Sunday, December 26, 2004

VDH defends Rumsfeld... successfully

A little while back, on my tBlog site, I went on a drunken rant inspired by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld’s comments during a Q&A with deployed troops in Iraq – you know, the ones about going to war with the army you have, not the army you wish for.

Well, I did think that the specialist who asked the question about scavenging armor from Iraqi junkyards deserved a better answer, but in retrospect, Rumsfeld’s response was actually pretty accurate.

Victor Davis Hanson provides some historical context for our supposed unpreparedness in this article.

VDH also points out what should be painfully obvious: the fact that the United States’ campaigns in both Afghanistan and Iraq have been successful, that despite charges to the contrary, our troops are wearing armor for the first time in U.S. history, and that fully 95 percent of our wounded now survive – many of whom find themselves in the Medical Holding Company on Fort Knox.

I found this paragraph rather insightful, since many of the war’s – and the administration’s – critics often refuse to supply context for their allegations:

Out of the ashes of September 11, a workable war exegesis emerged because of students of war like Don Rumsfeld: Terrorists do not operate alone, but only through the aid of rogue states; Islamicists hate us for who we are, not the alleged grievances outlined in successive and always-metamorphosing loony fatwas; the temper of bin Laden's infomercials hinges only on how bad he is doing; and multilateralism is not necessarily moral, but often an amoral excuse either to do nothing or to do bad — ask the U.N. that watched Rwanda and the Balkans die or the dozens of profiteering nations who in concert robbed Iraq and enriched Saddam.

At any rate, I’ll apologize again for the dearth of posts. I’m at home, enjoying the holidays with the family for the first time in two years, so that’s been the priority. If anyone’s still stopping by to read this, thanks for sticking with me.