Pity for Sauron
I hear, again, so much talk about the evils America has perpetrated and is perpetrating, primarily by extending our military strength around the world.
Such people, of course, ignore what we fight for, and how we fight, and, above all, whom we fight against.
All they see, like Bill Ayers, assert only the "unbalanced" forces at war, and thereby condemns us for our superiority.
I assume most folks here are familiar with the Lord of the Rings, especially the movies.
In the final movie, "The Return of the Uni... King" (sorry, sometimes my hope derails my train of thought...), there's the great, final battle with the forces of Sauron.
Throughout the movies, the evil wrought by Sauron's forces and allies is demonstrated. His minions are distorted, ugly misshapen, unclean.
And the battle remains in question, quite "balanced" between the forces. So that the ultimate victory for the forces of good seems well-earned.
Let me digress here a bit; there has been speculation that the "races" in the Lord of the Rings represented the different peoples of England. Such as the Germans/dwarves, the English/hobbits, French/Elves (I guess), etc.
Obviously, in my view, the Americans are represented by the Eagles. Showing up at the last minute from an unexpected quarter to save the day... Americans I say.
Now, imagine if, say, the 3rd infantry division had been at that final battle. Suppose the forces we sent against Saddam Hussein (speaking of a Sauron) we instead sent against the armies of Mordor.
It would have been a complete and utter route; not a battle, but genocide.
Would we have been any less righteous in our cause? Should we have any greater obligation to give quarter and show mercy, in light of what the armies of Mordor had done? Simply because we were so dramatically superior in force of arms against them?
(I can picture the men of Gondor as they came charging out of their city to confront the armies of Mordor, with King Theodin leading the charge of his army in full gallop... suddenly stopping short and in unison saying, "WTF??" as the forefront of Sauron's forces disappears in fire, from the artillary and tank fire and missiles and the Warthogs strafing from above as the Apaches attack from the horizon.
And yet, in the eyes of the left, we'd be the bastards simply because we could do such destruction, no matter how evil and deserving our "victim".
Such people, of course, ignore what we fight for, and how we fight, and, above all, whom we fight against.
All they see, like Bill Ayers, assert only the "unbalanced" forces at war, and thereby condemns us for our superiority.
I assume most folks here are familiar with the Lord of the Rings, especially the movies.
In the final movie, "The Return of the Uni... King" (sorry, sometimes my hope derails my train of thought...), there's the great, final battle with the forces of Sauron.
Throughout the movies, the evil wrought by Sauron's forces and allies is demonstrated. His minions are distorted, ugly misshapen, unclean.
And the battle remains in question, quite "balanced" between the forces. So that the ultimate victory for the forces of good seems well-earned.
Let me digress here a bit; there has been speculation that the "races" in the Lord of the Rings represented the different peoples of England. Such as the Germans/dwarves, the English/hobbits, French/Elves (I guess), etc.
Obviously, in my view, the Americans are represented by the Eagles. Showing up at the last minute from an unexpected quarter to save the day... Americans I say.
Now, imagine if, say, the 3rd infantry division had been at that final battle. Suppose the forces we sent against Saddam Hussein (speaking of a Sauron) we instead sent against the armies of Mordor.
It would have been a complete and utter route; not a battle, but genocide.
Would we have been any less righteous in our cause? Should we have any greater obligation to give quarter and show mercy, in light of what the armies of Mordor had done? Simply because we were so dramatically superior in force of arms against them?
(I can picture the men of Gondor as they came charging out of their city to confront the armies of Mordor, with King Theodin leading the charge of his army in full gallop... suddenly stopping short and in unison saying, "WTF??" as the forefront of Sauron's forces disappears in fire, from the artillary and tank fire and missiles and the Warthogs strafing from above as the Apaches attack from the horizon.
And yet, in the eyes of the left, we'd be the bastards simply because we could do such destruction, no matter how evil and deserving our "victim".
I have no pity for anyone. It would be un-Galt-like.
Regarding war, short and overpowering is the only way to fight war, and then only as necessary. I'm not going to argue about Seal Team Six taking out OBL, but the 2nd Iraq War didn't need to happen. The first Iraq War was one the US had a strategic interest in, and it was handled about as well as it could have been.
I'll only agree that the "2nd Iraq War" was only unnecessary... *as it was fought*.
My biggest disappointment in Bush was his handling of the war on terror. When I saw the tanks lining up to invade Iraq, I cheered. It was the strategy I'd called for since 9/11.
Invade and conquer Afghanistan. Invade and conquer Iraq. Appoint American governors-general to both, and use them as staging areas. Rule each of them, don't "give them democracy".
Then, from Iraq and Afghanistan, invade and conquer Iran. Then swing west and take out Syria. Then eye the allegedly neutral or even allied middle-eastern countries and give them the choice of reforming or being likewise conquered.
My guesstimate was at most 3 years to accomplish that.
My goal wouldn't be to gain territory or "liberate" the middle east, but either completely discourage them from being a threat to us, or eliminate them as a threat to us.