Fischer’s statement is not a “stark reversal” of anything. It is obvious that the US and the Brits are not going to stop the killing until Saddam is gone. Fischer, as a decent human being, is merely hoping that moment comes sooner rather than later. His statement explains that quite clearly.

And the schadenfreude surely belongs on the German side, as they can see the hatred the US and Britain have arosed in the Arab world and even Iraq itself. Surely Fischer knows, as Mr. Auster knows, that the US has lost this war in the larger sense. No crowds welcoming liberation, stiff resistance, far more US casualties than expected, far more civilians killed, and at the end of it we will be stuck occupying a sullen and hostile population.

BTW, VFR readers should be aware that the *Afghanistan* body count (US) crept up by another two last week. Yet another of our great triumphs is coming home to roost.

“Fischer, as a decent human being”

A “former” radical left Marxist supporter of communist terrorism is a “decent human being”?

“they can see the hatred the US and Britain have arosed in the Arab world and even Iraq itself. Surely Fischer knows, as Mr. Auster knows, that the US has lost this war in the larger sense.”

We have not “aroused” anything that was not there in the first place. Hatred for the West by the Arab and Muslim world has been common for hundreds of years. That some Arab Fascists and Islamic fundamentalists are marching in the streets and calling for Jihad is niether nothing new nor the fault of America and Britain. We were going to have to confront this hatred sooner or later, so its best to bring it out in the open so we can deal with it. I know the Buchananites and many paleoconservatives and libertarians would like to crawl under a table like gutless cowards, hoping the bad Islamic men wont hurt them if they hide and grovel enough, but no self respecting patriotic conservative would take this stance.

“No crowds welcoming liberation, stiff resistance, far more US casualties than expected, far more civilians killed, and at the end of it we will be stuck occupying a sullen and hostile population.”

That many Iraqi’s are suspicious of the allies is hardly suprising given what happened after the first Gulf War. It is also not suprising that many Iraqi’s have become so fearful of the Baathist regime that they are too scared to show any support for the allies. However, as the intention of America and Britain to drive the Baathists from power totally becomes clear to the Iraqi people, and as it becomes a reality, support for the allies will become much more open and widespread. In fact there are already signs that this is happenning.

“BTW, VFR readers should be aware that the *Afghanistan* body count (US) crept up by another two last week. Yet another of our great triumphs is coming home to roost.”

Driving the Taliban from power was a great triumph, unless of course your one of the new far left/far right anti-American crowd taking yet another opportunity to spit on America.

How long did it take to defeat Nazi Germany? How long did it take to defeat Soviet Russia?

Why do some people expect instant victory over an enemy as difficult to fight as assymetric guerilla and terrorist groups? This will take time. It is both laughable, and naive to expect that this war against Islamo-Fascism is going to be won in a few months or even years. Patience is a virtue. Whining is not.

Joschka Fischer, like many people, had a fiery youth. At least he has learned from his mistakes. As things stand, I see him as far more honorable than Rumsfeld or Bush, who have knowlingly mislead the American people into believing that Iraq was connected with 9/11. Give me an honest leftist anyday.

As for historical Arab hatred of the US, this is simply untrue. Arabs used to look at the US as an enemy of colonialism. Indeed, we stopped France, Britain and Israel from carrying out a neoolonial war over Suez in 1956.

Shawn has obviously swallowed US propaganda hook, line and sinker. The neocon position — the Rumsfeld position — was that the Iraqis would give up instantly, that the Shia would revolt, that Turkey would support us, that France and Germany would get behind us once the war started. None — none of this has happened.

The comparison of our current imperial adventures with the Cold War or WWII are just plain silly. The Cold
War was about containment — the Soviet Union fell under its own weight. WWII was about defeating armies occupying other peoples’ countries. Now we are the ones occupying other peoples’ countries. More benignly, to be sure, but we are still occupiers.

As for “spitting on America”, I wore the uniform for five and a half years, buddy. Given my specialty and the time I served, I chose the most “forward” assignments possible. I have friends still serving active duty. They should not be ordered to kill or die in an unjust and ultimately self-defeating war which has nothing to do with the fight against terrorism.

From Mr. Young’s comments, it is apparent that no matter what happened, he would say America has “lost” this war. He reminds me of a list that was published somewhere of all the things that would have to happen in order for certain liberals to concede this war to be a success. The list is so long and particular—including such demands as “must not get any Arabs angry,” “must be won in three days,” “must have no deviations from original battle plan,” that you realize this war could never be a success by the liberals’ lights.

MY wrote: “BTW, VFR readers should be aware that the *Afghanistan* body count (US) crept up by another two last week. Yet another of our great triumphs is coming home to roost.”

I just don’t understand this at all. Mr. Young seems to want us not to go after the terrorists who attacked US soil and their sponsors. Judging from his comments, he positively relishes the idea that we might fail or suffer setbacks in that endeavor…????

I don’t know Mr. Young’s politics, but I’d have to guess by his presence here that he’s probably not a Leftist, or at least doesn’t consider himself one, so how can he say such things? I did four years, all overseas, as a groundpounder in the Marine Corps myself, so I’ve earned the bleeping right to criticize such sentiments, and I will. As Shawn says, Mr. Young is spitting on this country when he mocks our efforts to root out and destroy those who unjustly attacked American soil. Period. It’s one thing to be against the war in Iraq. It’s quite another to be a de facto cheerleader for and champion of terrorists.

P.S. Wearing the uniform is not a prerequisite for criticizing anti-American sentiment anyway. Let’s be clear about that.

I did not mock efforts in Afghanistan. (I did not even oppose that war, which I thought was a necessary show of power.) I pointed out that Americans are still dying in a supposedly pacified Afghanistan. This fact is not given prominence by the major media, which is distracted by the current war. It is far more disrespectful to our forces to leave them to suffer a slow trickle of deaths in Afghanistan, pretending the situation to be under control, which alternative media and personal contacts tell me is not the case.

That, to me, is “spitting on America” — and Americans.

My apologies, Mitchell. Evidently I misconstrued your comment.

I’ve never gotten the impression that anyone is claiming the situation there is all under control though. True, we haven’t had a lot of news out of Afghanistan for awhile, but that’s a different thing from someone positively making a statement to that effect, isn’t it?

Thanks Bubba. It was probably not a good idea on my part to use “triumph” in quotes. What I meant to imply is that the war is not over there.

I think we all have been getting a little careless with language during this war. Let’s hope it is over soon so that we can get back to debating domestic issues.