Where Are We?
NRO:
Victor Davis Hanson
Everyone expected a September do-or-die showdown over our presence in Iraq; but the good news from the surge and the absolutely insane, suicidal Democratic attacks against the best in our military have given the president another six months. He knows that the sudden reprieve is late and limited — given the military’s manpower exhaustion and the public weariness over the human and material costs of staying.
So he wants to act fast of the heels of the successful statesmanship of Petraeus and Crocker, and take advantage of their window of opportunity.
He didn’t even mention Saddam by name; that war is over and won. What faces the United States now is a new war against radical Islam that continues to foment sectarian strife to destroy the young democracy and recreate another Afghan-like haven.
In response, the president offers a new American security commitment, like that once extended to Korea, that promises both Iraq and us long-term strategic opportunities arising from the tactical successes of the surge — and sweetened by future periodic American military withdrawals.
The policy sounds like Vietnamization, but this time backed by permanent American guarantees — supposedly by bipartisan consent — to evolve into something like South Korea rather than abandonment with helicopters on the Saigon embassy roof, and hundreds of thousands butchered and exiled.
Critics will say the speech is unnecessary given the stellar testimony of Petraeus and Crocker. They would have liked instead some explanation of what went wrong the last four years, and how those perceived mistakes were corrected to allow the present success. And by now most will be against whatever George Bush is for.
Perhaps. But all that matters now is whether critics have a better plan — get out now and downsize in the region? The answer is no.
Senator Reid’s response — training Iraqis, more diplomacy, steady withdrawals — didn’t sound much different from Bush’s plan. And that’s the opposition’s problem; there really is no alternative to the present course other than simple defeat and flight. The public may well come to that defeatist position in time, but it is not there yet, and so neither for all their talk apparently are the Democrats.
Where are we? A frantic half-year race lies ahead to stabilize the country and curtail radically American losses. Soon the election-cycle really kicks in and there will have to be more accomplished than the present improvement to keep Republicans from bailing. Gen. Petraeus cannot keep testifying and President Bush can’t keep giving periodic reports; news from Iraq instead will adjudicate. We are on the cusp of 1973-4 — a one-time chance, after a long ordeal, to win a critical victory, but at precisely the time the public is weary and the opposition most shrill.
So the country looks to Iraq and our maverick General Sherman outside Atlanta, where the battlefield, as it always does in war, will sort out the politics and determine our future.
— Victor Davis Hanson is the Martin and Illie Anderson fellow in military history and classics at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University. This September he is teaching at Hillsdale College in Hillsdale, Michigan, as the Wayne & Marcia Buske Distinguished Fellow in History.
Be respectful of others and their opinions. Inflammatory remarks and inane leftist drivel will be deleted. It ain’t about free speech, remember you’re in a private domain. My website, my prerogative.
If you can't handle using your real email address, don't bother posting a comment.
And then what? Does ANYONE think the war is over? We still have Iran who is a threat with their obsession over nukes. Iran with their sponsorship of Hezbolla, Syria and then AL-Q. If we succeed in defeating Al-Q in Iraq we will have seriously damaged their organiztion. Is it a final blow? Where do we go from there? This war is not by any means over with. Once we leave Iraq we still have a long ways to go on our war on Islamofacist and they are by no means resting. To say we are war weary will by no means end this weariness after Iraq. Our war is a long generational war. This is only a chapter in the book we are currently writing.
September 14th, 2007 at 2:45 pmI say again: “…The all-important question is, Which set of devastating consequences are we willing to accept so as to ensure our national security most effectively and stem the advance of the global jihad most definitively?”
September 14th, 2007 at 3:16 pm*Sigh* I hope that at least, if the Left manufactures a defeat like they did in ‘Nam, they pay for it with skin from their own hides. Retribution must be had.
September 14th, 2007 at 3:18 pmAnother news item. A preacher in Fla send this message to OBL. I think it’s cool to turn the tables on the fool.
“Look at you, look at your life,” Keller says. “You live like a hunted goat in caves, totally dependent on a small group of people for your survival. At any moment, one of those you trust could betray you like Judas betrayed Jesus and your life would be over. The false prophet you follow, Mohammad, was poisoned to death by one of his wives.”
Keller continues: “It is against the most basic standard of good and evil that your life, Osama, will be judged by historians and future generations to be one of pure, unbridled evil.”
Keller has harsh words not only for bin Laden, but for Islam, as well.
“You followed the same path as the false prophet you have put your faith in – Mohammad – who, like you, was once a businessman, but who history has recorded was nothing more than a murdering pedophile who led men’s souls to eternal damnation with the false religion he created,” Keller says. “Islam is a 1,400-year-old lie that was born out of the voice of Satan – literally. Mohammad was correct when he stated it was Satan who initially spoke to him. He dreamed up his own god, Allah, a poor imitation of the God of the Bible, and inspired his own holy book, the Quran, a cheap imitation of the inspired, inerrant Word of God found in the Bible.”
Keller calls bin Laden a “coward” and a “tool of Satan.”
“There are no virgins waiting for you in Paradise when you die, only Satan and the everlasting punishment of hell,” said Keller….”
He also directed some harsh words to Adam Gadahn, the former California heavy-metal music aficionado who converted to Islamism and joined al-Qaida.
“First off, you are out of your mind!” Keller says. “I read your life story. Your hero Osama was born into this lie of Islam, you were born here in the United States, exposed to the Truth of God’s Word, yet you rejected that Truth and embraced the lie of Islam? You listened to too much heavy metal music dude! It rotted your brain. Look at you. You are now living like a hunted dog in the middle of hell on earth. You are using your life to further the hatred and murder and evil of this street gang you have joined. Haven’t you figured out their only goal is death and destruction?”
September 14th, 2007 at 3:30 pm“…Which makes more sense: trusting the judgment of military commanders closest to “conditions on the ground” in Iraq and with no political ax to grind, or that of partisan armchair generals on the left aisle of the Senate with little to no expertise and no constitutional authority to act as mini-commanders in chief?
Which position do you suppose Osama is rooting for? “
September 14th, 2007 at 4:04 pmThe MSM is the one who has been weakening and attacking American’s resolve. It’s not the actual war. They aren’t even in it. Most see clips of the war from CNN while they sit in T.G.I Fridays, or Outback Steak House.
September 14th, 2007 at 5:03 pmThe democratic party (including lefties)is doomed because their ethics and the ethics of their supporters are deplorable. They have no real core truth to what they believe in or are willing to die for, and at best their behavior is that of Jackels..Verbal beratment and vandalism is their calling card. From the Hollywoods screwballs to politicians, the academia farce to the misinformed in the streets. The real horse dung belongs to the Liberal arts society in general. They need a swift kick in the ass for their cultural iconistic retarded (and I mean retarded to its full extent of the definition) behavior.
September 14th, 2007 at 5:07 pmGO Dan GO
September 15th, 2007 at 2:30 am