Leftists like to say it takes two sides to wage war. Which if true means one side (always America or our allies) can choose to make peace unilaterally. That is folly. But in one sense the leftists are correct. If only one side wages war, peace will certainly come. But the "peace" will be on the terms of the side that actually wages war. The left works hard to make sure we aren't that side. I suppose that succinctly defines Smart Diplomacy.®
Too often our folly is believing peace flows from "ending" the fighting to befriend our enemy. That lets the bad guys win. See also the Taliban in Afghanistan.
This is correct (via Instapundit):
War is an ugly, brutal, and savage thing. It is also an eternal part of the human condition. Wars are best not started, as horror comes with it.
A just, compassionate nation will always ensure that it is strong and ready for war because war will surely come. Someone will win that war. It can be the just and compassionate nation, or it can be the aggressive and brutal nation. For a just nation to win, it must be prepared to be more aggressive and in a fashion, as brutal - in context and constraints - than its enemy.
The future is not granted, it is won and maintained through the successful execution of warfare.
I disagree a bit if the implication taken by readers (and the author clearly doesn't intend to convey that take) is that America must be as brutal and cruel as our enemies.
The Israeli war against Hamas shows this is not true. It is not true because leftists who side with Hamas pretend that the scale of Gazan losses in lives and infrastructure proves Israel is committing war crimes rather than trying to win the war without pretending a premature ceasefire is peace.
The real standard of whether the good guys are fighting the war "cleanly" is the actual standard of proportionality rather than the pretend standard that argues Israel is doing "too much" with its aggressive and "in a fashion," brutal war on the perpetrators of the October 7, 2023 slaughter-rape-and-kidnapping raid compared to what Hamas is capable of doing. The rules of war do not make aggressive and brutal--in context and constraints--illegal.
Of course, my initial thoughts linked are really about the post-war rather than Commander Salamander's subsequent war advice. The Biden administration push for a ceasefire and talking about a Palestinian state before Israel even wins the war shows the urge to reward and befriend a brutal enemy is strong within the Biden administration from war to post-war. That is full-spectrum folly. Sadly, it only takes one side to lose a war. God help us, but our leaders want us to be that side.
If you want peace, you need someone to win. Make sure the good guys are the victor. In the war and in the post-war. A Participation Ribbon is not good enough.
UPDATE: We're too effing stupid not to lose, aren't we?
The Biden administration on Wednesday quietly issued yet another sanctions waiver to Iran, giving the terrorist regime access to as much as $10 billion in frozen assets.
It just doesn't stop. Why do the Biden administration's Obama alumni looove mullah-run Iran so much?
I mean, why did Iran bother infiltrating our Iran policy machinery?
UPDATE: Qatar offered to expel Hamas after the Hamas October 7th rape and murder invasion. Our State Department said, "no thank you." Tip to Instapundit.
UPDATE: America sent a delegation to Niger. A week later Niger ordered our troops out. So our major anti-terrorism base will be out of action. And also:
American officials also voiced alarm in the meetings about several other issues, including whether Niger’s military government was nearing a deal to give Iran access to Niger’s vast uranium reserves, a concern that was reported earlier by The Wall Street Journal.
We give Iran lots of money, hoping Iran won't do bad things with it; and then try to tell other countries not to accept that money for bad things.
Restoring our reputation abroad® with Smart Diplomacy® is fun!
UPDATE: My frustration expressed in this post is reflected in this older post I recently discovered:
What is it with the strain of conventional wisdom holders in our foreign policy establishment that holds that the height of diplomatic triumph is brokering a deal that saves our enemies rather than defeats them?
It never ends.
UPDATE: ISW hits the nail on the head:
The West naturally and understandably gravitates toward peace. Our default instinct is to seize the first opportunity in any conflict to “stop the fighting.” The Kremlin has mastered using the Western predisposition to peace as a lifeline for Russia’s wars – from Syria to Ukraine. The Kremlin has not once supported its euphemism of “peace” with action in the context of Ukraine. The Kremlin has had continuous opportunities to choose peace, including a choice not to invade Ukraine – a country that Putin considered to be so militarily unthreatening that Putin assessed he could conquer it in a matter of days. Allowing Russia to keep its gains in Ukraine in 2015 and having a peace framework in place for seven years did nothing to stop the Kremlin’s reinvasion in 2022. Every single version of the Kremlin’s euphemisms of “peace” since 2022 has included a demand that amounted to the destruction of Ukraine’s sovereignty.Defeat Russia. That is the only hope for peace.
NOTE: TDR Winter War of 2022 coverage continues here.
