The Stab That Failed

The Weekly Standard ^ | 12/03/2007 | Noemie Emery

[krogers58]

Eagerly anticipating the defeat in Iraq to which they are so much attached, some on the left have also been preparing for another contingency: the assault that they think they see coming, a drive to pin the whole wretched failure on them. Apparently, this will be "stab in the back" redux, a new iteration of the theme deployed so successfully in interwar Germany by a resourceful, ambitious Austrian corporal, who managed to propel his rise to power with the claim that World War I would have been won by his country, if not for sinister forces at home. Then, it was subversion by Jews and other disloyal elements. This time, in the left's imagining, the blame will fall on the press and the Democrats who, by pulling the plug at just the wrong moment, caused the loss of Iraq. "Nobody I know in a rational condition believes that the United States is going to have any kind of a military victory," Mark Shields said in August. "So the idea is going to be, 'We were on the cusp of victory and the rug was pulled out from under us by these willy-nilly, weak-kneed, nervous Nellies back home.' "

The problem with this is (1) that we may really win, and have no failure to blame upon anyone, and (2) that the nervous Nellies really did try to keep us from winning, indeed fought fang and claw to derail our best efforts. If they had had their way, Iraq would still be the quagmire they are so fond of invoking, and the United States--or George W. Bush, which may be the more relevant factor--would have incurred a definitive and, at least in his case, legacy-blasting defeat. It is unfair of course to call this a stab in the back, as the Democrats have been engagingly open about their intentions. In the course of the past year, they have gone from attacking a plan that had not been effective to attacking one that hadn't been tried yet, to attacking one that exceeded all expectations, while in the process ignoring reality, slandering a commanding general, and denying American forces in battle due credit for what they had done. If not backstabbing as such (see above), it is diverting enough a spectacle to merit a replay. Let us look back at this last year of battle and see how the story played out.

[maxter]

But it will be all over talk radio.

[ricks_place]

The Republicans need to make the rampant disloyalty of the Democrats the centerpiece of next year’s elections.

Save it for the upcoming Presidential Election where it will expose the left's candidate.

[Leisler]

Backstabb, spit in the troopers face, consort, support and aid the enemy in time of war. Yeah, thats the Democrats I know.

[Leisler]

Balls? They don’t even have sacks.

[Dilbert56]

Republicans can legitimately question the judgement of these Democrats throughout the election cycle: "Why was my opponent calling for us to give up when we were on the brink of victory? How could anyone trust his/her judgement again?

[y6162]

“Stabbed in the back” is effective rhetoric. It should be repeated endlessly during the debate on war funding.

It could be broadened as well. Afterall, Dems stabbed the Black Hawk Down boys the back during the 90s, Nicaraguan Contras in the 80s, South Vietnamese in the 70s, Cuban Freedom fighters in the 60s, and the nationalist Chinese in the 50s.

Iraqis will be their latest victims.

[Verginius Rufus]

You could go back further to the Copperheads of the 1860s--if the Democrats had won the 1864 election, the Civil War would probably have ended with a peace treaty between the U.S. and the Confederate States of America.

The Democrats' tactics in 2007 have been less like the mythical "stab in the back" of 1918 and more like the 23 stabs in the front, back, and sides Julius Caesar experienced on the Ides of March.

[tear gas]

I have said for a long time that historians will regard President Bush as one of the four or five greatest military strategists in history, on a par with Alexander, Julius Caesar, Napoleon Bonaparte. People have actually laughed at me for saying that.

Well, he who laughs last, laughs best!

[Zack Nguyen]

bump.

[Marine_Uncle]

One can become weary over a period of time listening to these knuckle heads discuss things beyond their level of understanding. The military victory was achieved in 2003. Saddam was ousted from power. The Security and Stabilization Operations (SASO) have reached a point where Iraq is now on the mend. From day one this administration made it clear military intervention was only the first step in a long process to create a new Iraq along the lines of a democracy.
Unless my head has been buried deep in the sand it appears for the most part all the things set forth for this venture have beared fruit in a positive way.
We continue to see a increasing willingness among the citizens of Iraq to move forward under a new form of government and in increasing numbers indicate their willingness to put nationalism above sectarian and tribal law.
As for as Mark Shields goes. Why bother expending ergs of power on what a real buffoon he is.

[groanup]

I have said for a long time that historians will regard President Bush as one of the four or five greatest military strategists in history, on a par with Alexander, Julius Caesar, Napoleon Bonaparte. People have actually laughed at me for saying that.

I think you are absolutely right. And generations will study how this man from Texas withstood the plethora of talking heads and media darlings, elite professors, famous actors and brilliant writers and laid the groundwork for all future administrations to defeat Islamofascism by having a powerful ally in the middle east.

He may not be able to pronounce nuclear but he can command the armed forces without sticking a wet finger in the air to guess whether the polls are with him.

[tear gas]

You and me make a majority!!

[jveritas]

Sorry for coming late, I was out all day today. The traitors bet on America’s defeat in Iraq and they lost very badly, they are going to pay a very heavy political price for their treason for the next 30 years.

[txhurl]

‘History will get it right, and we’ll both be dead’.

[txhurl]

ping

[txhurl]

ping

[Just A Nobody]

Thank you for the ping.
This is an excellent article systematically detailing the demonrats treason this past year.

Afraid of moving directly to defund the armed forces, Democrats decided on a series of steps that would have the same effect without saying so, i.e., putting so many restrictions and regulations on troop deployments that the number available would in effect be greatly reduced.

These would be sponsored by veterans (James Webb and John Murtha), and the stated goal would be to help the armed forces.
The real goal, however, was to strangle the surge in its crib.

I LOATHE these traitorous scumbags.

[jazusamo]

Thanks for the ping, Justa. This is an outstanding article and I would have missed it completely but for you, I noticed it was posted a week ago.

Seldom before in the annals of governance have so many politicians fought so long and so hard to completely screw up a winning strategy being waged on their country's behalf.

She sure nailed it by saying the above and the traitorous Dems are still misrepresenting lying about what is taking place in Iraq.

[Just A Nobody]

You are welcome. I would have missed it if not for txflake. So...what goes around and all that. ;*)

The section you chose to highlight was the next one I was going to do...before my 'puter decided to shut down. I do not like Vista!

[txhurl]

Astounded turned me onto it, I turned Rush onto it, Sandrat will turn EVERYBODY onto it.