Abandoning Iraq (1. Declare victory: 2. Cut; 3. Run)

RealClearPolitics ^ | November 8, 2006 | David Warren

[AngryJawa]

We can't. Not after all that's been achieved. We can't pull out now. We cannot do that to our armed forces and our allies who have worked so hard, sacrificaed so much and come such a long way here.

We can't leave them high and dry now!

The decisions as to the right and honorable things to do were placed in the wrong hands last night. They'll do whatever they feel is in the best interests their future power. Those who have sacrificed can just deal with it.

[Hatteras]

"Give me one reason why terrorists would be more likely to strike now, as opposed to if we kept congress."

Because the people of America just blinked.

[Loyolas Mattman]

How did we blink on 9/11?

[quidnunc]

G Larry wrote: Now that the terrorists have beat us at the ballot box, how long before they blow up a few more U.S. cities?

They won't do that and risk rousing the American public such as happened after 9/11.

Instead they are going to subject us to the death of a thousand cuts on the peripheries until our resolve collapses completely and we surrender to their will.

[stanz]

A nightmarish article. Scary because it's true.

[stanz]

A must read.

[Allegra]

Those who have sacrificed can just deal with it.

When you trivialize the best of the American crop like that, you insult us all.

[Uncle Miltie]

"I'll bet we have a terrorist attack within six months."

Yes, and Republicans will blame the Democrats declaration of defeat in Iraq, and the Democrats will blame the Republicans failure in Iraq.

"The only question is, what are you prepared to do about it?"

[Stultis]

I think the MSM will start telling everyone the Democrats are doing a great job, look at the economy, the success in Iraq...and so on.

That would be great, IMHO. Who cares who gets the credit, so long as we WIN.

Problem is our internal enemies probably won't be satisfied with anything short of complete and definitive defeat, just as was the case wrt Vietnam. BTW, the ostensible claim that they just want to "bring the troops home" is lie, as was also proved by Vietnam. The American (and international) left actively pursued the defunding, deligitimization, demoralizing and defeat of South Vietnam even after America troops had been removed from the country and a peace treaty was signed.

Of course their overriding aim is not defeat for America as such, but America's humiliation and humbling of its supposed predatory "arrogance" thereby. I'd even be satisfied if it could be made to appear to the American Left (while not so much to our external enemies) that America had been "humbled," but in such a way that we could still actually win. I doubt that's possible though.

[ONTHEFIFTY]

ummm,

didnt the WTC get bombed in 93?

or is Ramzi Youseff in jail for J-walking?

[AngryJawa]

Allegra,

Sorry. I need to clear up what I wrote. I meant that from the Dems perspective.

My personal view of last night's nightmare w.r.t. those who have sacrificed, you included, cannot be stated without wanting to cry.

[Hatteras]

WTF? We blinked yesterday. Who said anything about 9/11?

[Loyolas Mattman]

Yeah, sorry if I wasn't clear, I was referring to the time running between the two WTC attacks.

[Chena]

There was no Patriot Act from 1993-2001 and we didn't get hit then, either (OKC being a debatable exception). We don't have enough information to know if we haven't gotten hit because of the Patriot Act, etc. or because it's AQ's m.o. to wait years between attacks if it suits them. And based on the President's performance in today's presser, I'm not inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt.

The terrorist haven't been able to successfully hit us again, but they have tried.

[Chena]

Do you get the feeling that sleeper trolls are out in force today?

[Loyolas Mattman]

To your mind, terrorists attack when America blinks. What "blinking" caused 9/11?

Terrorists attack because they are nihilists. It is their nature, it's what they do and who they are.

If you accept the principle that if we do X, the terrorists will do Y, then the next logical step is that if we don't do A, the terrorists won't do B. Which opens the door to negotiating with terrorists, which I bet neither of us would be willing to do.

[Allegra]

The terrorist haven't been able to successfully hit us again, but they have tried.

It's likely they haven't hit us again because they have been engaged elsewhere.

[Allegra]

Do you get the feeling that sleeper trolls are out in force today?

YES!! They're ALL OVER THE PLACE on FR!

[newsjunkiepgh]

We didn't blink on 9/11. We blinked thru the 90s and in 2000 with the USS Cole. Bin Laden has stated this so many times that we are a paper tiger, and the specific example he uses is Somalia. I would consider that a blink, wouldn't you?

[Chena]

It's likely they haven't hit us again because they have been engaged elsewhere.

I wish I had thought to add that truthful statement too, Allegra. Well said!