Tuesday, May 13, 2008

Gen. W.T. Sherman's reply to Anti-Victors

My fellow Americans:
I have read your posts, in the nature of a petition to revoke the orders of sending all the troops to Iraq. I have read them carefully, and give full credit to your statements of distress that have and will be occasioned, and yet shall not agree to the revocation of those orders, because they were not designed to meet the humanities of the cause, but to prepare for the future struggles in which millions of good people outside of Iraq have a deep interest.

We must have peace, not only in Iraq, but in all the world. To secure this, we must stop the war that now desolates this once happy and favored country. To stop war, we must defeat the insurgency which are arrayed against the laws and Constitution that all must respect and obey. To defeat this insurgency, we must prepare the way to reach them in their recesses, provided with the arms and instruments which enable us to accomplish our purpose.

Now, I know the vindictive nature of our enemy, that we may have many years of military operations from this quarter; and, therefore, deem it wise and prudent to prepare in time. The use of Iraq for warlike purposes in inconsistent with its character as a home for families. There will be little manufacturers, commerce, or agriculture here, for the maintenance of families, and sooner or later want will compel the inhabitants to go.

Why not support the war now, when all the arrangements are completed for the transfer, instead of waiting till the plunging shot of contending armies will renew the scenes of the past years? Of course, I do not apprehend any such things at this moment, but you do not suppose that the troops will be there until the war is over. I cannot discuss this subject with you fairly, because I cannot know what is proposed to be done, but I assert that our military plans makes it necessary for the inhabitants to live with it, and our troops can only renew their effort of services to make their lives in any way as easy and comfortable as possible.

You cannot qualify war in harsher terms than I will. War is cruelty, and you cannot refine it; and those who brought war into this country deserve all the curses and maledictions a people can pour out. I know I had no hand in making this war, and I know that our troops make more sacrifices to-day than any of you to secure peace. But you cannot have peace and a division of a country.

If the United States submits to a division now, it will not stop, but will go on until Iraq suffers the fate of many countries, which is eternal war. The government of Iraq does and must assert its authority, wherever it once had power; for, if it relaxes one bit to pressure, it is gone, and I believe that such is the national feeling. This feeling assumes various shapes, but always comes back to that of Union. Once admit the Union, once more acknowledge the authority of the national Government, and, instead of devoting their houses and streets and roads to the dread uses of war, the leaders and the army and police become at once their protectors and supporters, shielding them from danger, let it come from what quarter it may.

I know that a few individuals cannot resist a torrent of error and passion, such as swept some into rebellion, but you can point out, so that we may know those who desire a government, and those who insist on war and its desolation. You might as well appeal against the thunder-storm as against these terrible hardships of war. They are inevitable, and the only way the people of Iraq can hope once more to live in peace and quiet at home, is to stop the war, which can only be done by admitting that it began in error and is perpetuated in pride. We don't want their oil or their businesses, or their lands, or any thing they have, but we do want and will have a just obedience to the laws of Iraq. That they will have, and if it involved the destruction of their improvements, it cannot be helped.

11 comments:

Lista said...

Boy! I've allowed myself to fall behind in the reading of your blog. I've got about 5 posts to read. Sometimes I have a little trouble keeping up with daily bloggers, but I really am going to try and get back over here to read some of this by the end of the day.

The Griper said...

he smiles. ty, but don't worry too much about it, lista, i'm not a daily blogger as a lot are. a couple a week is all i try for, like you.

Lista said...

Starting from Wednesday of last week and ending with yesterday, you have posted 7 times. That's daily. Now knock it off! lolol.

Just kidding. You can post as often as you want to, but I'm just passing through again. I've got to run.

tweetey30 said...

Wow. Very interesting points here. You know I have been hollering for this war to stop for sometime and Gayle has made points and now you. You both are right about this war. It sucks because I think we all have some one we know over there.

Gayle said...

Hi, Griper.

I see nothing to "gripe" about regarding this post. It makes perfect sense to me and it's also hard to understand why it wouldn't make perfect sense to everyone, but we both know that it wouldn't. The left runs on emotions instead of facts and that's something that I'll probably never be able to understand.

I took some time off from posting and haven't done so since last Monday. (I think it was Monday, anyway.)

The Griper said...

shucks gayle, what do i need to do to get a gripe out of you? lolol

"The left runs on emotions instead of facts and that's something that I'll probably never be able to understand."

that's easy to understand once you understand their ideology.

The Griper said...

tweety,
"It sucks because I think we all have some one we know over there."

all the more reason to stop this war by winning it instead of pulling out.

BB-Idaho said...

"all the more reason to stop this war by winning it instead of pulling out." The metrics about
the lives of our troops suggest
early withdrawal. Considering the mideast tendency to fight these things for hundreds, thousands of years, as well as our drifting definition of 'victory' winning needs a more concrete definition.
Until they elect a fundamentalist
Muslim state? Until electricity runs all 24 hours a day? Recall
Westmoreland's light at the end of the tunnel. Recall Robert E. Lee's
invasion of the north for a quick end to the Civil War-Antietam..try again-Gettysburg? General Shinsecki gave his opinion, was fired, and we invaded. Petreaus
(read his field manual on insurgency) knows there is no victory by military action alone.
You have mentioned previously respecting the opponent; in large measure that includes understanding his motivation. Until and when, we win 'hearts & minds' this affair will drag on.
I had friends in WWII combat that spent far less time on line than my current friends in Iraq: bless them all they are doing their job.
The guys that never served, that invaded the pentagon with their super ideas, now them, I got a beef with. Guess I'm uncharacteristically down beat today..can someone give
me a date for V-I day?

The Griper said...

bb,
"can someone give
me a date for V-I day?"

show me a war that had a date for victory. show me any declaration of war that stipulated the date of victory by any nation or any war. there has never been one. the date for victory is always when one side or the other surrenders in one form or another. that is why vietnam war was lost, we surrendered. it is why the korean war is still technically still ongoing. no one has surrendered. now, people can use all the fancy words they want to to describe the above wars but it is all spin and you know it too.

did our revolutionary war have a date for victory prior to the surrender of England?

did the civil war have a date for victory prior to the surrender of Lee?

did WW1 or WW2 have dates for victory prior to the surrender of germany?

there can be dates for surrender prior to surrender but never victory.
the reason being that it is the losers who decide when war is over not the victors.

"You have mentioned previously respecting the opponent; in large measure that includes understanding his motivation. Until and when, we win 'hearts & minds' this affair will drag on."

i don't disagree here and neither did Sherman. he proved that in this statement of his letter,

" but you can point out, so that we may know those who desire a government, and those who insist on war and its desolation. You might as well appeal against the thunder-storm as against these terrible hardships of war. They are inevitable, and the only way the people of Iraq can hope once more to live in peace and quiet at home, is to stop the war,..."

in here he tells the council to point out who wants war and who wants government. in other words winning the hearts of those who sought peace under government.

and from what i hear that is happening more and more in Iraq as they feel assured that they are safe.

so, winning the hearts of the people is not a new strategy of war but a very old one.

and winning thee hearts of people can only come after military victory and when control is established not before.

there is the big differences in strategy in this war. the remainuing in areas instead of withdrawing after a battle was won.

dcat said...

We need to press on and take the thugs out for good!!!

tweetey30 said...

Yes very much so. Its hard knowing those friends over there are or might get killed. Its a sad situation but not much us civilians can do about it.

Followers

Words of Wisdom of my visitors

Grab This Widget

Gas Buddy

Search for gas prices by US Zip Code

 

Design by Amanda @ Blogger Buster