Chris Matthews’ New Definition Of Victory In Iraq Means We Lost World War Two
Don Surber:
Chris Matthews’s new definition of Victory in Iraq means we lost World War II. But, hey, we finally won Vietnam.
Growing up, I always heard America wins the war, loses the peace. The nation never was big on diplomacy. But in an asymmetrical war, there are no diplomatic negotiations.
That’s where some in the media step in to try to give our military victories away. Consider this quote from Chris Matthews on his show last night while he was interviewing David Ignatius:
MATTHEWS: Lots of publicity lately, and maybe it‘s fair, maybe it‘s not, that things may have calmed down over there, less Americans killed in action in the last several of months but before. But my definition of a defeat is you can‘t leave. If we can‘t leave that country in the foreseeable future, we are losing. The purpose of the American Army is to get home and be ready to defend this country against possible threats to this country.
As long as we‘re stuck over there, it seems we‘re losing. When will we be able to come home from Iraq, based upon all this popular good news here?
IGNATIUS: You can‘t say that the purpose of fighting a war is to bring the troops home. The purpose of fighting a war is to stabilize the country and then be able to bring the troops home.
MATTHEWS: That‘s another way of saying what I‘m saying, when can we come home?
IGNATIUS: My own view, Chris, as somebody who has often been to Iraq, is that with the space that we are creating, with the success that we undeniably are having because of the surge in securing the country, we need to capitalize on that. We need to use that as leverage.
MATTHEWS: That‘s only as long as we‘re there.
IGNATIUS: When I say capitalize on it, I think we ought to move more aggressively to reduce our troops wherever we can. I‘m encouraged by the fact that we have not sent troops south to Basra to replace the British, who are leaving. We‘re, basically, sink or swim, fellows. I think that‘s what we need to say. I think we should be saying it in more parts of Iraq. I think we‘re going to. There‘s a big battle — nobody knows about it.
There is a big battle going on between the Pentagon and General Petraeus. The Pentagon, supported by CENT-COM, would like the number of troops to come down or at least discussions about that to take place. General Petraeus and his commanders are really resisting that. The view, as I understand it, of Secretary Gates is exactly like yours; if we‘re being so successful, why don‘t we get more troops home? That‘s their view. They are fighting it out.
MATTHEWS: Because if we can‘t ever come home, we can‘t ever say we won.
Interesting way of redefining victory. For thousands of years, you take over a country, you’re the winner. Matthews wants to change that, saying, “As long as we‘re stuck over there, it seems we‘re losing.”
Let’s see. We still have troops in Kuwait, so we must have lost the Gulf War.
But we pulled our troops out of Mogadishu so we beat Somalia.
No American troops in Vietnam. Yeah, we won.
But we still have troops in Korea. Darn it, we lost the Korean War.
Troops still in Japan? We lost World War II.
Troops still in Germany? We lost World War I.
Troops still in the Philippines? We lost the Spanish-American War.
Troops still in the South? We lost the Civil War.
And I just learned that we have 10,500 troops in Britain. That means we lost the Revolutionary War. No wonder we speak English.
Be respectful of others and their opinions. Inflammatory remarks and inane leftist drivel will be deleted. It ain’t about free speech, remember you’re in a private domain. My website, my prerogative.
If you can't handle using your real email address, don't bother posting a comment.
Chris Mathews is a fucking idiot. He’s certainly no journalist. Just another MSM lib acting as the donkeys ass for the Democrats. Fuck him!
November 29th, 2007 at 3:05 pmWhat a fucking re-tard.
November 29th, 2007 at 3:10 pmWeeelllll …
Matthews IS sort of kind of almost maybe correct …
I mean, he IS still “deployed” at MSNBC … Hence their/they’re losing the ratings war.
November 29th, 2007 at 3:14 pmi better not show this to my son,,, he’ll explode,,, ramadi is now under the control of the iraqi police,, and my sons base is now an iraqi base,,, hmmmmm i wonder how many troops christ madthews has really talked to??? i like watching that moran,, i get a new t.v. set evertime,,,, but i am running our of bullets,,
November 29th, 2007 at 3:44 pmI never was convinced Mathews was very smart. Everyday he sets out to prove it.
