Does the Flypaper Strategy Work After All?
Personally, I’ve always thought it was one of the weaker arguments for the Iraq War; however, our good friend AJStrata has a story that might give pause to those who completely dismiss it…
|
||||||
Does the Flypaper Strategy Work After All?Personally, I’ve always thought it was one of the weaker arguments for the Iraq War; however, our good friend AJStrata has a story that might give pause to those who completely dismiss it… 6 comments to Does the Flypaper Strategy Work After All?Leave a Reply |
||||||
|
Copyright © 2010 Informed Speculation - All Rights Reserved |
||||||
I’m with AJ.
I think that time will reveal both the Patriot Act and the Bush Doctrine to be reflective of some of the most insightful strategic thinking in US history.
The Flypaper Strategy has always seemed to me to be incredibly selfish. You shouldn’t try to attract terrorists to Iraq; you shouldn’t try to attract them anywhere! I don’t think the death of foreign civilians instead of Americans is something that should be hailed as a success. If anything, to me it weakens the case for the war. Bush should drop the Flypaper rhetoric from his speeches.
Jojo, you make a good point…I suppose a staunch supporter of the strategy would say, yeah, but here we have soldiers ready to take them on…but, as I said, it’s not my preference, either…
Jojo—Well, this is not my ‘blog and I don’t want to step on Mark’s toes, but I have to say that your analysis of the situation seems somewhat unrealistic to me.
You wrote, “you shouldn’t try to attract [terrorists] anywhere!” It’s become clear that beyond the Sunni “insurgency,” which at least appears to be fighting toward some kind of goal, as crazed as it may be, is the nihilist death cult of al-Qaeda, who aren’t particularly fighting toward any goal, just killing for the sake of killing and disruption. Though his words have been mocked, the president was right: we’ve got to “smoke ‘em out.” And apparently we are.
You wrote, “I don’t think the death of foreign civilians instead of Americans is something that should be hailed as a success.” I’m not sure who, in this sentence, you are referring to as “foreign civilians,” but I hope it is not the amassed horde of Saudis, Jordanians, Iranians, Syrians and Egyptians who are in Iraq solely to kill Iraqis and Americans. Again, the sad fact is that these people are willing to kill indiscriminately and, in fact, are anxious to do so. It will be now or it will be later, but they must be “smoked out” and killed. There can and will be no reconciliation with al-Qaeda; it is purely a “them or us” scenario, as unfortunately gruesome as that must be.
Greg – I’ll only butt in to say this: you guys are never stepping on my toes…disagree with me all day long, I enjoy the give and take…
I’m not sure who, in this sentence, you are referring to as “foreign civilians,” but I hope it is not the amassed horde of Saudis, Jordanians, Iranians, Syrians and Egyptians who are in Iraq solely to kill Iraqis and Americans.
Sorry for the late reply: by foreign civilians, I meant the civilians of Iraq. A lot of the rhetoric I hear is “better to fight them there than here”, which translates to “better to put other civilians in harm’s way than our own”.