Cut and run as fast as we can
If you know who Hugh Hewitt is you know he is, in the words of Andrew Sullivan an "empty gas-bag of ideology." Imagine the self-importance and pompousness of William Buckley crossed with the anti-intellectual vaudeville qualities of Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh and that's Hewitt. Another thing Hannity, Rush, and Hewitt have in common is that none of then have ever served in the military but lecture people on military affairs. Hewitt has a long resume. Among his positions was executive director from groundbreaking through dedication of the Nixon Library. In 1990 Hewitt proposed ideological screening of researchers wishing to use the library resources; for example, Hewitt said Bob Woodward would not be admitted because he was "not a responsible journalist."
Here, again in the words of Andrew Sullivan, is a "priceless" interview on Hewitt's radio show. He tries to pick apart Lt. General William Odom (ret.) on Iraq and Iran. Let's just say it doesn't go so well for Hewitt. It's hilarious to hear another mighty chickenhawk try to go toe-to-toe with a Lt. Gen. and one who headed the NSA under President Reagan. Take a few minutes and listen to the interview or read the transcript. It's well worth it if you want to hear why we should cut-and-run as fast as we can out of Iraq. And this from a three-star general who is an America first hardliner.
Some of the better parts of the interview:
Lt. Gen. Odom: We have made [Iraq] much worse.
Hewitt:: Much worse than Saddam?
Odom: Yeah.
...
Lt. Gen: Odom: Look, I mean, I…this a kind of a pointless argument. I mean, the issues…all of your things can be true. They don’t make it any better for us. We are on a path to suffer every month we stay. The defeat we face will be larger, and we will put off the time at which…and where we will have even less resources to recover. If you remember the Second World War, Hitler had 600,000 troops thrown into Stalingrad, refused over four, five months to withdraw them, at the plea by, from his generals, and he ends up losing them all. If he had withdrawn them as they said, asked him to do, and let Stalingrad go, he could have shortened his lines by seven or eight hundred kilometers, and had nearly, had over 600,000 troops survive. Now that’s…a military commander that doesn’t know when to retire from one area so he can approach the conflict from another area, is not a smart commander. And it seems to you’re advocating a kind of policy where you have a president who jumps off the Empire State Building, and he goes by the 50th floor, and he says I’m on course. Well, I want a president who knows how to change course.
Hewitt: I’m actually just trying to figure out what you think Iraq would look like if after four months hence, we leave, what it would look like in a year?
Odom: It’s going to look worse if we stay.
Hewitt: I know that, but what do you think it will look like? I know you believe that…
Odom: I don’t know. I don’t know. You don’t know, and it’s just a guess. And I don’t see killing more Americans based on your guess.
...
Lt. Gen Odom: ...I'm saying the big scare in Southeast Asia was that there will be a whole group of countries that became pro-Soviet bloc, and pro-Chinese. Well, two more went communist, but they were not pro-Chinese. We were pursuing a war to contain China, the Soviet policy had become containing China. We were presenting a half a million U.S. troops in pursuit of Soviet foreign policy objectives. Right now, we are pursuing al Qaeda and Iranian foreign policy objectives in Iraq.
...
Hewitt: Would Libya have disarmed its nukes and chemical weaponry, General, if we…
Lt. Gen Odom: It’s not analogous. If you are trying to [apply] a general rule to cause something to happen in all countries, that is…you know, I’d flunk you on a sophomore international relations course.
Hewitt: I’m asking whether or not you thought the Libyan disarmament had anything to do with our invasion of Iraq?
Odom: None.
...
Hewitt: Are you gambling with Israel’s future, then, to allow a radical regime…
Lt. Gen. Odom: No, Israel’s gambling with its future by encouraging us to pursue this policy.
Hewitt: So Israel should not take unilateral action, either?
Odom: That’s up to them, but I think it’ll make it worse for them. Israel’s policies thus far have made its situation much worse. If you read all of the Israel press, you’ll find a lot of them there are firmly in my camp on this issue. And I’ve talked to many Israelis who are very sympathetic with the view I have on it. You’re making it much, much worse for Israel.
Hewitt: Are you familiar…
Odom: If I were an Israeli right now, given Olmert’s policies and Bush’s policies, I would fear for my life.
Hewitt: Are you familiar with…
Odom: So I would say the policy you’re advocating is a very serious threat to Israel.
