Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Gen. Batiste’s Op-Ed That The WSJ And The Washington Times Didn’t Want You To See

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-22-07 03:24 PM
Original message
Gen. Batiste’s Op-Ed That The WSJ And The Washington Times Didn’t Want You To See
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/08/22/batiste-conservatives/


Gen. Batiste’s Op-Ed That The WSJ And The Washington Times Didn’t Want You To See

Our guest blogger is Ret. Maj. Gen. John Batiste, the former Commanding General of 1st Infantry Division.

For my first post here at ThinkProgress, I thought I would share something a little different from what you usually read here — something from a conservative perspective. I think this is especially fitting, given the new poll of foreign policy experts by Foreign Policy Magazine and the Center for American Progress, which shows 64 percent of conservative analysts feel the co-called “surge” in Iraq is having no impact, or a negative effect.

The following is an op-ed I wrote two weeks ago, which neither the Wall Street Journal or Washington Times wanted to consider, so I’m posting it here…

Over a year and a half ago, I made a gut-wrenching decision to leave the Army in order to speak out about the war in Iraq. I turned my back on over 31 years of service and what by all accounts would have been a great career. I realized that I was in a unique position to speak out on behalf of Soldiers and their families. I had a moral obligation and duty to do so. My family and I left the only life we knew and entered the political debate. As a two-time combat veteran, I understand the value of thorough planning and deliberate execution. I understand what it takes to win. As a life-long Republican, I am prepared to carry on with the debate for as long as necessary. I have been speaking out for the past 17 months and there is no turning back.

As a conservative, I am all for a strong military and setting the conditions for success. America goes to war to win. I am not anti-war and am committed to winning the struggle against world-wide Islamic extremism. But, I am outraged that elected officials of my own party do not comprehend the predicament we are in with a strategy in the Middle East that lacks focus and is all but relying on the military to solve the diplomatic, political, and economic Rubik’s Cube that defines Iraq. Our dysfunctional interagency process in Washington DC lacks leadership and direction. Many conservatives in Congress have allowed the charade to go on for too long.

It is disappointing that so many elected representatives of my party continue to blindly support the administration rather than doing what is in the best interests of our country. Traditionally, my party has maintained a conservative view on questions regarding our Armed Forces. For example, we commit our military only when absolutely necessary. In the same way conservatives have always argued against government excess in social programs, the lives our young men and women in uniform, our most precious resource, are not to be used on wars of choice or for nation building. The military theorist Carl von Clausewitz taught us that wars are to be fought only as a last resort–the extension of politics by other means.

These principles are apparently not understood by many of the Republicans in our Congress. Besides the fact that many conservatives allowed President Bush to jump head-first into a war of choice, the bullheadedness of Congressional Republicans who argue for staying the course runs contrary to conservative values. Many politicians of my party continue to argue that we must liberally use up whatever our military has left. Bottom line, the Republican Congress of the last six years abrogated its Constitutional duty and share in the responsibility for the debacle in Iraq.

Our all-volunteer military cannot continue the current cycle of deployments for much longer. America’s national strategy in Iraq is akin to a four legged stool with legs representing diplomacy, political reconciliation, economic recovery, and the military. The glue holding it all together must be the mobilization of the United States in support of the incredibly important effort to defeat world-wide Islamic extremism. The only leg on the stool of any consequence is the military–it is solid titanium and high performing, the best in the world. After almost six years since September 11, our country is not mobilized behind this important work and the diplomatic, political, and economic legs are not focused and lack leadership. Most Americans now appreciate that the military alone cannot solve the problem in Iraq. In this situation, the stool will surely collapse.

Our military and our treasury are not unlimited resources. The war in Iraq is breaking our fine Army and Marine Corps, and we are perilously close to doing damage that will take more than a decade to fix. Our brigades and divisions in Iraq today are at near full strength because the rest of the force has been gutted. We cannot place America in a position of weakness as it just begins its long war against world-wide Islamic extremism. The Republican administration is bleeding our national treasure in blood and dollars with little to show for it.

