Hagel running the show, there’s a lot to be concerned about. As likely as not after this gets cranked up Obama will lose interest and walk away from it, leaving subordinates to take the blame and pick up the pieces as best they can.

    [h/t to the Ricochet bug that for whatever reason is failing to limit posts to 200 words. I promise not to abuse it again, or anyway not much]

    • #4
    • September 23, 2014, at 6:48 PM PDT
    • Like
  5. Roberto, Crusty Old Timer LLC Member
    Roberto, Crusty Old Timer LLCJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Valiuth:

    Obama is finally getting off his behind to confront ISIS and our side is jumping to this. 

    It is unwise to assume this. After all the President mocked ISIS and openly denigrated the threat they pose to this nation prior to the execution of a pair of American journalists, executions very prominently covered by American media as we all know. The timing with the mid-term elections right around the corner must be considered, it is a mistake to discount the cynicism of this President.

    With the conclusion of the vote in November his previous indolence has every likelihood of being resumed. Any notion that Obama is committed to a long campaign appears specious in my eyes.

    • #5
    • September 23, 2014, at 7:01 PM PDT
    • Like
  6. billy Inactive

    Nick Stuart:

    Valiuth:

    3. What, if anything, is being done to replace the matériel and equipment being consumed? Seriously!? I think the Pentagon knows how to order more bombs and cruise-missiles. It will be in the next budget.

    Will it? Obama shut down production of the F-22 that he’s now using for his bombing campaign. If (when) they’re shot down or wear out will they be replaced? I don’t take that for a certainty. I think Obama’s perfectly capable of pushing the military to a high burn rate of materiel and equipment without making any effort to see to it replacements are authorized.

    Hasn’t Obama halted production of the Tomahawk cruise missile as well? So each one fired in this not-a-war-is-a-war won’t ever be replaced.

    • #6
    • September 23, 2014, at 7:13 PM PDT
    • Like
  7. Dr. Jimmy Carter Member
    Dr. Jimmy CarterJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Jon Gabriel, Ed.: Wars are easy to start. But they can be difficult to sustain.

    That’s the rub. Wars ain’t to be “sustained,” but ended victoriously. And America can do that easily if left to do so.

    • #7
    • September 23, 2014, at 8:01 PM PDT
    • 1 like
  8. Brad B. Inactive

    It is the same war that the Eastern Roman Empire fought. Same villains. Different weapons. We will be fighting them until we’re dead, and when the US is in the history books someday, someone else will be fighting them.

    • #8
    • September 23, 2014, at 8:42 PM PDT
    • 1 like
  9. James Gawron Thatcher
    James GawronJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Jimmy Carter:

    Jon Gabriel, Ed.: Wars are easy to start. But they can be difficult to sustain.

    That’s the rub. Wars ain’t to be “sustained,” but ended victoriously. And America can do that easily if left to do so.

    Jimmy,

    To win a war you must clearly identify the enemy. Terrorism is a vaguely defined tactic. Islam radical or moderate is a western definition of a major world religion that has little resemblance to any of its billion practitioners.

    Jihad is the particular belief of Islam that differentiates those who are the problem. If we are ready to fight against Jihadism then there are many natural allies in the Islamic World who are also ready to fight Jihadism. If we are prepared to deal with this ideological obsession then we will be able to identify those around the world who would be part of the problem or part of the solution.

    Rubio is making a great deal of sense in this interview. Still he does not use the word Jihad even though it clearly describes “the foreign fighters that fill the voids” he is most concerned about.

    Once properly locked on target then Victory is our aim.

    “You ask what is our aim? I can answer in one word: Victory. Victory at all costs. Victory in spite of all terror. Victory however long and hard the road may be. For without Victory there is no survival.”