Take a listen and see if you can hear the difference between the Moe, Larry and Curlys who run this country and pontificate from behind a microphone and a former head of the National Security Agency, a Lt. General with a PhD and a few strategic and historical thoughts in his head. It's like listening to the Daily Curmudgeon and everyone else. Does that make me Curly or the other guy?
Here, again in the words of Andrew Sullivan, is a "priceless" interview on Hewitt's radio show. He tries to pick apart Lt. General William Odom (ret.) on Iraq and Iran. Let's just say it doesn't go so well for Hewitt. It's hilarious to hear another mighty chickenhawk try to go toe-to-toe with a Lt. Gen. and one who headed the NSA under President Reagan. Take a few minutes and listen to the interview or read the transcript. It's well worth it if you want to hear why we should cut-and-run as fast as we can out of Iraq. And this from a three-star general who is an America first hardliner.
Some of the better parts of the interview:
Lt. Gen. Odom: We have made [Iraq] much worse.
Hewitt:: Much worse than Saddam?
Odom: Yeah.
...
Lt. Gen: Odom: Look, I mean, I…this a kind of a pointless argument. I mean, the issues…all of your things can be true. They don’t make it any better for us. We are on a path to suffer every month we stay. The defeat we face will be larger, and we will put off the time at which…and where we will have even less resources to recover. If you remember the Second World War, Hitler had 600,000 troops thrown into Stalingrad, refused over four, five months to withdraw them, at the plea by, from his generals, and he ends up losing them all. If he had withdrawn them as they said, asked him to do, and let Stalingrad go, he could have shortened his lines by seven or eight hundred kilometers, and had nearly, had over 600,000 troops survive. Now that’s…a military commander that doesn’t know when to retire from one area so he can approach the conflict from another area, is not a smart commander. And it seems to you’re advocating a kind of policy where you have a president who jumps off the Empire State Building, and he goes by the 50th floor, and he says I’m on course. Well, I want a president who knows how to change course.
Hewitt: I’m actually just trying to figure out what you think Iraq would look like if after four months hence, we leave, what it would look like in a year?
Odom: It’s going to look worse if we stay.
Hewitt: I know that, but what do you think it will look like? I know you believe that…
Odom: I don’t know. I don’t know. You don’t know, and it’s just a guess. And I don’t see killing more Americans based on your guess.
...
Lt. Gen Odom: ...I'm saying the big scare in Southeast Asia was that there will be a whole group of countries that became pro-Soviet bloc, and pro-Chinese. Well, two more went communist, but they were not pro-Chinese. We were pursuing a war to contain China, the Soviet policy had become containing China. We were presenting a half a million U.S. troops in pursuit of Soviet foreign policy objectives. Right now, we are pursuing al Qaeda and Iranian foreign policy objectives in Iraq.
...
Hewitt: Would Libya have disarmed its nukes and chemical weaponry, General, if we…
Lt. Gen Odom: It’s not analogous. If you are trying to [apply] a general rule to cause something to happen in all countries, that is…you know, I’d flunk you on a sophomore international relations course.
Hewitt: I’m asking whether or not you thought the Libyan disarmament had anything to do with our invasion of Iraq?
Odom: None.
...
Hewitt: Are you gambling with Israel’s future, then, to allow a radical regime…
Lt. Gen. Odom: No, Israel’s gambling with its future by encouraging us to pursue this policy.
Hewitt: So Israel should not take unilateral action, either?
Odom: That’s up to them, but I think it’ll make it worse for them. Israel’s policies thus far have made its situation much worse. If you read all of the Israel press, you’ll find a lot of them there are firmly in my camp on this issue. And I’ve talked to many Israelis who are very sympathetic with the view I have on it. You’re making it much, much worse for Israel.
Hewitt: Are you familiar…
Odom: If I were an Israeli right now, given Olmert’s policies and Bush’s policies, I would fear for my life.
Hewitt: Are you familiar with…
Odom: So I would say the policy you’re advocating is a very serious threat to Israel.
Take a listen and see if you can hear the difference between the Moe, Larry and Curlys who run this country and pontificate from behind a microphone and a former head of the National Security Agency, a Lt. General with a PhD and a few strategic and historical thoughts in his head. It's like listening to the Daily Curmudgeon and everyone else. Does that make me Curly or the other guy?