Let me know if you want in or out.
Links: FR Index of his articles: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/keyword?k=victordavishanson
His website: http://victorhanson.com/
NRO archive: http://www.nationalreview.com/hanson/hanson-archive.asp
Pajamasmedia: http://victordavishanson.pajamasmedia.com/
Vietnam ... won on the battlefield, lost on the homefront. How quickly some forget.
bttt
Seeing more of the purple finger, and less of the shaking fist, is the key to regaining the hearts and minds of Americans who in the end alone can win or lose this war.
&&&&&&
What a great summary!
If our country’s politicians had been united in this effort, the general public would have been exposed to a very different theme from mass media.
Even though VDH enumerates the negative images that American viewers are shown repeatedly, he does not have mass protests on his list - because mass media does not have video of mass protests - because they are NOT occurring in the Muslim world!
What we need most: Demonstrated success that the surge is working. The next reporting date by Petreus is Sept.
Thanks for the VDH ping. It’s always a great read.
We should not spend our energy making the war popular, but rather we need to spend our time fighting the traitors in Congress to defeat them and fighting the terrorists in Iraq to annihilate them
Excellent analysis.
It’s Europe that isn’t worth it.
VDH is dead on. His analysis simply could not be more accurate. Let us hope the right people read this.
OK
Voters may not like particularly a Harry Reid, but in frustration at the violence, they sense now that, just like them, he also doesnt like a vague somebody over there.
That's not what the bundle of contradictions called Harry POS Reid is about, is it VDH?
Garbage
Enabler
Resign Harry POS Reid
Hmmm, that figure seems awfully low. I would have thought it was closer to 75%.
We need far more articles like this to counteract the totally false picture created by the MSM.
At least Hanson has touched a critical fulcrum.
When Iraqi liberation is considered by itself, I am certain that most of them appreciate it all right, but that doesn't mean they'd line up with us to defend Israel against Iran or even stay quiet. Were we to enter serious conflict with Tehran, there's no telling what the Iraqis would do. Historic precedents suggest that such accounts of good will are usually ephemeral.
That is a consequence of media and political figures who have very successfully turned a distant war to their own domestic ends by casting it in the most negative light possible. There are several further consequences - first, that American participation in international collective security that is so dear to the progressive heart has been damaged badly, second, that the media constitute an echo chamber and the hatred that they magnify disproportionately does not simply resonate through the country, but through the world, third, that the moral equivalency necessary to pull off this ideological flimflam leaves its promoters no real way to differentiate aggression from self-defense, and fourth, that it offers up a twisted, skewed view of the world that serves only the haters.
That is the price of power, of influence. Those who claim that Bush has blood on his hands would do well to examine their own.
Harry Reid doesn't care one way or the other about the Iraqis. His only interest is gaining power for the Democrats, and he'll do that any way he can.
This is a weak analysis. The Administration has only itself to blame for the unpopularity of the Iraq war. For example, propaganda is an essential part of war but the President has totally neglected it.
Perhaps the way to deal with the Middle East is to go to the countries there that are at least nominally on our side and give them the option: cut the crap, stifle the 'death to Israel' and 'death to America' crap, and support us openly or we will leave, but we'll leave parts of the Middle East as a glass parking lot on the way out - any place we think may be trouble is gonna cease to be trouble in an instant.
Nah. won't happen.
Huh? VD's categories don't seem to apply to what's going on now. The Democrats sound more like McGovernites. You might find "Bob Taft" sentiments among a few Republicans, though. "Wilsonianism" looks dormant or dead.
The fiercest critics of the brave struggling Iraqi elected government remain liberal Senate Democrats, not Republicans.
I don't think they're talking about the Iraq government much. They don't like Bush and just want out.