How to win in Iraq

Although I spent 9 years in the military as a Captain in the Air Force, I have no special knowledge on war-mongering. I did attend and read the usual military courses and schools through the War College and such. For those of you that don't know it, the military (all branches) has courses in various big-picture subjects through what they call the war college. These courses can either be done at a military facility (less common now because of the cost) or through a correspondence course. So every officer has a basic training in strategy, history and tactics to some degree. Of course, as a physician, I had no opportunity to use such knowledge. But I am a long-time student of military history and I know how to win the war in Iraq (if we really want to). These ideas are not original to myself, but since they are politically incorrect, you won't hear any military person say them publicly. So in behalf of those in harm's way who can't say what they know to be true because of the overwhelming liberal bias in the media and culture, here goes.

1. Close down every Muslim church, mosque and facility in Iraq today. The reasons for this have nothing to do with religion. When the US took over Germany in World War II, how much sense would it have made to declare National Socialism (Nazi is just the abbreviation of the starting letters of the official party name. So Nazis are a kind of socialist - not a right-wing faction at all. (Just another left-wing lie where by repeating the fiction that Nazi's are right-wingers rather than left-wingers often enough, they have changed a fact into a lie.)) a protected entity and allowed Nazi organizing to go on? Well, political parties in Iraq are not how things are done. The Baathists were just Sunnis loyal to Hussein. The real organization in Iraq is done through the mosques and the schools associated with them. We need to close them all down now. This will dishearten the enemy, take away their organization, prevent the spread of their evil propaganda, and get the rising generation away from terrorist inoculation. Any mosque found to harbor terrorists or weapons should be bulldozed.

2. We need to take control of schools and see that only approved teachers and topics are taught.

3. We need to take control of all media now and keep control for years. (Yes years, if we are really serious. Remember that the pacification of Germany and Japan took a generation - and by the way, we still have troops in both countries more than 50 years later)

4. Propaganda must be rigidly controlled. All Iraqis must be educated forcibly to hear the proper kinds of news. Casualty reports and American losses must be hidden. In World War II, the Germans almost won the war in the first few years. They did this by sinking more ships than we could build. We therefore couldn't supply our troops, nor our allies. I bet most of you don't know that the Nazi's sank about 2,000 US ships in the war. Yes, 2,000. The US Merchant Marine lost 1 in 26 members in the war - a much higher casualty rate than any other service. The government censored this information heavily to keep our spirits up and enlistments up in the Merchant Marine. We need to do this in Iraq. This would dishearten the enemy and help our troops morale.

5. Break off Northern Iraq and make a Kurdistan. The Kurds will never assimilate and having a part of Iraq that will oppose the terrorists (and Iran) will help balance the region. This strategy is not without risk. Kurds make up a high proportion of neighboring Turkey. Perhaps this will cause problems in Turkey. Good. The Turks refused to let us attack Iraq from the north, if you remember and are directly responsible for increasing our battle casualties, so tough for them.

6. Fragment Iraqi society by establishing total freedom of religion. The more Christians, Zoroastrians and the like there are, the better. Give these people preference in jobs and government positions.

7. Kill several hundred known trouble makers from al-sadr to several Imams. Try them in a military tribunal (not a civilian one) and then hang them publicly. These trials should be done simultaneously and over a a very short time frame (days) to decrease resistance.

8. Allow a small number of rallies against "harsh American rule". Pick one city at a time and allow a rally. Arrest and kill the leaders. Then allow a protest in another city. Arrest and kill the leaders. Etc.

9. Propagandize heavily against Iran. Remember that Iraq has been at war with Iran for a generation. The Iraqis have suffered many more casualties at their hands than ours. We need to foster hatred of Iran and blame them for every evil in the country. Easy to do since they are the source of much of what is wrong in Iraq today.

10. We must set up a party that will be for us without being pro-American. When we leave Iraq, there will be a natural back-lash against anyone that worked with the Americans. We must be very careful to make it seem like the people we really like, are not liked by us because they are so pro-Iraqi.

11. Give our troops the green-light to kill terrorists. Anyone found using arms against us or having bomb-making equipment should be killed in the field. No imprisonment, no trial, just kill them in the field. Patton's solution to Nazi Germany was to "kill Germans. Kill more Germans". This is the solution to terrorism. Not let them share power, not forgive them. Kill them. They are like rabid dogs and can't be cured. And their disease spreads if they are not removed from the population.

12. Use captured Iraqis to rebuild the infrastructure of Iraq.

13. Invade Pakistan and get Osama. Never mind what they Pakistanis say. They have surrendered that part of the country anyway. And they would be secretly relieved because this part of Pakistan is anti-government anyway.

We could fix Iraq in a decade. Nothing else would do the job.

Do you think any of the above will happen? Such an occupation would be distasteful. And if we didn't do it when we had high public support, what makes you think we'll do it now?

I am as anti-war as you can get. I opposed the first Gulf War because I know how horrible war is. I've treated veterans, remember? And I realize that the innocent Iraqi soldiers had it lots worse than we did. I cringed when I saw footage of destroyed Iraqi columns. Most of their dead were as innocent as our dead. They were just doing what they were told.

Iraq was never a direct US threat, even though they did have WMD's (weapons of mass destruction). I never understood the distinction between weapons of mass destruction and other weapons. As near as I can tell, the more people a weapon kills, the better a weapon it is. Isn't that what a weapon is for? I know Hussein is a murderer. But I'm not willing to send my son to die for a free Kuwait. Let the Arabs send their sons to war and use their money. I personally don't care who sells the oil. If the Arabs aren't willing to fight for their own freedom, why should we?

