Print

You have not viewed any products recently.

 

A Frivolous, Open-Ended War

View all posts from this blog

By:Srdja Trifkovic | October 08, 2014

There has never been a war in American history so strategically ill-conceived as the one currently developing against the Islamic State (IS) in Iraq and Syria.

The Mexican war of 1846-47 was essentially an aggressive operation to take Alta California and New Mexico, and to cement the status of Texas. It was limited in its objectives, and it was conducted in a strategically sound manner. The goals – their legality apart – were achieved, and the balance between costs and benefits was never in doubt. Vae victis!

The Civil War (under whatever name) was a “rational” bid by Abraham Lincoln and his team – legal, moral, and humanitarian considerations notwithstanding – to create a centralized state. He won the war, and hugely expanded federal governmental power. This was a disaster for America, but it was a resounding success from the standpoint of its instigators.

The 1898 war against Spain was but another exercise in Realpolitik. It finally moved America from a republic to an empire, the “manifest destiny” now manifested in Admiral Mahan’s and Theodore Roosevelt’s geopolitical designs.

Woodrow Wilson’s 1917-1918 intervention against the Central Powers was the first overtly “ideological” war – to make the world safe for democracy etc. Its slogans were silly, but in the end it could be argued that the geopolitical purpose was well served: to prevent the dominance of the continent of Europe by a single hegemon. America did not make much difference to the outcome in the battlefield, but her entry signaled to the Germans that the Entente could not lose.

World War II was a convoluted affair that entailed FDR provoking Japan in order to provoke Germany. Considering Roosevelt’s Weltanschauung it worked beautifully. His goals were rational within that paradigm, and they were fulfilled beyond expectations.

The war in Korea was a prompt response to an outright act of aggression in the disputed “Rimland” of the early Cold War. Truman, for all his failings, was right in preventing Douglas McArthur from turning it into an existential struggle. The truce of 1953 still stands. It was a limited war, of limited duration, for limited objectives.

With Vietnam we enter a murky territory. By 1968 the gap between political objectives and military means had become painfully obvious, for the first time in American history. It took the courage and vision of Richard Nixon – a statesman par excellence unjustly maligned to this day – to end that military-political quagmire. Today’s Vietnam, far from being a bastion of Communist orthodoxy, is a flourishing capitalist economy and America’s de facto ally in curtailing Beijing’s ambitions in the South China Sea.

The 1990’s were a disaster. Bill Clinton bombed the Bosnian Serbs in 1994-95, thus making Sarajevo safe for the foreign jihadists who are now providing the foreign backbone for the Islamic State. He bombed Serbia in 1999, thus making Kosovo safe for their Albanian cohorts. The oft-stated intent, that America is helping “moderate” Muslims, has never paid any dividends.

The decade following 9/11 was even worse. After two failed wars, in Afghanistan the Taliban will eventually take over, period. Iraq is a failed state, with the new Shiite prime minister rearranging the deck chairs on the sinking ship. Trillions of dollars and thousands of American lives were utterly wasted.

And now we have a new war, against the Islamic State (IS, or ISIL, as Obama prefers to call it). There is no strategy, no operational tactical plan, no end-game. Air strikes with no boots on the ground. We are told, with disgusting complacency, that this war may last thirty years (Leon Panetta), or for ever (Newt Gingrich). Our “allies” in Ankara are watching calmly as the Kurds in Kobani succumb to IS attacks. The Turks and Saudi Arabia – our “allies” – want to finish off Bashar al-Assad first and foremost, the only man who has the viable fighting force ready and willing to confront the IS.

This is postmodernia at its best. God help us.

Comments

 

 
robert m. peters
coushatta
10/9/2014 01:02 AM
 

  Dr. Trifkovic, I am not a theologian, so I will not theologize about eschatology, the end times or the apocalypse. I am a pan millennialist: with our Lord in control, everything will pan out just fine; however, my daddy told me that when you smell sulfur, assume that old sluefoot is around. Well, I smell sulfur: invasion of illegal aliens aided and abetted by the elites in both parties; state laws against same-sex-marriage falling over night; ebola virus, a strange almost weaponized variety; war in the Ukraine which could ramp up into a world-wide catastrophe; failed political and military policies which nevertheless seem intentional as in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, etc; the rapid deployment of totalitarian technologies from those which keep us dumb and entertained to those through which almost every action is known and nearly every thought, particularly among the dumb and entertained, is apprehended. I read on an intelligence site which has been very accurate that the Kurds in Kobani do not want Turkish assistance because they trust the Turks no more than ISIS. They do want and could get substantial help, at least with manpower, from Kurds in Turkey; however, according to the report, the Turkish authorities are blocking the Kurds from Turkey from joining the fight. The smell of sulfur is thick in the air.

 
 
Srdja Trifkovic
Chicago
10/10/2014 08:23 AM
 

  Mr. Peters: Exactly 15 years ago I started trying to trace the source of those sulphuric fumes: http://www.antiwar.com/rep/trifkovic1.html -- but the task remains woefully incomplete, and the nature of the beast is growing ever more complex.

 
 
Alex Sepkus
Ossining
10/10/2014 11:16 PM
 

  Mr. Trifkovic, Thank you for that piece from 1999. It's magnificent.

 
 
Bryan Fox
Houston
10/14/2014 01:38 PM
 

  There were no moral, legal or humanitarian considerations for the 1861-65 Jihad. As for the miscreant Nixon, he is unjustly maligned, Watergate was a small affair. He deserves to be maligned for is putrid domestic policies that are sucking away our livelihoods to this very day. He opened the door for the death of American manufacturing at the hands of Chinese Communists who should still be riding crappy bikes wearing green khakis. Nixon a statesmen par excellence, indeed.

 
 
David Smith
Montgomery County
10/14/2014 01:59 PM
 

  While morality and virtue are at best questionable in most (if not all) of the wars cited, at the very least there was some discernible rationality. Now, with our latest wars, both morality and rationality seem to be wholly absent. Indeed, God help us!

 
 
Print

You have not viewed any products recently.

 

To comment on this article, please find it on the Chronicles Facebook page.