« Rudy a Federalist? | Main | Fred on Federalism »

Jul27
The Politics of Iraq

Peter J. Wallison, senior research fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, explores the politics of the war and why Democrats want to set a date for withdraw now, before a September report likely to show that the "surge" is, indeed, working.

Finally, if—as seems apparent now—the surge is succeeding, opponents of the war are going to be hard-pressed to make the case for abandoning Iraq, even if there is no Shi'ite-Sunni political settlement in sight. The inconvenient truth here is that, apart from the irreconcilable Left, the American people's support for withdrawal has been based on an assessment that we were losing the war. If that no longer seems true, support for withdrawal will melt away. The Democratic leaders know this; that's why they made a concerted effort last week to get a vote on withdrawal in July. September, which will likely see a favorable report by General Petraeus, will be too late. Claims that the inability of the Iraqis to reach a political settlement is a reason for us to leave will ring a bit hollow in the face of a possible military success. After all, the American people have noticed that our Congress, unthreatened by anything more serious than an upcoming election, couldn't pass an immigration bill, can't eliminate earmarks or adopt ethics rules, and can't agree on energy legislation when gasoline is $3.50 a gallon. Politicians, they know, will be politicians, but that doesn't mean we should hand our enemies a victory instead of a defeat.

Understand this: The Democratic Party's political success in the 2008 election cycle is based on American defeat in Iraq. If the current military strategy known as "the surge"  - which involved a profound change in tactics not just increased numbers of soldiers - works, the cry of Democrats like Harry Reid that the war is already lost will be seen for what they really are - a hollow attempt to create that result based on purely cynical political motivation.

The war has not been lost. American forces on the ground are in the process of winning it. The American military has never lost a war that the American people and its politicians have vowed to win.

It's a shame that the Democratic-controlled Congress can't manage to do anything about illegal immigration, earmarks, sleazy congressional ethics or energy, but it would be better if they buckled down and worked harder at those issues than focusing so intently on legislating American defeat in Iraq.

Do they really want to run in '08 as the party that caused us to lose in Iraq? 

related entries


13 Comments/Trackbacks




» http://instapundit.com/archives2/007668.php from Instapundit.com (v.2)
MORE ON THE POLITICS OF WAR.... [Read More]

» Lose so that we can win! from Classical Values
Bill Hobbs says the war is not lost, but that the Democrats are determined to lose it: The war has not been lost. American forces on the ground are in the process of winning it. The American military has never... [Read More]

It doesn't matter what Petraeus says in the fall.

Once it's filtered through the press it will still sound like failure. He could report that every Sunni joined hands with a Shia and there wasn't a death all quarter and the troops managed to cure cancer in their spare time, and the press will still spin it as American failure.

Look how they've been reporting the booming economy.

The sooner the Mainstream media dies, the better off we'll all be.

"Understand this: The Democratic Party's political success in the 2008 election cycle is based on American defeat in Iraq."


Ha ha - so you wish. The GOP is going into the political wilderness for at least the next decade and there is nothing you can do to stop it.

Yes, of course, the Dems want to be known as the party that lost Iraq.
They are currently known as the party that lost Vietnam, and that has worked out very well for them. They desperately want a repeat of Vietnam. Back then they were young, beautiful, and powerful. How could they not want a repeat of that?
Plus, every single military action we have been involved in since Vietnam has been predicted to be (wait for it) ... "another Vietnam": Afghan, Gulf War I, f'ing Granada even. The Dems are a broken record and Vietnam is their tune.
Of course, they want to lose.

The tradegy is that the Democrats have put their personal ambitions ahead of National Security. Al Qaeda would have a victory that would cause the world grief for generations.

The left and their mouthpieces in the press are so desperate for us to lose, that I'm not even that clear that they're on our side.

Mike Roth, that is because they can understand the pain of a loss in power, but cannot understand what letting evil run in the world costs. For their needs, what happens elsewhere is of little concern, save as how it plays in American politics.

In Vietnam, Nixon patiently triangulated the Soviets & ChiComs into understanding that their national interests lay with trade & better relations with the U.S. Linebacker II resulted, bringing Vietnam to the table with a deep understanding of what the USAF can do sans LBJ targeting.
There is no one to triangulate with in Iraq & Afghanistan. The left is making a huge mistake; we cannot run from this fight. The emboldened jihadists are only to eager to follow.

In Vietnam, Nixon patiently triangulated the Soviets & ChiComs into understanding that their national interests lay with trade & better relations with the U.S. Linebacker II resulted, bringing Vietnam to the table with a deep understanding of what the USAF can do sans LBJ targeting.
There is no one to triangulate with in Iraq & Afghanistan. The left is making a huge mistake; we cannot run from this fight. The emboldened jihadists are only to eager to follow.

THis is an idiotic thesis. The Democrats can count to 60. They know there's no way to force a troop withdrawl before September. They don't have the votes to stope a fillibuster, let alone a veto. You people have been predicting imminent victory in Iraq for four years now; longer than WWII. Military victory is impossible in Iraq.

The "surge" should have happened during the invasion. The only strategic interests we sent enough troops to guard were oil fields. Bush likes to talk about how congress shouldn't be running the war, but it should be left to military commanders on the ground. Military commanders recommended nearly 500,000 troops to fully control the country. They got about 160,000 at the height of the invasion. We are now playing catch-up, only we'll never win. You can't win a civil war. You can only encourage a truce. But you have to use diplomacy, not force.

Trying to pin the failure on the democrats only makes the republicans look stupid. Everyone knows the warhawks in the Bush administration invented a crisis in Iraq, and 911 was just a convenient excuse to invade. They're not fooling anyone.

What no one seems to understand is that they want total control, that we are the infidel? Are we going to get that through our heads before it's too late??

submit a trackback

TrackBack URL for this entry:

post a comment

Name, Email Address, and URL are not required fields.





Comment Preview

« Rudy a Federalist? | Main | Fred on Federalism »

Advertise

Related Resources

sponsored ads



subscribe


Prefer Email?
Subscribe below-

Enter your Email:


Powered by FeedBlitz What's this?

Current News

Support This Blog

My site was nominated for Best Political Blog!

business social media

Use these fast growing business social media sites to promote your business, feature your products, spotlight your business leaders, create links, and drive traffic back to your company site, all for free!

BIZZlogos - Add your logo - free link to your site
BIZZphotos - Add photos of your products and people
BIZZprofiles - Submit your profile and build your online visibility
BIZZspotlight - Spotlight your business with free links
BIZZvideos - Videos about businesses, products and business people.
BIZZbites - "Digg" for Business - Submit your articles and posts

Know More Media - Government / Politics

know more media network

View Network Map

Network Feed List (OPML)

Know More Media Network
Feed


we support unitus

PRWeb

Influencer



ElephantBiz is a member of the Know More Media network of business related blogs.

Here are some current headlines from some of our business publications:

ProductivityGoal

CallCenterScript

AdHurl

TheBizofKnowledge

LandingTheDeal

CustomersAreAlways

HealthCareVox

BrainBasedBusiness

TheInsurancePolicy

MarketingBlurb