Sunday, December 03, 2006

Using the Military to Kill and Destroy

I found this great posting over at IMAO on what our new policy for future wars should be:

For the next war, we should totally just blaze into a country, bombing everything followed by ground troops to kill off the country's government. Then we just leave.

As soon as people start complaining that we left the country in turmoil and all the innocent people are suffering, we say, "Hey, last time we invaded a country and stayed to help, you whined about it. Thus, we will no longer stay and help countries after we devastate them. These people are suffering because you whined. It's your fault."

I, for one, know the military - and especially my brother - would like this policy a lot better. Actually, if the people shouting "Chickenhawk!" all the time got their way and only people in the military made decisions on wars, that's exactly what would happen. My brother, like many Marines, joined the military to kill evil foreigners, not to build schools. Do you have any idea how few casualties we'd take if our sole goal was to go into a country, kill all the readily available targets, and leave? Do you also know how much cheaper that would be? Plus, if we actually just left Iraq right after we had that infamous "Mission Accomplished" banner, the whole Middle East would be talking about that huge Iraq military win because we totally kicked the crap out of Iraq. The only reason the conflict doesn't look like a clear-cut victory is because we stayed after the crap-kicking to try and make friends.

America is big; we don’t need friends.

I now think liberals have had this issue right all along: We need to just go into countries, destroy them, and then leave them to rot. If you don't want your country destroyed, make sure it's only pestering France and not us.

So, maybe I'm changing my position: I'm for cutting and running. Then, we got into Iran gun blazing, and, a couple days later, cut and run again. Then North Korea. If a new evil government comes up in place of the ones we destroy, we just do it again. It's really not that hard for us to go into a country, destroy as much as we can, and leave considering our technological and training advantages. Plus, it's a lot more fun. I'd totally join the reserves if that was our policy.

"For your one weekend this month, instead of training, we're going to destroy Syria. You might want to call work and tell them you may be in late on Monday."

"Can we bring beer and bacon for this invasion?"

"Sure. The military has returned to its old policy of having complete and utter disdain for all other cultures."

"Hooray!"

That would be sweet. A lot of us really want to kill terrorists but wouldn't want to use more than a week's vacation for it. With shorter invasions, that makes terrorists killing more accessible to the general populace.

So, can we get a politician to push this or do I actually have to run for office?


If this guy, Frank J Fleming, ran for office I would vote for him.

2 Comments:

Blogger Progressive Pete said...

interesting ideas. i'm ust glad no one in their right mind would vote..

7:02 PM  
Blogger A. Truman North said...

bwahahaha... I love that Progressive Pete nearly as much as I like Frank J Fleming.

I'll vote you both in if you promise to run together.

7:06 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home