Dems in Congress don't get it (about Iraq being the central front in the war on terrorism)

The Tracy Press (CA. ^ | April 10, 2007 | Steve Wampler

[sruleoflaw]

Dems in Congress don’t get it

Steve Wampler/For the Tracy Press Tuesday, 10 April 2007 A letter from Steve Wampler

(Author's Note: The fifth paragraph from the end is slightly edited from the printed version to more accurately reflect my thinking).

President Bush gets it. So does Osama bin Laden. The Fadhil brothers, Mohammed and Omar, who live in Baghdad and write the “Iraq the Model” blog, get it. Many Americans and Iraqis also get it.

One of the few groups of people who don’t understand that Iraq is the central front in the war against terrorism consists of nearly all congressional Democrats, including Rep. Jerry McNerney, D-Pleasanton.

In February, McNerney claimed that Afghanistan is the central front in the war on terror. Sadly, McNerney doesn’t know what he’s talking about because he wants to “cut and run” as quickly as possible from the main battlefield — Iraq.

One of our main foes there is al-Qaida in Iraq. Upward of 4,000 radical Islamist, suicide bombers — from Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Yemen, Syria, Iran and local Iraqi ones — have martyred themselves in Iraq, not Afghanistan.

America’s No. 1 enemy, Osama bin Laden, calls Baghdad “the capital of the caliphate” and contends “the most important and serious issue today for the whole world is this third world war ... raging in (Iraq).” Bin Laden’s No. 2, Ayman al-Zawahiri, has stated that Iraq “is now the place for the greatest battle of Islam in this era.”

Moving America’s focus from Iraq to Afghanistan could lead to chaos in Iraq, a regional conflict or even give Iraq to al-Qaida. But McNerney and his fellow Democrats don’t seem to care what happens, even though about 110 Democrats in Congress voted to go to war in Iraq.

As a nation, Afghanistan is geographically insignificant, with no resources, no industrial base and no technological infrastructure.

Meanwhile, Iraq is one of the three major Arab states, with the world’s third largest oil reserves, an educated population and an advanced military and technological infrastructure that, even though decayed, could easily be rejuvenated. Iraq’s strategic location provides its future leaders with important influence over the entire Persian Gulf region, including Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the other Gulf states.

In a perceptive essay that should be required reading for all Americans, the Baghdad-based Fadhil brothers (http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/) argue in their March 23 entry that “The real front in the war on terror” is Iraq.

Most of al-Qaida’s money, effort and propaganda machine capabilities are being directed to support terrorist activities in Iraq, state the Fadhil brothers. Even more telling, the Fadhils note that some of the prominent lieutenants of al-Qaida, such as Omar al-Farouk, who escaped from Bagram and was later captured in Iraq, have left Afghanistan for Iraq.

The Fadhils warn that “an Islamic state in Iraq, whether led by al-Qaida or one of the local extreme religious parties, would be an enormous threat to the security of the region and the world.

“Walking away from the main war is not redeployment,” they emphasize, “it’s quitting.”

Yet, just as there are positive signs from the surge, McNerney and his fellow Democrats are taking actions to ensure failure, bolster the terrorists, betray our Iraqi friends and undermine the morale and safety of our military.

Almost like a law of nature, when democracies act with weakness and appeasement, totalitarian governments and terrorists respond with impunity. It should be no surprise that 15 British sailors were seized by Iran just as congressional Democrats tried to raise the white flag in Iraq with their “Iraq Surrender Act of 2007.”

Just as the 1975 Democrat Congress stopped giving ammunition and supplies to the pro-American South Vietnam and Cambodian governments, unleashing a bloodbath in Southeast Asia, and just as President Bill Clinton failed to respond to the Mogadishu attacks that contributed to Sept. 11, today’s Democrats want to walk away from a tough — but winnable — fight in Iraq. America’s military has yet to lose a battle to the jihadists who hide behind women and children.

The price of failure may be high. New York Times Baghdad bureau chief John Burns, one of the most knowledgeable reporters about Iraq, warns that a premature U.S. withdrawal could unleash violence without limit, potentially lead to regional conflict and lead to us facing those terrorists in the United States.

Since McNerney and his fellow Democrats won’t believe Bush about the threat of facing terrorists at home operating from a safe haven in Iraq, maybe they’ll believe a New York Times reporter. It’s no wonder many Americans feel today’s Democrats can’t be trusted with national security.

Steve Wampler, a Tracy resident, is a former radio talk show host. He has a master’s degree in political science from the University of Kent in Canterbury, England.

[bnelson44]

YOUR ACTION REQUESTED BY SOME TROOPS IN IRAQ: Please spread the word about an appeal for redress that people in the military can sign to show support for the mission. They are having problems getting the word out:

www.appealforcourage.org

If you haven't seen this yet: A campaign by active-duty troops asking Congress to drop plans for a withdrawal from Iraq. Lt. Jason Nichols, a 33-year-old naval projects officer who has been in Baghdad since mid-January, said the goal is to keep lawmakers focused on letting the military finish its mission in Iraq, and not prematurely declare failure

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7392499685041821301&hl=en

Petitions for civilians:
http://www.townhall.com/ref/surrender
http://www.gopetition.com/online/11574.html

[pollyannaish]

In February, McNerney claimed that Afghanistan is the central front in the war on terror.

Somebody needs to get out a map and take some time looking at demographics. And studying a little war theory. Yipes.

[jveritas]

Excellent article.

[supercat]

Democrats want to be kings of the wasteland.

[pollyannaish]

And unfortunately at the moment they have the tools they need to do a bang up job of it.

[peeps36]

The democrats know the war in Iraq is important but they don’t care about anything as much as their own political ambition. They are willing to sacrifice our soldiers and our safety if it means they will become more powerful.

[sruleoflaw]

I totally agree. You’ve hit the nail on the head. The political ambitions of many congressional Democrats are paramount. We need to hold the red state/red area Dems accountable in their areas — and make them pay.

[pollyannaish]

Sure appears that way. Especially when their positions change in relationship to anything the President does to reach out. Oppositional defiance I guess. :-)

[wodinoneeye]

Its worse than ‘they dont get it’, its more like ‘they would rather see half of America dead, killed by terrorists, if it means that they can maintain their political power.’

[pawdoggie]

I was thinking about the time in the 11th Century (IIRC) when the Pope invited a King of Spain to go on a Crusade to destroy the (radical Islamist) Saracens who were occupying Jerusalem. Of course, at that time most of Spain had been occupied for a couple of centuries by Muslim invaders from North Africa. The Spanish King politely declined the Pope’s invitation in words to this effect: “We already have more than enough Moors to kill here in Spain”. The Democrats remind me of that Pope, they pretend that the only Al Qaeda “Saracens” worth killing are to found in Afghanistan, even though we all know that if there’s another attack on our Homeland it will in all likelihood come from someplace other than Afghanistan.

[sruleoflaw]

That’s another good point. The Dems supported the war in Iraq; now they oppose it. The Dems opposed timelines for withdrawal; now they support them. The Dems supported the surge; now they oppose it.

[pollyannaish]

Apparently they elected a truly representative example of themselves in the last Presidential election. ;-)