Posted on 09/14/2007 12:09:26 AM PDT by Aristotelian
Had anyone suggested six weeks ago that the GOP would emerge from the Petraeus hearings on the political front-foot, they'd have been laughed at all the way to Anbar. There's a lesson here for Republicans, in particular those most worried about how Iraq will play in next year's elections: Good military policy is good politics.
That wisdom was a hard sell this spring, when the news out of Iraq was glum, the war supplemental debate raged, and dozens of Republicans were threatening to call it quits. The White House instead made an impassioned plea that the party hold tight through the summer and let Gen. David Petraeus do what they'd sent him to Iraq to do. Sen. Mitch McConnell and Rep. John Boehner were subject to endless moaning and fretting and even a few senatorial mini-defections, but for the most part succeeded in keeping their political troops in formation. In July, when House Democrats forced yet one more vote on Iraq withdrawal, only four Republicans joined the other side.
And slowly, slowly began a trickle of good news:
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
****
IMO, the Dems have invested in Iraqi failure because they want to tie Republicans to a military defeat. Time after time, voters turn to the GOP as the party of national security. The Dems aim to break that connection through failure and defeat. They want it to be said that "Republicans can lose a war as easily as we can."
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
They seem to believe there is such thing as A Perfect War in which everything is done perfectly, there are no casualties other than Bad Guys, and that if only we did what their folks said, we'd be just fine. Those who say "We should have done" X, Y or Z may appear to be correct now that we see the flaws in what we DID do, but they have the luxury of having been ignored--if those other ways were tried, who knows what could have resulted? We'll never know.
Iraq is a gruelling ordeal for our brave soldiers. It is a political opportunity for the Democrats, who don't give a damn about individual soldiers and choose to believe that all this Islamofascist stuff is just xenophobia.
Whatever my qualms about Bush, he seems to be the one unshakable political pillar in our Iraq invasion. He knows why we're there. He knows what will happen if we cut and run. The Democrats seem to believe that we can just leave Iraq and put this thing behind us and get back to life as it was on 9/10.
Unfortunately, I think they're right, we CAN get back to life as it was on 9/10--and you know what came after 9/10.
This could possibly be a turning point in terms of public perception, not of the war but in how it plays out from here. Petraeus comes across as non-political in the face of a bunch of political hyenas, and whatever the talking heads try to make us think, the average American may be having second thoughts about their second thoughts about this war.
An important point which SHOULD be a no-brainer.
Not for the HIPPIES who run the Democratic Party and were Vietnam War protestors in the 1960s and 1970s.
There are considerable anti-war sentiment in the leadership of the Democratic Party and in some of the Northern Liberal Republicans...
Good post.
We forget how many on the left were crying, “quagmire” just three weeks into our attack on Afghanistan.
The Democrats' entire strategy for war is based on forgetting their previous actions. Not to mention forgetting their pasts (Kennedy, Clinton, etc.). They like to hit the "reset" button over and over, and expect us all to believe in their new definition of reality each morning.
That's all the proof I need.
It's not over yet and we still hear those noises, but it sure is showing significant signs of improvement.
Oops, looks like Timmy might have called it too soon again. Remember, Florida!!
Winning wars is important. Even worthless efforts like Bosnia have to be won. If your primary strategy is deterrence, weakness undercuts it. Winning in Iraq actually important. It's geographically important, separating Syria from Iran. Defeating Al Qaida is important. Having a Sunni Muslin, Arab population reject them is hugh.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.