    -Winston Churchill

    Regards,

    Jim

    • #9
    • September 23, 2014, at 8:46 PM PDT
    • Like
  10. Valiuth Inactive
    ValiuthJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Listen I don’t have much faith in Obama, but I like to think even he can be brought around ever so slowly to fulfilling his responsibilities. Sure, he was backed into them but for now he is actually doing some good. He got the Arabs on board and he is hitting ISIS with a bit more kinetic action than I think he would prefer. Like I said, maybe we should try some positive reinforcement. It would be nice though to see the Congress step up a bit and offer authorization and commit funding whether the O asks for it or not. If for no other reason than to keep the pressure up on him.

    We are bombing ISIS, and I say that is a good thing for now. Lets see if we can make some headway with this.

    • #10
    • September 23, 2014, at 9:16 PM PDT
    • 1 like
  11. SEnkey Inactive

    Under promise, over deliver. That has been the President’s problem all long. He promises to turn back the tide of the oceans, heal the world, and change centuries of history and human nature. Disappointment is guaranteed.

    • #11
    • September 23, 2014, at 9:16 PM PDT
    • Like
  12. Dr. Strangelove Thatcher
    Dr. StrangeloveJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Valiuth: Obama is finally getting off his behind to confront ISIS

    Please. As far as I can tell, Obama has been driven into action by the polls that are swinging against him. This movement in the polls was driven by the emotional reaction by videos of grisly decapitations and mass murder posted to social media.

    Put differently, Obama would not have engaged ISIS had those horrific images not been posted to social media. Put yet another way, Obama’s real objective is to halt the poll numbers from ripping out levels of bedrock never before seen by the naked eye on the eve of an election–not to defeat America’s enemies.

    Obama revealed that he is in pursuit of something less than victory over ISIS when he studded our “objective” with so many verbal escape hatches (e.g., “if we are joined by the international community”, to “shrink ISIL’s sphere of influence, its effectiveness, its financing, its military capabilities to the point where it is a manageable problem”) that how long the U.S. will fight ISIS is purely up to Obama’s discretion.

    Am I being too harsh? Then what is the specification for an an adequate participation by the international community? Or the precise point where “ISIS’ sphere of influence” becomes tolerable. (And tolerable to who? Obama or the Yazidi?) How is ISIS’ financial prowess to be measured? And what level of ISIS’ financial might is tolerable? or military capability? And what about the fact that those at war can regenerate military capability so long as they aren’t defeated? Which means that any destruction of ISIS’ military capability is temporary so long as ISIS lives?

    And the most important question is Who sets all of these standards? Answer: Obama does. And just as soon as the next election is safely behind him he can deem all of the above considerations to have been met to his satisfaction. (If Obama wants a blue suit he just turns the blue light on.) Afterwards Obama can just command the U.S. Military to abandon the battlefield, leaving ISIS in control of it.

    A guy who will lie to the American people about being able to keep their doctor will lie to them about other things.

    • #12
    • September 23, 2014, at 9:35 PM PDT
    • Like
  13. Eustace C. Scrubb Member

    Things said with a Texan twang are stupid. If the same things are said in our Prez’s elegant, cultured tones they are brilliant.

    • #13
    • September 23, 2014, at 10:08 PM PDT
    • Like
  14. TheChuckSteak Inactive

    It will continue to be even longer with Obama at the helm the next two years and four months. As this insufficient but not unwelcome bombing campaign clearly is shown to be insufficient, and starts to be monotonous and not even close to being a deciding factor in and of itself, Obama will have the choice of two radical options. He will either retreat and say nothing will or can be done because he is unwilling to submit ground forces or he will commit ground forces. Either way he loses. He either loses his radical anti-war base for committing ground forces which will cement his lame duck status. Or he will lose the country for refusing to do anything more once we see how insufficient this bombing campaign is as it becomes apparent over time. Either way we do not have a president who is serious about winning this thing as quickly and decisively as possible. What we have is a president who is buying time before he cements himself as a lame duck. It was Iraq that was a major factor in winning him the presidency, and his betrayal and piss poor prosecution of it that will ensure his end as a president.