War kills innocent people. Lots of them. It brutalizes even the best of people. I would never have gotten in Iraq either time. I enlisted because I felt I owed something to this country and wanted to give something back. Even though against the gulf wars, I enlisted because it was my duty to support my country, even if I disagreed with its policies. The time and place to resist policies is at the ballot box, not when we're at war.

But nation-building is not the purpose of the military. It's for defense, nothing more. There is nothing in the Constitution that allows the President or Congress to be the world's policemen. After 9/11, we should have destroyed al-queda wherever it was found. We should have brought down the Taliban, the ally of al-queda. This we did. If we felt Hussein, was bad, we should have waited until he felt safe, and then sent a few cruise missiles after him - not invaded the country. Then we should have left Iraq and Afghanistan alone. Let them kill each other or not as they wished. If another government that supported al-queda came into power, then assassinate them also.

And so back to the Iraq war. We could easily "win" it, even today. But what do you think the odds are that the liberals in control of our government, media and culture would let the above things happen? Impossible, and you know it.

In which case, we should get out of Iraq now. Today. Without suffering even one more casualty. Because it's morally wrong to kill our troops in a war we don't have the will to win.

Vincet Veritas, MEB

Former Representative Kolbe of Arizona representative of why Republicans lost

Here's a link to an article about Rep. Kolbe of Arizona in my local newspaper - http://activepaper.olivesoftware.com/daily/Skins/StandardEx/navigator.asp?skin=StandardEx&BP=OK
Go to page 11 for the article.

"In Arizona, retiring GOP Rep. Jim Kolbe said he hopes the Republican losses “cause a serious reexamination of our party’s roots and directions.” Kolbe, who has held his seat for 22 years, will be succeeded by Giffords. “If Republicans are to provide leadership for our country, we must get back to the fundamentals of our party — an emphasis on national security, fiscal discipline, reducing government’s role in our daily lives, embracing immigrants from other parts of the world, and a commitment to economic growth through lower taxes and increased trade,” he said."

Now Kolbe is a perfect example of why Republicans lost. He is a leader in a party of cultural conservatism that is pro-family. And yet he was practicing perversion (homosexual behavior) in the closet. And just as bad, he was corrupt (currently under investigation). No wonder the Republicans lost - they were (and are) a party of hypocrites. Kolbe has a lot of nerve making comments on what Republicans need to do. I have a suggestion for him and others like him - keep your pants on, stay away from boys, and don't be a crook. Now that's not too much to ask, is it?

And even worse, Kolbe is still stirring up trouble by trying to keep the Republicans doing all the things that lost them the election. Yes, "national security" is important. Maybe that's why we should have never gone in Iraq, which was not a threat to the US and the arabs could take care of themselves if Saddam tried invading Kuwait, Saudi Arabia or the Gulf States. And if they didn't resist, well that's too bad for them, but why should I send my son and my taxes over there if they won't even defend themselves? And from a cynical point of view, who cares which thug sells us oil? Saddam is a mass murderer, no doubt. And an evil man. But why should the US have to do something about it? And Hussein was a counter-balance to worse nut-cases in Iran. Yes, Rep. Kolbe, it is time to care about American Security - not world, not European, not Middle East - but American Security. And Kolbe still doesn't get it.

"Fiscal discipline" is also important. That's why the party that hugely expanded the welfare state through things like buying drugs for the senior crowd (the demographic group with the highest disposable income) paid for by borrowing and taxing young, working families who have the least disposable income deserved to lose. The Republicans actually managed to do worse than the Communists - they didn't take from the haves to give to the have-nots - they took from the have-nots and gave to the rich.

"Reducing government's role" is also a worthy goal. Too bad, Rep. Kolbe didn't practice what he's preaching. He and others like him including GWB have vastly increased government's power. Just look at how much of recent job growth is due to increase in size of government. And all this "growth" is actually a net loss to the economy because government workers produce nothing useful. They only produce paperwork and restrictions on the rest of us.

"Embracing immigrants" is exactly what lost Kolbe's successor the primary election. Is Kolbe mentally deficient? Never mind that the demographics of the criminal aliens are 85% liberal. Kolbe must think Republicans are idiots. (Well, actually he's right, because they kept electing him for 22 years) Americans oppose immigration 2 to 1 right now. How would adopting a position contrary to the wishes of Americans help the Republican party? (And remember this guy was a Republican leader - no wonder they lost)

"Lower taxes" are also a great idea but how about lower spending? Again, Kolbe demonstrates that the Republican leadership just doesn't get it.

And last "increased trade". Kolbe is off base on this one also. What he really means is importing more foreign-made goods and exporting American manufacturing and jobs. And the Republicans should be against this - not for it. If there is any hope for Republicans (and I don't think there is or they would be saying different things) this issue alone may hold promise of wresting control back from the Democrats. If the Republicans would equalize the playing field by imposing hefty tariffs and limiting our balance of trade, they could appeal to the blue-collar Democratic middle class that voted so heavily Democratic. But as long as GWB is President, this won't happen, so I expect a worse loss of Republicans in the house in the next election. Yes, you heard it first from me - I predict the Democratic margin in the House will go up - not down - in the next election because there is no sign that the Republican leadership has learned anything.

Vincet Veritas, MEB