November 29th, 2007 at 3:47 pmHow fucking blunt stupid is this shit bag. He still jacks of thinking of his greatness while writing lies for carter.
just keeps repeating the same line ‘as long as we are there we are losing’ that is so damned stupid it hurts my head to retort
really who has he throated to have that job? it sure as shit is not due to ratings
he pisses me off more than alqueeeda because at least they admit they are our enemy, he just comes in behind with a knife
November 29th, 2007 at 3:55 pm^^^ jacks off (not of)
November 29th, 2007 at 3:56 pmThanks Pat!! Now I feel absolutely worthless as an American, seeing as how the fights that I thought we had won we had actually lost!
Hey, seeing as how by the new definition we won in Mogadishu will they have to remake “Blackhawk Down”?
November 29th, 2007 at 3:59 pmWow we lost world war 2, sorry grandpa.
Chris Mathews is really hard to listen to these days. he is such a loud mouth and that makes his shitty views and opinions even worse
November 29th, 2007 at 4:09 pmWait a second Kurt(the infidel) didn’t you learn anything from the View? Beyhar taught us that just because O’Rielly was louder did not make him right!
Maybe I can feel better about myself!! Just because he said we lost does not mean that we are done fighting and winning!!
November 29th, 2007 at 4:23 pmI think it is a difficult thing to define victory in Iraq. Each war is unique in defining victory. In Iraq some would say victory was removing Saddam, some say it is when Iraq is a democracy like America’s. Then there is everything in between. At some point the US will determine that something in between will qualify victory. Last jihadi dead. Al-Qaeda removed. Violence reduced to a “comfortable level”. You win war when you meet your objectives. The difficulty with defining victory in Iraq is the objectives have changed on one hand and no one has really said what victory will look like, on the other
There are some historical realities with the other wars you mentioned.
1) Hostilities ended in Germany soon after Hitler’s demise. We remained in Germany so long because the war really hadn’t ended due to Commie transgressions evolving into the Cold War.
2) The Korean War is technically still going on, therefore, yea we didn’t win the war.
3) The Spanish-American war was won because we beat the Spanish. The insurgent war against the Philippines raged brutally on after the peace treaty with Spain was signed so the war had evolved into another war.
4) To most Southerners the Civil War wasn’t over until reconstruction ended.
5) We had troops in Germany following WW I? I know we had troops in the Baltic Sea coast of Russia but in Germany?
November 29th, 2007 at 4:54 pmVictory is Defeat.
War is Peace.
Freedom is Slavery.
Ignorance is Strength.
November 29th, 2007 at 5:26 pmYeah howie i know. Just using a little sarcasm. Matthews is a pecker head. his views mean nothing to me and this new definition of victory is lunacy. would make all of our wars ass backwards. Left wing mind sets are dangerous.
Oh and I think O’Reilly is usually always right whether he yells or whispers lol
November 29th, 2007 at 6:24 pmI disagree with how he words it but in studies done on counter insurgency it HAS to be WON by the host nation so that the insurgency can lose any legitimacy. Its our role to train up the ISF, beat down the insurgency to the brink of death, pull out and let the Iraqis finish them off
November 29th, 2007 at 7:46 pmCan anyone help me understand where these colostomy bags come from?
November 29th, 2007 at 7:47 pmAn excellent break down Pat! People forget that the Japanese and Germans (for instance), Although Brutal in War, Were Honorable in defeat and that, that is not the case with Jihadists; The Citizens of Iraq are Cool as Fuck, but the extremist element has never displayed that Honor (let alone any RESPECT where the Rules of War/Engagement or even the Geneva convention are concerned)…
I take issue with Matthews comment: “The purpose of the American Army is to get home and be ready to defend this country against possible threats to this country.”
What is this “Media Whore monger” suggesting? That the purpose of our Troops is not to be Deployed, but to sit idle while the Enemy comes to us? John Cunningham used the term “Fucking Retard” to describe Matthews; and quite frankly, I cannot improve on that description!