    • #14
    • September 23, 2014, at 11:50 PM PDT
    • 1 like
  15. Gazpacho Grande' Coolidge

    Valiuth:

    Nick Stuart:

    3. What, if anything, is being done to replace the matériel and equipment being consumed? Seriously!? I think the Pentagon knows how to order more bombs and cruise-missiles. It will be in the next budget.

    So how much experience do you have with defense contracting? When budgets are cut, the contractors who build the guns, the bombs, the planes – and the sub-contractors, tens of thousands of them, that build the components that are then assembled by the prime contractor – scale back. They don’t maintain or upgrade tooling, in fact they’ll sell it when the contracts dry up so they can get something of value for their assets.

    When it comes time to “order more bombs and cruise-missiles” the capacity and capability to build those items takes a long time to ramp up, depending on the weapon/part. A long time. Lead times for military spec equipment can be years. Just for one component of a larger assembly.

    On a further note, when the president presides over massive military cuts to active duty personnel, cuts the Navy to pre-WW2 size, and then decides to flex his Prezzy muscles by going to war in a place where he was loudly declaring that he ended a war just 2 years ago, well, let’s just say faith in that man, if there ever was any, has dropped to less than zero.

    • #15
    • September 24, 2014, at 3:42 AM PDT
    • Like
  16. Manny Member

    It does continue. When the Soviet Union collapsed I thought my Cold War Warrior days had ended. Unfortunately it transfomed after a respite into Anti Islamism Warrior days. I expect it to last the rest of my life. War is a terrible human condition.

    • #16
    • September 24, 2014, at 5:45 AM PDT
    • Like
  17. Barkha Herman Inactive

    Who are we fighting?

    What constitutes a win?

    What constitutes a loss?

    • #17
    • September 24, 2014, at 6:10 AM PDT
    • Like
  18. Ray Kujawa Coolidge

    Barkha Herman:Who are we fighting?

    What constitutes a win?

    What constitutes a loss?

    I thought President Bush’s video addressed this, although he only spoke of al Qaeda.

    • #18
    • September 24, 2014, at 6:27 AM PDT
    • Like
  19. Albert Arthur Coolidge

    Nick Stuart:

    Valiuth:

    Nick Stuart:1. What, if anything, did Obama actually ask Congress to authorize? Nothing but then again I don’t hear anyone of them complaining.

    Yes, very disturbing that nobody seems to be stepping up to accept reponsibility for this war we’ve now gotten ourselves into.

    2. How is this actually being paid for? The same way all our wars are paid for. I don’t recall us worrying about this under Bush. Is ISIS worth fighting? If so than it is worth paying for this war.

    It was paid for under Busy by deficit spending, which was evidently the plan. Bush got funding for the military, the Left got funding for their pet programs, the debt soared. But Congress at least went through the motions of appropriating the money. Presumably that’s how it’s going to be done this time around too, just curious what this sausage is going to look like after it comes out of the factory.

    This time around Obama asked Congress to provide funds to train the Free Syrian Army (and/or some other groups). Last year, as far as I can recall, he never asked Congress to do anything, after making his big “I can order airstrikes in Syria but I won’t because I’m a coward and won’t back up my red line so I’m going to punt and say I’m asking Congress for authority–even though I don’t need their authorization” speech.

    • #19
    • September 24, 2014, at 6:34 AM PDT
    • Like
  20. DrewInEastHillQuarantineZone Coolidge

    Right war. Wrong Commander-in-Chief.

    • #20
    • September 24, 2014, at 8:00 AM PDT
    • Like
  21. Misthiocracy got drunk and Member
    Misthiocracy got drunk andJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Barkha Herman:Who are we fighting?

    Those who wish to overthrow by force the government in Iraq that the US expended so much blood and treasure to install.

    What constitutes a win?

    The continued existence of a legitimate government in Iraq, chosen by peaceful and (as) democratic (as possible) means.

    What constitutes a loss?

    The overthrow by force of said government.

    • #21
    • September 24, 2014, at 8:10 AM PDT
    • Like
  22. Aaron Miller Member
    Aaron MillerJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Jon Gabriel, Ed.: but the administration’s “anti-war” supporters are praising his pre-emptive military action

    One wonders if many liberals truly have any policy stances separate from the political personalities who espouse them.