The high price we are paying might be worth it if Iraq’s many factions were making meaningful progress to achieve political reconciliation. But, after more than four years, Iraqis are no closer to settling their differences and the sitting Shia government is ineffective. With insufficient coalition and Iraqi security forces on the ground, the myth of Sisyphus is playing out over and over again. The Iraqi Parliament goes on vacation instead of working, and every few months, it seems, another Iraqi political faction walks out of the process. To me, continuing to expend money and American lives on a nation that shows little drive to solve its own problems is the foreign policy equivalent of a welfare queen.

The only way to stabilize Iraq and allow our military to rearm and refit for the long fight ahead is to begin a responsible and deliberate redeployment from Iraq and replace the troops with far less expensive and much more effective resources–those of diplomacy and the critical work of political reconciliation and economic recovery. In other words, when it comes to Iraq, it’s time for conservatives to once again be conservative.

– Major General John Batiste, US Army (retired)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Mojorabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-22-07 03:31 PM
Response to Original message
1. K&R n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alstephenson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-22-07 03:35 PM
Response to Original message
2. Iraq = Rubik's Cube. Very good analogy.
We won't be seeing this Op-Ed anywhere but ThinkProgress.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pwb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-22-07 03:41 PM
Response to Original message
3. What does a combat veteran know about war.?
The neocon newspapers ignored the story because they get their war strategy from the, Fighting Romney's.:banghead:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tnlurker Donating Member (698 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-22-07 04:06 PM
Response to Original message
4. I'll read this at home
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveAmerica Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-22-07 07:49 PM
Response to Original message
5. Nobody puts Baby (lonsister) in the corner, why didn't this get more
air time? Was it already posted? This should be forwarded to all Republicans in everyone's contact list. Thanks for posting it here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-22-07 08:12 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. I was thinking how significant this is
...and wondering why there are so few posts and recommendations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tinksrival Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-22-07 08:43 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. The good General has already been branded a traitor.
He has been long tossed over the side by the media.
He gave up his command and retired early in protest and came out pretty strong before the '06 elections.
The media in this country has as much blood on it's hands as Bush, Cheney, and the Neocons.

See this C-Span You-Tube for the "not news worthy" testimony he gave to the Senate.
If you haven't seen it...you should!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TWMRyEo28Q

***Some freeper blames Soros in the you-tube comments!

The military is not all behind Bushco. News not at eleven!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ghost in the Machine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-22-07 08:33 PM
Response to Original message
7. K&R
I wonder if it's ok to send this to our local papers?? I'll do it in a heartbeat...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveAmerica Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-22-07 08:50 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. Hugh, Tink and Ghost - Yes! it's up to us to be the media!! Print out
Edited on Wed Aug-22-07 08:51 PM by SaveAmerica
30 copies and drop them off on the subway on your way to work, etc and forward to local papers. My first copy is going to my Republican 'representative' as a reminder that THIS is who he should be listening too when it comes time to vote, not W. Who should he listen to, someone who's "Been there and done that" or someone who hasn't been anywhere or done anything right?

One hand ---> W, hid during Vietnam or General Batista, 31 years experience Boots on the ground in actual wars < --- other hand



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
barbtries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 07:30 PM
Response to Reply #9
19. interesting that you would say that
Edited on Thu Aug-23-07 07:31 PM by barbtries
for several months now i print up one good DU thread to read, and leave, on the bus as i ride to and from work.

edited interestingly
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pawel K Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 11:11 AM
Response to Original message
10. Agree with most of it but will they please stop blaiming Iraqis for this shit?
Edited on Thu Aug-23-07 11:13 AM by Pawel K
"To me, continuing to expend money and American lives on a nation that shows little drive to solve its own problems is the foreign policy equivalent of a welfare queen."

Their own problems? What a crock of shit. We are the ones that created these problems. We knocked their country back 50 years and now we are upset they won't fix it themselves? What is wrong with our country?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PinkyisBlue Donating Member (617 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 11:38 AM
Response to Original message
11. We're fighting for freedom of speech and democracy over there....
so we don't have to have freedom of speech and democracy over here.

