Defeat, the Liberal exit strategy

Militarily there is no way we can lose in Iraq. Our soldiers know what they are doing and they are doing it well. Which makes the liberal view of Iraq not only wrong but inexplicable. The left is not only not eager for victory, but are instead desperately assuring themselves we will be defeated.

It's all in the ideology, I guess. What would a victory in Iraq mean for the left? Nothing less than total cognitive dissonance. It's my contention that the left has so much invested in the failure of Bush and the rejection of the idea of American exceptionalism that to even admit the possibility of progress in Iraq cannot consciously be considered, much less admitted.

Where's the progress, they say? Indeed where is the progress in our predominently liberal news media? Rep. Murtha, of whom 99.9% of America has never heard of before, is national headline news, but Vice Presidential Candidate Joe Leiberman is a backpage mischaracterized paragraph (if we're lucky). What's more newsworthy? A democrat against the war? Literally, a dime a dozen. Or a Democrat saying that there has been great progress and our troops are accomplishing their mission?

The truth is that victory has been slow but steady. Unfortunately, most Democrats are waging a completely different war. One that demands we hand the enemy a victory they couldn't win militarily, but can claim nonetheless. A victory not well fought, but which will nonetheless be used to recruit thousands of suicide bombers willing to inflict many more 9/11's on a weak and decadent American paper tiger.

As I said, our boys were shocked by the low morale of the American soldier and they realized that the American soldier was just a paper tiger. He was unable to endure the strikes that were dealt to his army, so he fled, and America had to stop all its bragging and all that noise it was making in the press after the Gulf War in which it destroyed the infrastructure and the milk and dairy industry that was vital for the infants and the children and the civilians and blew up dams which were necessary for the crops people grew to feed their families. Proud of this destruction, America assumed the titles of world leader and master of the new world order. After a few blows, it forgot all about those titles and rushed out of Somalia in shame and disgrace, dragging the bodies of its soldiers. America stopped calling itself world leader and master of the new world order, and its politicians realized that those titles were too big for them and that they were unworthy of them. I was in Sudan when this happened. I was very happy to learn of that great defeat that America suffered, so was every Muslim. ... Osama Bin Laden, on why terrorism will defeat America (Pre 9/11, and pre invasion of Afghanistan.)

Assured of our defeat?

Militarily there is no way we can lose in Iraq. Politically, well, that's another matter. In war you are not necessarily just killing folks, you are defeating the enemy's will to fight. Al Qaeda in Iraq believes that Ted Kennedy's Vietnam strategy will pay off for them. Every liberal declaration to that fact only boosts their morale and will to fight on and continue the killing of Iraqi civilians.

Lie, Damn Lies, and Misleading about the war.

Revising history is one way for Democrats to avoid cognitive dissonance on the war. "I wasn't wrong, Bush lied."

WASHINGTON - Sen. Hillary Clinton left one thing out this week when she tried to explain her views on Iraq - namely that she used to agree almost completely with President Bush, even after the war took a nosedive.

...Clinton emphatically told The News in her 2003 call, "I felt that it was appropriate under the circumstances, which really went back to 1998 under the Clinton administration's conclusion that the regime had to change, that the President [Bush] had authority to pursue that goal."

"Why was the intelligence consistent from the Clinton administration to the Bush administration?" Clinton added. "The intelligence was consistent for over a decade."

On the eve of war, even the senator's aides echoed Team Bush's confidence in a swift victory, including one who boasted, "It's going to be a cakewalk."

At the time of the 2003 phone call, the insurgency had blossomed and the White House had finally backed off claims that Iraq had rebuilt its nuclear bomb program.

Some experts don't fault Clinton for her omission, but admit she is clearly "feeling the heat" over Iraq.

"If the tide shifts, she's on the wrong side of the sea wall," said Baruch College political scientist Doug Muzzio.

Flustered Clinton aides yesterday sidestepped the question of why the senator's letter ignored the intelligence from her husband's administration. nydailynews.com

Re: Iraq War: Reflections

As rationale for our retreat, the left insists that our liberation of Iraq and Afghanistan is actually increasing terrorist recruiting. This is like saying that sending police into bad neighborhoods creates gangs. Just the opposite is true, not sending police into bad neighborhoods virtually assures that the criminal element will get stronger. The middle east is not able to police itself right now. It does not have the political structure to do it. Bush's strategy includes building new political structures that will be able to do so.

The idea that the invasion of Iraq caused terrorist recruitment, and that therefore pulling troops out would lessen terrorist recruitment is quite frankly 'highly uninformed'. After all, Osama Bin Laden's rationale for declaring war on America was not the invasion of Iraq. The ancient cause of irrational hatred doesn't need a rational reason to kill those it dislikes. Lacking any valid reason we know that irrational hatred will invent one.

Do you have a message for the American people?

I say to them that they have put themselves at the mercy of a disloyal government, and this is most evident in Clinton's administration ... . We believe that this administration represents Israel inside America. Take the sensitive ministries such as the Ministry of Exterior and the Ministry of Defense and the CIA, you will find that the Jews have the upper hand in them. They make use of America to further their plans for the world, especially the Islamic world. American presence in the Gulf provides support to the Jews and protects their rear. And while millions of Americans are homeless and destitute and live in abject poverty, their government is busy occupying our land and building new settlements and helping Israel build new settlements in the point of departure for our Prophet's midnight journey to the seven heavens. America throws her own sons in the land of the two Holy Mosques for the sake of protecting Jewish interests. ... Osama Bin Laden

Must we pull Israel out of the middle east in order for there to be peace with terrorists? Then, after having done so, would anyone believe that the Osama's and the Zarqawi's would be content to kill no more? Or would this not embolden them into believing, falsely, that a new worldwide caliphate was in fact possible?

[H]egemonic Word count: 1198