    • #22
    • September 24, 2014, at 8:28 AM PDT
    • Like
  23. DrewInEastHillQuarantineZone Coolidge

    The modern anti-war movement is essentially an anti-Republican movement.

    The “no blood for oil” placards common during Desert Storm were kept in the attic when Clinton was bombing Iraq. They came out again when GW was president, but disappeared once the Lightbringer moved into the White House.

    I haven’t heard anything about the Nobel Committee confiscating their peace prize. You’d think that President Obama would at least have the courtesy to mail it back to them as he did with the bust of Churchill.

    • #23
    • September 24, 2014, at 9:29 AM PDT
    • Like
  24. Misthiocracy got drunk and Member
    Misthiocracy got drunk andJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Dig this video of Joe Biden from 2012, mocking Mitt Romney for “wanting to go to war with Syria” and “being confrontational with Russia”:

    • #24
    • September 24, 2014, at 9:32 AM PDT
    • Like
  25. billy Inactive

    Aaron Miller:

    Jon Gabriel, Ed.: but the administration’s “anti-war” supporters are praising his pre-emptive military action

    One wonders if many liberals truly have any policy stances separate from the political personalities who espouse them.

    Do you really wonder? Let’s just state it plainly: The anti-war movement of 2002-08 was not a protest against the war. It was against George Bush and all conservatives.

    • #25
    • September 24, 2014, at 9:47 AM PDT
    • Like
  26. Mikescapes Member

    It is unwise to assume this. After all the President mocked ISIS and openly denigrated the threat they pose to this nation prior to the execution of a pair of American journalists, executions very prominently covered by American media as we all know. The timing with the mid-term elections right around the corner must be considered, it is a mistake to discount the cynicism of this Presid

    With the conclusion of the vote in November his previous indolence has every likelihood of being resumed. Any notion that Obama is committed to a long campaign appears specious in my eyes.

    ——————————————————————————————————————–

    Ups to ROBERTO: You beat me to the punch. Bombs away! No boots. Everybody rallies round the flag. Obama’s poll numbers jump up. No Congressional vote on a declaration of war. Big boost for the threatened democratic senatorial campaigns. Clever political move. Bad news for Republicans.

    • #26
    • September 24, 2014, at 10:10 AM PDT
    • Like
  27. James Gawron Thatcher
    James GawronJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Valiuth:Listen I don’t have much faith in Obama, but I like to think even he can be brought around ever so slowly to fulfilling his responsibilities. Sure, he was backed into them but for now he is actually doing some good. He got the Arabs on board and he is hitting ISIS with a bit more kinetic action than I think he would prefer. Like I said, maybe we should try some positive reinforcement. It would be nice though to see the Congress step up a bit and offer authorization and commit funding whether the O asks for it or not. If for no other reason than to keep the pressure up on him.

    We are bombing ISIS, and I say that is a good thing for now. Lets see if we can make some headway with this.

    Val,

    I agree we should keep the pressure on him and move him forward. Aside from the right thing to do it will kill his base at the polls.

    However, his performance at the UN was again astounding. For a few sentences he sounded like an American President faced with a brutal cruel enemy that must be stopped. Then he mentioned Ferguson MO.  Aside from the fact that most of the UN had no idea what he was talking about, that it was completely inappropriate while trying to build a coalition to fight ISIS, that he still doesn’t get it that the facts have proven Michael Brown to be way less than innocent, this is Obama once again apologizing for the USA. Val, he does not deserve to be President.

    He makes you want to vomit.

    Regards,

    Jim

    • #27
    • September 24, 2014, at 10:43 AM PDT
    • Like
  28. Valiuth Inactive
    ValiuthJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    James, I agree. He doesn’t deserve to be president. But we have to work with what we got.

    • #28
    • September 24, 2014, at 11:05 AM PDT
    • Like

Comments are closed because this post is more than six months old. Please write a new post if you would like to continue this conversation.