Great opinion piece. It appears that a lot of military people have turned against this war and this administration. It would be great to get them all together in one forum. That is criminal that the mainstream news organizations would not dare to publish this piece; our country has fallen so far, so fast.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 11:39 AM
Response to Original message
12. Huge Kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 02:09 PM
Response to Original message
13. Another "conservative" asshole making excuses...
Even if he's bashing Bush and the neocons, he's still a fuckhead.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kolesar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 03:56 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. Bashing Dems as using the military unnecessarily , but it was Reagan who attacked Grenada
Traditionally, my party has maintained a conservative view on questions regarding our Armed Forces. For example, we commit our military only when absolutely necessary.


For that matter, the GOPs had an illegal wars against the Nicaraguan Sandinistas, killed Chile's Allende, and L'il Bush tried to knock off Hugo Chavez in a failed coup in April 2002. Whose government attacked Columbia and stole Panama to make a canal? McKinley, Roosevelt??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 04:02 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. Exactly...
Just another revisionist history asshole.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
malaise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 04:00 PM
Response to Original message
15. Has this been sent to KO?
Wow!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donkeyotay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 04:41 PM
Response to Original message
17. Hold the GOP and the flag-wavers responsible for this optional war
"These principles are apparently not understood by many of the Republicans in our Congress. Besides the fact that many conservatives allowed President Bush to jump head-first into a war of choice, the bullheadedness of Congressional Republicans who argue for staying the course runs contrary to conservative values. Many politicians of my party continue to argue that we must liberally use up whatever our military has left. Bottom line, the Republican Congress of the last six years abrogated its Constitutional duty and share in the responsibility for the debacle in Iraq."

But he really didn't have to say "liberally use up" - as if he's implying that's something liberals would do. He could have left that word out.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Disturbed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 04:52 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. . Maj. Gen. John Batiste doesn't understand that the Busholini
Regime is not a "conservative" Regime. It is Neo-Fascist & Impirialistic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Postman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 08:39 PM
Response to Original message
20. Iraq is equivalent to a "welfare queen"?......
Where do you start to debunk this crap? "Welfare Queens" must be living at the poshest hotels, eating at the most lavish restaurants and spending their nights in the high stakes poker pit out in Vegas. I mean what to do, what to do with all those welfare checks they're cashing at our expense....

How about all those "welfare queens" known as Halliburton, KBR, GE, Honeywell, Raytheon, McDonnell-Douglass, Grumman...just to name a few...No. They don't seem to register on General My Army Is A Paper Tiger's radar....

Do we need allies such as this numb nuts?


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Disturbed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 08:52 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. He is a Rethug. Just because he is dissing the way this
War On Iraq is being run doesn't mean he is changing his political beliefs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davekriss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 09:20 PM
Response to Reply #20
22. I second your emotion
I was just about to post the same. "Welfare queens" my ass! General Batiste is as deluded as any other of his violent right-wing ilk.

"I am all for a strong military and setting the conditions for success. America goes to war to win. I am not anti-war and am committed to winning the struggle against world-wide Islamic extremism."

In other words he has no problem with the illegal and immoral invasion of another country THAT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH ISLAMIC EXTREMISM if planners simply better arranged for "success". I guess Mr. Batiste would be OK, too, if we invaded New Jersey to rid the world of "Islamic extremism" as long as the residents of Jersey City then welcomed him with flowers and praise. Mr. Batiste would blindly follow his Fuhrer as long as the Fuhrer set the conditions for "success".

"...we commit our military only when absolutely necessary."

O sure, Mr. Batiste. Our military needed to invade Panama to rid the world of that dangerous Islamic extremist Noriega; Grenada, too, was necessary -- what would we do without those medical students? And of course our troops protecting the Canon Limo oil pipeline in Columbia are there only because it is "absolutely necessary". General Batiste, let me introduce you to General Smedly Butler.

While I welcome all voices that speak against this war, this one is hard to take.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 14th 2024, 06:54 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC