Hillary Needs Some Military Schooling


Eric in some private e-mails thinks I have been too soft on Hillary lately. He is probably right. With Hillary rising in the polls again I think it is time to give her a few whacks.

She says there is no military solution to what we face in Iraq. How does she explain that the surge of our military combined with a political offensive has actually strengthened the Iraqi government and started us down the road to stability. In addition our presence has bought time for the Iraqi Army to become a competent fighting force. They still have a ways to go. Which says that a premature withdrawal would leave Iraq vulnerable to the various terrorist groups and Iran. She also fails to mention that Iraq is a sovereign country and we are there at their request.

She also thinks that Iran wants us to stay in Iraq. Sure it is a possibility. The question is: are we more dangerous to Iran when we can attack them on a broad front from Iraq if they cause trouble or if we can only maneuver from Kuwait on a narrow front. A military genius Hillary is not. She hasn't even gotten as far as map reading let alone logistics.

She thinks that Iran wants us to stay in Iraq so they can keep whacking our troops with the various insurgent groups and all that would end if we left. She is correct on that point. She fails to take it one step further though. If we left Iran would be free to apply the tactics it has used against us with little ultimate success against the Iraqi government. I don't see the good in that. Neither does Bill O'Rielly.

Remaining in Iraq undermines our ability to deal with other problems says Hillary. Like Iran's cats paw in Iraq - the Mahdi Army, which is getting murdered in Iraq.

We and the Iraqi government have turned Iraq into the roach motel for for all the various terrorist groups including Al Queda in Iraq, JAM, and others. Other wise referred to as the flypaper strategy. Long derided by our lefty friends. Despite the evidence that it is working after a long and difficult period when the outcome was in doubt.

A very wise military expert once put it this way:

It will matter to us if Iraq totally collapses into civil war, if it becomes a failed state the way Afghanistan was, where terrorists are free to basically set up camp and launch attacks against us.
Who was that expert? Hillary Clinton

I do think Hillary would be a strong Commander in Chief. I also think she would be a stupid Commander in Chief if her current pronouncements reflect what she currently believes. Strong and stupid is not a good combination.

H/T Gateway Pundit says Hillary was schooled by O'Rielly. Abe Greenwald provided the Hillary quote. All via Instapundit

posted by Simon on 05.01.08 at 10:38 PM





TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://classicalvalues.com/cgi-bin/pings.cgi/6608






Comments

Clinton may still have a lot of learning to do on matters military, but she has at least proved that she's teachable, which is a great deal more than you can say for either our sitting president or for John McCain.

She increasingly seems to be the only candidate running who has the knowledge and confidence necessary to steer us through the Iraq quagmire.

Laura Louzader   ·  May 2, 2008 12:04 AM

Laura, I am interested in your choice of words..."steer us through the Iraq quagmire". I may be wrong, but I think Hillary's supporters, at least her Democratic supporters, believe she intends to "steer us OUT of the Iraq quagmire". I might be parsing words here, but no more than I thoroughly expect Hillary has been doing all along on this topic. No Democratic candidate would be their party's choice without at least APPEARING to be against the war, and we damn well know that Hillary was nearly born ready to say what needs to be said to get elected. If she gets what she thinks is nearly her birthright, there's going to be a mighty group of lefties out there with egg all over their faces...AGAIN! I hate seeing a good egg going to waste, but this time I might not mind. Might even offer up a paper napkin or crying towelette if you prefer.

Penny   ·  May 2, 2008 02:14 AM

Hillary will do (at least, she'll create the appearance of doing) whatever is in her interest to do. If that means being a strong Commander in Chief, she'll do that. There's also a need to overcompensate. She might be very tough, too. But only if she thought it was in her best political interest. If the country is lucky, her political interest might happen to coincide with the country's best interest. If not, tough!

Eric Scheie   ·  May 2, 2008 06:42 AM

Laura, let us know when there's a quagmire in Iraq and we'll talk about whether Hillary is the person to get us out of it, okay? You also seem to have an idiosyncratic meaning for the word "teachable." In your context, it seems to mean "agrees with what I predicted." You may want to look it up for further use.

As to the original post, there is technically never a solely military solution in war. Political followup and stability are always going to be necessary. Therefore, I don't see why the need for political solutions is considered a relevant criticism with respect to Iraq.

Assistant Village Idiot   ·  May 2, 2008 10:56 AM


June 2008
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30          

ANCIENT (AND MODERN)
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR


Search the Site


E-mail




Classics To Go

Classical Values PDA Link



Archives




Recent Entries



Links



Site Credits