Neocons admitting defeat?

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Taz_786, Aug 14, 2006.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MWIwZmVlNWUwZTdhOWVhNTllOTg5ZGE1ZThkMGZjMjM=


    The beginning of the end for neoconservatism?
     
  2. Or a rallying call to the cause!
     
  3. They've tried 'rallying' for three years now..
     
  4. The flag needs to be under threat for people to rally round it.
    trouble has been brewing but has it really been imminent yet?

    A strengthened Iran Syria flicking the bird to the US is different to sabre rattling, or AQ voicing discontent.
     
  5. I'd agree, I think Hezbollah will take more from this than Israel. The Israelis have failed to defeat Hezbollah who proved themselves to be a well organised enemy. The Israelis (with US and UK) support have been taking this approach for 50+ years and it does not work. Time for a long over due re-think. As for Iran they'll be happy with this "result" and given that they have US and UK forces directly to their west and east will see this as giving the west a bloody nose. In addition Israel's conduct in the conflict will have lost them a great deal of support in countries that have been generally sympathetic down the years.
     
  6. Hezbollah won.
    No massive armourd thrust getting into the Enemy Army's rear administrative areas and carrying the day. No civilian infrastucture failing and dragging down the government, for Hezboll is only a minor part of the state assembly.
    And what ammounts to Terror Bombing, did the Blitz, the Firestorms of Germany or the mass bombing of Japan, N Vietnam teach nothing. Didn't work then and does not work now.
    Conventional armies can be defeated by conventional means and the Isreali's and Yanks are very good at that.
    But armies made of men who do not 'Line' up and fight require unconventional methods.
    john
     

  7. This is a long fight and fat lady isn't even close to singing.
     
  8. Au contraire, recent US opinion polls would suggest otherwise.
     
  9. Bush's final gamble: giving Iraq a dictator?

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,176-2320091,00.html
     
  10. Trip_Wire

    Trip_Wire RIP

    The last time I checked 'jonwilly,' we won the war, in Japan and the reason for the surrender, was the bombing of the two cities with the Atomic Bomb! So, I think that worked! They would have fought to their deaths without the bomb! :roll:

    Oh, also your quote "But armies made of men who do not 'Line' up and fight require unconventional methods." Didn't the American Army teach the British Army, that this tactic didn't work in the Revolutionary War? To bad we forgot it, in the civil war and used European tactics again on both sides.
     
  11. maguire

    maguire LE Book Reviewer

    jonwilly said the 'mass bombing' - by which I think he means the conventional bombing done *before* the atomic bombs were dropped. and you can hardly claim North Vietnam as a victory now, can you?
     
  12. Oh My Buddha, Lord above save little old me from Bush's iriots.
    john
    Yeah I'll also go with this new idea that King George's way out will be to install a dictator. Means ta say 'I know hes a son of a bitch but he's our son of a bitch.'
    Worked before din'it, Batista, The Shah, Hey say Thems two cuntry we hate now.
     
  13. Good piece of work Taz. A very good article.