Comments on: EXIT STRATEGY http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/exit_strategy/ Online Journal of Politics and Foreign Affairs Wed, 25 Nov 2009 19:07:43 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: Paul http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/exit_strategy/comment-page-1/#comment-7166 Paul Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000 /?p=3632#comment-7166 I was speaking to a research assistant of Professor Steven Ambrose about this topic. (Ambrose was arguably the most knowledgeable man in the world on D-day before his recent death.) The he went postal when this topic was mentioned. His argument (and it was an obvious one) is that FDR would have been forced to resign and basically all hell would have broken loose in the States. He went on at length but he basically said Hitler would have become a nuclear power and the world would be a very bad place. I found it impossible to disagree. I was speaking to a research assistant of Professor Steven Ambrose about this topic. (Ambrose was arguably the most knowledgeable man in the world on D-day before his recent death.)

The he went postal when this topic was mentioned. His argument (and it was an obvious one) is that FDR would have been forced to resign and basically all hell would have broken loose in the States. He went on at length but he basically said Hitler would have become a nuclear power and the world would be a very bad place.

I found it impossible to disagree.

]]> By: Barry http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/exit_strategy/comment-page-1/#comment-7167 Barry Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000 /?p=3632#comment-7167 I agree that WWII could not have been waged by the US in today's media climate. However, the casualties in Iraq are minimal, compared to WWII, and even to Vietnam. I remember some Vietnam veteran writing a letter to a newspaper after Gulf War I, and stating that the GW casualties amounted to a 'bad weekend in Vietnam'. Does anybody here believe that 1,000 US KIA in Afghanistan in 2001-02 would have not been readily taken by the American people? What's happened is a combination of people realizing that the administration lied about WMD's and Saddam being a threat to us, it lied when it spun rosy scenarios (of rice, flowers, a quick withdrawal and a domino wave of democracy). Now, if we were indeed down to 30K troops in Iraq, as planned, with their main danger being overeating, or lethal hay fever from too many rose petals, people wouldn't mind the lies about WMD's/terrorists/etc (see May 2003 for proof - no WMD's in evidence, but support for the war grew). --- I agree that WWII could not have been waged by the US in today's media climate. However, the casualties in Iraq are minimal, compared to WWII, and even to Vietnam. I remember some Vietnam veteran writing a letter to a newspaper after Gulf War I, and stating that the GW casualties amounted to a 'bad weekend in Vietnam'.

Does anybody here believe that 1,000 US KIA in Afghanistan in 2001-02 would have not been readily taken by the American people?

What's happened is a combination of people realizing that the administration lied about WMD's and Saddam being a threat to us, it lied when it spun rosy scenarios (of rice, flowers, a quick withdrawal and a domino wave of democracy). Now, if we were indeed down to 30K troops in Iraq, as planned, with their main danger being overeating, or lethal hay fever from too many rose petals, people wouldn't mind the lies about WMD's/terrorists/etc (see May 2003
for proof - no WMD's in evidence, but support for the war grew).

---

]]>