My understanding is that the purpose of the 2nd Amendment is that the Right of the Citizens to bear arms is to defend against Enemies Foreign and Domestic; The way I see it, Our Troops are doing their part in the Foreign theater while our Federal agencies, Boarder Patrol, Minutemen and Citizens care for this theater… Our Troops need to be home for their Families for sure, but not to protect this “Well Armed Nation”! Matthews is an Imbecile; what is his point? That we should invite the enemy here, to disrupt an already working Democracy? Rather than help build stability in Iraq that would lead to an Important Ally in the Middle East?
November 29th, 2007 at 11:10 pm“And I just learned that we have 10,500 troops in Britain. That means we lost the Revolutionary War. No wonder we speak English.”
I lost my drink on that one. Freekin awesome!
In Pansy world
-outright Sedition and even Treason is actually “true patriotism”.
-Refusing to even make such a hollow minor gesture of patriotism like wearing a US flag lapel and calling your self a “world citizen” is somehwow TRUE American Patriotism? -Were the statement “how dare you question my patriotism” is not laughable but serious, especially right after comparing US troops to Pol Pot, Gulags, and Midnight Terrorizers of Innocent women and children no less.
-Were the US the only nation in history to ever literally conquer over 80% of the world yet give it all back AFTER building up infrastructure, freedom, and technology BUT is actually called a evil oppressive colonial empire?
-Do I need to continue?
The funniest thing about this is Cris Mathews said this. I don’t know how many of you have stroll through the swamps of KOS, Atrios, America Blog and such but I do from time to time to remind myself that Republicans may mess things up but these guys are freekin NUTS and would likely FUBAR the whole dam thing. Anyway my point was that the when the Nutroots speak of Cris Mathews they claim him a Rightwinger? Chris Mathews who thinks winning wars is not about holding ground but who gives it up first?
November 29th, 2007 at 11:41 pmThe only thing I know any more about Chris Matthews is what I read on the blogs.
November 30th, 2007 at 12:38 amI have a biochemical reaction when I hear Matthews voice. Its like the episode of Seinfeld when Kramer would hear Mary Harts voice. Its something about that damn frequency and tone that he has. It sounds like a screaming pig in a meat grinder. I can’t decide which voice is worst. Chris Matthews or Billy Mays. If I never heard their voices again it would be too soon.
Having said all that. Who really cares what Matthews thinks? He can change whatever meaning he wants but that doesn’t make it so. I don’t care what his mommy told him.
“The purpose of the American Army is to get home…”
What a f-ing jackass. The purpose of the American Army is to defend the constitution and do what ever the civilian leadership tells them to do.
This is a big confusion that a lot of uneducated people have. The military does what ever joe-citizen tells it to do.
For all those military-haters out there: YOU told us to ‘jump’ we don’t ask ‘how high?’ we just jump. If you don’t like it, guess whose f-ing fault it is. Yeah, thats right, yours. (not pointing this at Pat fans)
November 30th, 2007 at 12:43 amPoint system for major US engagements
1 Full point- Revolutionary War
.25 Point- WW1
.25 Point - Europe WW2
1 Point - Pacific WW2
.50 Point - Vietnam
1 Point 1991 Desert Storm
.75 Point- Iraq 2003
November 30th, 2007 at 6:51 amThing I hate is that F*# tard is always on AFN on the freakin TV when and if I happen to make it to evening chow here and theater and makes me lose my appetite everytime. Can stand to watch him talk in that snide-whinyass way he seems to push his bullshit out. Pisses me off that I never catch O’reily on. He apparently is spinning old news as well. The involvement of IP/IA’s here grow stronger everyday. Yeah, they are a little slow on the uptake but they are getting better. I just wish they would stop accidentally shooting themselves in the foot (literally). That has been keeping me busy. Got to say I have aced foot trauma in the Iraqi male population out here.
November 30th, 2007 at 10:34 amMeant can’t stand….and was referring to Matthew (not Bill) when it comes to pushing out BS on the public.
November 30th, 2007 at 10:36 am