Mover Mike

You know those little yellow ribbons we see on the backs of cars, "I Support the Troops". Something I've long suspected appears to be true. Check out Daniel's Political Musings for a picture of what the protesters think of the troops.

Sure you do!

If you have read Mover Mike for any time, you know that I believe the U.S. fights wars with good intentions, but politicos get involved and turn the war into a cesspool of ineptitude.

If you are a liberal, you probably believe that too much money goes for defense that could be used for social causes, like education and healthcare, and you have no patience with the sacrifices that must be made to fight a war. What we have experienced instead is

...the United States has consistently encountered strategic stalemate or defeat in particular politico-military operations.

John Maudlin in his Outside the Box has a piece from Stratfor President George Friedman, the premise of which is the U.S. fights wars as "spoiling attack."

The spoiling attack is an offensive operation; however, its goal is not to defeat the enemy but to disrupt enemy offensives — to, in effect, prevent a defeat by the enemy. The success of the spoiling attack is not measured in term of enemy capitulation, but the degree to which it has forestalled successful enemy operations.

He cites the Korean war, the Vietnam war, Cuba, the Iran containment policy, and the Iraq wars as evidence.

On a pretty arbitrary scale — between Korea (1950-53), Cuba (1960-63), Vietnam (1963-75), Iran (1979-1981) and Iraq (2003-present) — the United States has spent about 27 of the last 55 years engaged in politico-military maneuvers that, at the very least, did not bring obvious success, and frequently brought disaster. Yet, in spite of these disasters, the long-term tendency of American power relative to the rest of the world has been favorable to the United States.

So three questions arise:.
First, does a spoiling attack set us up for an abnormal defeat?. Is it possible that we enter a conflict not really trying to win and it backfires?
Second, is the spoiling attack better than total defeat of the enemy? Which strategy leads to long lasting peace?
Third, what is the next target for a spoling attack? Leaks from Russia suggest that the U.S. is ready to attack Iran with tactical nukes on April 6th, and the campaign would last 24 to 48 hours.

If you are a grunt in any of these conflicts, how does it make you feel to know, if Friedman is right, that you and your buddies were maimed or killed for stalemate or defeat as a goal?

John Maudlin George Friedman Stratfor Spoiling Attack Iraq Iran Mover Mike

Update:

Gina Cobb has an interesting post on the subject entitled Shhhh!! Be Ve-wy, Ve-wy Quiet! We Ah We-tweating!