Bush seems to be falling victim to his own success. We have been so successful in the war on terror that the country doesn't see it as a war anymore. Consider the following: If you were told on 9/21/2001 that by this date:and from Jim Bennett,You'd be thinking "not bad."The Taliban have fallen
Iraq has fallen and has become a bastion of free press in the islamic world.
Libya had given up its WMD's
North Korea is in multi-lateral talks about WMD's
A majority of the leadership of Al Queda are dead or in custody
Pro-democracy rumblings are going on in Iran
Arafat is isolated
Many convictions of domestic sleepers or Al Queda members (Portland, NY etc...) and finally
NO SUCCESSFUL TERROR ATTACKS ON US SOIL
And all of this has cost less than 1000 dead American soldiers.
Mr. Bennett goes on to say that Vietnam and the current war are not comparable. That's true in some ways, but false in others. In what is most important-- how the enemy could succeed-- the analogy is close: the enemy is relying on propaganda to win, abetted by disloyal liberals in America who further their propaganda by slanting the news, and the U.S. Administration is defensive hesitant to take strong action abroad and not presenting any clear definition of victory, perhaps because it knows that whatever it does will be subject to partisan attack at home.The anti-war types keep comparing Iraq to Vietnam. This has made me think...
If less than a year after US troops first landed in Vietnam, they had occupied all of North Vietnam, had Ho Chi Minh and General Giap dead or in custody, had an interim government in place, and were preparing for free elections (which of course in actuality Vietnam still doesn't have forty years later), all for under five hundred combat casulaties, that wouldn't have been such a bad outcome.
[This page is
http://www.rasmusen.org/w/04.06.09c.htm]
To return to Eric Rasmusen's weblog, click http://www.rasmusen.org/w/0.htm.