Posted by: JakeJZG
« on: February 04, 2008, 01:30:00 AM »The United States is involved in Iraq to follow this doctrine:
Through the active creation of friendly governments that offer representation, suffrage, and general rights the United States will be more secure and the world will be benefited in the long run.
That's it. Nothing more than has already been espoused by the Administration.
http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm
In reply to your statements regarding current situations in Iraq:
People die wholesale in war - what is important is that Coalition involvement (most notably since the surge went into effect) has benefited the general Iraqi people. While many still die (you will be hard pressed to find accurate numbers) and will continue to do so for some time (beyond that of what could be considered an acceptable level akin to that of a Western country or Isreal), it is important to know that Iraqis are taking control of their country at a quickening pace. Local government is beginning to work. The economy is growing daily. People go outside, want barriers down in their towns, and are beginning to see higher levels of peace. The quality and effectiveness of Iraqi security forces are steadily able to take over more and more operational capabilities from Coalition forces.
The significant change in tactical and strategic doctrine with the implementation of the surge has allowed Iraq to begin to take care of itself. It is not perfect, it is not certain to succeed, and it is not pretty or completely safe yet - but it's working and getting better every day.
Some good ponderings on this can be read here:
http://pajamasmedia.com/xpress/victordavishanson/2007/11/13/iraqi_thoughts.php
http://pajamasmedia.com/xpress/victordavishanson/2007/10/07/impressions_of_iraqpart_ii.php
http://pajamasmedia.com/xpress/victordavishanson/2007/10/09/iraqi_impressionspart_iii_and.php
http://pajamasmedia.com/xpress/victordavishanson/2007/10/06/observations_about_the_war.php
http://pajamasmedia.com/xpress/victordavishanson/2007/07/08/war_and_peace_peace_and_war.php
Quote
June 3, 1997
American foreign and defense policy is adrift. Conservatives have criticized the incoherent policies of the Clinton Administration. They have also resisted isolationist impulses from within their own ranks. But conservatives have not confidently advanced a strategic vision of America's role in the world. They have not set forth guiding principles for American foreign policy. They have allowed differences over tactics to obscure potential agreement on strategic objectives. And they have not fought for a defense budget that would maintain American security and advance American interests in the new century.
We aim to change this. We aim to make the case and rally support for American global leadership.
As the 20th century draws to a close, the United States stands as the world's preeminent power. Having led the West to victory in the Cold War, America faces an opportunity and a challenge: Does the United States have the vision to build upon the achievements of past decades? Does the United States have the resolve to shape a new century favorable to American principles and interests?
We are in danger of squandering the opportunity and failing the challenge. We are living off the capital -- both the military investments and the foreign policy achievements -- built up by past administrations. Cuts in foreign affairs and defense spending, inattention to the tools of statecraft, and inconstant leadership are making it increasingly difficult to sustain American influence around the world. And the promise of short-term commercial benefits threatens to override strategic considerations. As a consequence, we are jeopardizing the nation's ability to meet present threats and to deal with potentially greater challenges that lie ahead.
We seem to have forgotten the essential elements of the Reagan Administration's success: a military that is strong and ready to meet both present and future challenges; a foreign policy that boldly and purposefully promotes American principles abroad; and national leadership that accepts the United States' global responsibilities.
Of course, the United States must be prudent in how it exercises its power. But we cannot safely avoid the responsibilities of global leadership or the costs that are associated with its exercise. America has a vital role in maintaining peace and security in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. If we shirk our responsibilities, we invite challenges to our fundamental interests. The history of the 20th century should have taught us that it is important to shape circumstances before crises emerge, and to meet threats before they become dire. The history of this century should have taught us to embrace the cause of American leadership.
Our aim is to remind Americans of these lessons and to draw their consequences for today. Here are four consequences:
• we need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global
responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future;
• we need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values;
• we need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad;
• we need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.
Such a Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity may not be fashionable today. But it is necessary if the United States is to build on the successes of this past century and to ensure our security and our greatness in the next.
Through the active creation of friendly governments that offer representation, suffrage, and general rights the United States will be more secure and the world will be benefited in the long run.
That's it. Nothing more than has already been espoused by the Administration.
http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm
In reply to your statements regarding current situations in Iraq:
People die wholesale in war - what is important is that Coalition involvement (most notably since the surge went into effect) has benefited the general Iraqi people. While many still die (you will be hard pressed to find accurate numbers) and will continue to do so for some time (beyond that of what could be considered an acceptable level akin to that of a Western country or Isreal), it is important to know that Iraqis are taking control of their country at a quickening pace. Local government is beginning to work. The economy is growing daily. People go outside, want barriers down in their towns, and are beginning to see higher levels of peace. The quality and effectiveness of Iraqi security forces are steadily able to take over more and more operational capabilities from Coalition forces.
The significant change in tactical and strategic doctrine with the implementation of the surge has allowed Iraq to begin to take care of itself. It is not perfect, it is not certain to succeed, and it is not pretty or completely safe yet - but it's working and getting better every day.
Some good ponderings on this can be read here:
http://pajamasmedia.com/xpress/victordavishanson/2007/11/13/iraqi_thoughts.php
http://pajamasmedia.com/xpress/victordavishanson/2007/10/07/impressions_of_iraqpart_ii.php
http://pajamasmedia.com/xpress/victordavishanson/2007/10/09/iraqi_impressionspart_iii_and.php
http://pajamasmedia.com/xpress/victordavishanson/2007/10/06/observations_about_the_war.php
http://pajamasmedia.com/xpress/victordavishanson/2007/07/08/war_and_peace_peace_and_war.php