As much as the media and the dims have loved screaming about the new Vietnam every time the US or Israel enters into an armed conflict they finally got one.

I fought in Vietnam as a “grunt” on the ground. I was in Saigon in 1975 and was airlifted from the US Embassy by helicopter when South Vietnam fell. I have been to Vietnam twice since the war. I now count old enemies as my friend.

Iraq was not Vietnam. Iraq was Germany after WW II with Werewolf battalions and dead enders. It took longer to pacify because the Americans were not allowed to use the tactics that were available to the allies after Germany surrendered.

The French and Russians were not patrolling Baghdad with “rape squads”. In 1946 two American soldiers were ambushed in Bavaria. The third Army pounded two towns into rumble for retaliation. There were no more ambushes.

Afghanistan is a terrible spot on the planet. We are not liked there. These people are in the 3rd century and do not wish to be a part of the 21st Century. I never went anywhere without at least a pistol when I was in Afghanistan.

The Soviets used over 300,000 combat forces, Russian, Soviet and Afghan during their occupation. The British lost entire Armies. Alexander lost 6,000 of his Army of 30,000 there in those Godforsaken mountains.

The dims have their Vietnam and they are welcome to it. President Bush gave Obama a victory in Iraq. He gave an workable stalemate in Afghanistan.

Obama has chosen to make it into a meat grinder. This is the dims war and the blood of those Americans are on their hands. As Iraq was on President Bush.

My question is will the Democrats throw in the towel and allow a strong man to emerge in ether Iraq or Afghanistan?

From a historical and cultural point of view, this part of the world has never had anything close to representative government that worked. It’s always some strong man, usually from the military who emerges and establishes ether benign or not so benign dictator rule.

What will the Code PinkO’s and other liberals do when His Obamaness refuses to insert American power to stop the rise of a dominate Strong man in ether country? Bush was committed to stabilizing both Iraq and Afghanistan using US power for as long as it took for democracy to take root, I somehow doubt Obama has the backbone to support democracy in the long run.

Debak has a unique perspective in a recent analysis, one which has chilling implications for Israel.

Excerpts…

Ashkenazi was therefore invited to Strasbourg to carry some more bad news to his government, i.e. that the Obama administration wants Iran as its key military and intelligence partner for resolving America’s Afghanistan-Pakistan (known now as “Afgpak”) predicament. The shape of this alliance lacks final form; backdoor US-Iranian meetings at various levels are in progress at different venues to determine how far Tehran is willing to go. But the US president has set his course.

Aside from UK premier Gordon Brown, NATO leaders by and large refused the US president’s appeal for more troops to fight in Afghanistan. German chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Nicolas Sarkozy told Obama there was no point in sending reinforcements to Afghanistan if US troops were on their way out, especially after Washington had opted for an “Iranian solution” for the conflict without reference to Berlin or Paris.

The Obama administration has a bitter pill for Israel to swallow for the sake of progress toward a strategic collaboration with Tehran on Afghanistan and Pakistan. It cuts close to the bone in terms of Israel’s security and international standing:

1. Washington will not brook any unilateral Israeli military action that might upset US-Iranian moves towards cooperation in the Afgpak Arena.

2. Washington will apply all its resources to obstruct such action.

3. It will not be enough for Israel to stand idle as Iran develops a nuclear bomb. The Obama administration also has fish to fry with Taliban and is bent on an urgent breakthrough in Israel-Arab peacemaking for dividends relevant to this arena too.

Israel can therefore expect to be squeezed hard for sweeping concessions to Syria, Lebanon and the Palestinians in order to enhance America’s hand on both these tracks.

Once again we see a suggestion that Obama is seeing to ally with our enemies and throw our long-term allies under the train.

Obama’s motive with regards to Iran here is to try to come up with a painless “victory” that he can look like a hero at home, hoping that the consequences won’t become evident until he has solidified permanent power.

And by the way, I suspect another sacrifice to this Iran policy will be an acquiescence to Iranian hegemony over Iraq – at least over the Shiite regions.

…….waging war against a perceived right wing enemy.
In WWII, both Germany and Japan were perceived as right wing enemies and the war proceeded as a no holds barred event.
The Democrats are far less comfortable standing up to a menacing, threatening, belligerent that has Leftist tinges about it. Hence the real reticence in confronting the Islamofascists, the ChiComms, or the ChiComms’ North Korean surrogates.
The Democrats are far more at ease throwing the bodies of the heads of a former right wing government and their families down a deserted Siberian well than those from a likewise Leftwing Government.
THE OBAMBI and his government wil spend more time confronting the North Korean and the Islamofascist threats with their hands in their pockets than the time spent raising even a single finger against them

.”promoting an open, honest, and effective Afghan national government;” Now, I think I’ve got this figured out, this administration, which is led by a non-leader, staffed by crooks, tax cheats, political hacks and back-room deal-makers, is going to promote democratic order in Afghanistan? I don’t think so. But I’m sure that Hillary and The Obamunist will tell us up is down, black is white and all that. And I meant black is white in a non-racist way. We don’t have open, honest and effective government here, how can they hope to bring it anywhere else.