|
August 4, 2007
OIF: Good
news is bad for surrender monkeys
by Mark Alexander
From The Patriot Post
In our democratic republic, we charge our
elected representatives with the conduct of
vigorous debate about issues both foreign and
domestic. In doing so, we expect them to uphold
their oaths to protect and defend our Constitution.
However, politicians often posture and pretend
in order to line up constituencies that perpetuate
their tenure in office, regardless of
constitutional constraints.
Such political posturing is a disingenuous
breach of trust at best. When this deceit extends
to matters of national security, especially when we
are at war and continue to face formidable threats
from Jihadi
terrorists, it is downright traitorous.
The Democrat Party was, in a bygone era,
populated by statesmen. Until JFK (that's J.F.
Kennedy not J.F. Kerry), Democrat leaders,
understood the projection of force to protect
America's security and vital interests abroad.
Now, this once-proud political party is infested
with hypocritical, nescient, duplicitous,
reprehensible, half-witted, asinine, obsequious,
meretricious, pusillanimous, indolent, imbecilic,
pompous, retromingent, ignominious, ungrateful,
sycophantic prevaricators (did I leave anything
out?), who flippantly exploit Operation
Iraqi Freedom as political fodder for their
next campaign.
Truth be told, most Democrats know that the fate
of the entire Middle East (and, by
extension, much of the free world) depends on the
establishment of a stable government in Iraq. They
know that Fourth Generation Warfare in the Second
Nuclear Age leaves us no choice but to confront
Jihadistan on the Iraqi front. After all, if
not Iraq now, then where and when?
They also know that much of what is reported in
the American media reflects not only the propaganda
machines of the Left, but also that of our Jihadi
adversaries. This is because these cutthroats
understand that our mainstream
media is friendly terrain for undermining
American will.
Unfortunately, petty party politics prevail,
with little regard for the inconvenient truth that
Leftist defeatism merely emboldens our enemy and
further endangers our troops in Iraq.
Now, however, there is a confluence of analysis
from the warfront in Iraq that OIF has turned a
corner. Clearly, such news will have significant
consequences for those Leftists who have staked
their political fortunes on America's failure,
surrender and retreat from Iraq.
In the New York Times this week, two
noted and vocal critics of OIF, Michael O'Hanlon
and Kenneth Pollack, analysts with the Left-leaning
Brookings Institution, published an op-ed entitled
"A War We Just Might Win."
Having just returned from a fact-finding tour of
Iraq, their op-ed notes, "After the furnace-like
heat, the first thing you notice when you land in
Baghdad is the morale of our troops. Today, morale
is high. The soldiers and Marines... feel now they
have the numbers needed to make a real
difference."
On the politics of Iraq, O'Hanlon and Pollack
write, "Viewed from Iraq... the political debate in
Washington is surreal. The Bush administration has
over four years lost essentially all credibility.
Yet now the administration's critics, in part as a
result, seem unaware of the significant changes
taking place."
Their analysis continues: "Here is the most
important thing Americans need to understand: We
are finally getting somewhere in Iraq, at least in
military terms. As two analysts who have harshly
criticized the Bush administration's miserable
handling of Iraq, we were surprised by the gains we
saw and the potential to produce not necessarily
'victory' but a sustainable stability that both we
and the Iraqis could live with."
Also this week, retired Army General Jack Keane
testified before the House Armed Services
Committee, telling them in no uncertain words,
"Your actions here in the Congress appear to be in
direct conflict with the realities on the ground
where the trends are up and progress is being made.
We are on the offensive and we have the
momentum."
That news was so distressing to Rep. Nancy Boyda
(D-KS) that she walked out of the committee
hearings during General Keane's testimony,
lamenting later that there was "only so much
[she could tolerate] after so much of the
frustration of having to listen to what we listened
to." She continued, "Those kinds of
[encouraging] comments will in fact show up
in the media and further divide this country
instead of saying, 'Here's the reality of the
problem'."
Of course, reality in the alternate universe of
the Left dictates that down is up, in is out, left
is right, black is white, falsehood is truth, pride
is humility, red is blue and, particularly in the
case of Iraq, good news is bad.
Adding insult to injury, more bad news for
Demos: Marine General Jim Jones conducted a
congressionally mandated study of Iraq's security
forces and returned with a favorable report.
This report, combined with the continuing
decline of American and Iraqi casualties, has
Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Leader Harry Reid
very concerned that their "defeat and retreat"
political folly may backfire.
Asked about the political implications should
commanding Gen. David Petraeus report significant
progress during his scheduled congressional
testimony in September, House Majority Whip James
Clyburn (D-SC) replied, "Well, that would be a real
big problem for us, no question about that."
Good news out of Iraq is "a real big problem"?
Guess that depends upon whose side you're on.
The
Patriot Post
Copyright 2007 by Publius Press, Inc.
The
Patriot Post Archive
Because
The Radical Academy publishes essays and articles
on its website does not imply acceptance or
approval of the comments or opinions expressed by
the author of the material. Nor is the Academy
responsible for any misrepresentation of the facts
included. It is your job to be a critical
reader.
Enrich
Your Life With A Book About Politics & Current
Events
|
Academy
Showcase Specials
|
|
|
|
|
|
|