After reading this at Blackfive, I’m beginning to think it’s time. H/T Jules.
It’s been almost 100 days since the president sent the supplemental bill to Congress, and theses “we support the troops” types oops, Congress. Fund the troops with a grown-up bill, not a piecemeal tease. They deserve better. They have your backs, even if you don’t have theirs.
And Mr. President, if they don’t, then get some war bonds up for sale, and the Americans who actually care about the fate of the troops - I’m thinking they’re more numerous than the folks at Moveon.org, and more bi-partisan in nature than the Congress - will fund them.
You damn people get off your hands and do what you were elected to do, and no, Dems, you weren’t elected to screw the troops to spite the president.
Even though the NY Times won’t report it, it seems the “surge” is beginning to take hold. The Democrats I grew up with, the Dem I used to be, would be supporting these troops and doing all they could to help them succeed in the mission, would be doing anything they could to help a forward momentum continue. These Democrats of today are of a different caliber, it seems. And the press is still midwifing the news with a poisoned rag.
Some thoughts on how the war is being portrayed (hint: mostly inaccurately) - it’s a must-read. And another look at the distortion.
One man’s (John Edwards’) surrender is another man’s dubious victory.
Michael Yon has words you won’t hear in the mainstream.
Meanwhile: WaPo has What we Got Right In Iraq. Published on a Saturday, of course. Never on a Sunday when it might be read.
And Ambivablog is typically sensible, here.
May 12th, 2007 at 10:10 am
Gotta say, this whole business of castigating Democrats for “screwing the troops” is getting a little ridiculous. These and other refrains from the cheerleaders of this war are getting very tiresome, because it neglects one salient point. The Congress sent President Bush all the money he needs to fund the troops. Instead of writing a blank check for an administration who has proven that it cannot manage this war effectively, they demanded sign of progress and yes, a timeline. It was President Bush who effectively didn’t support the troops with his veto. When more than 60% of Americans want a timeline and when the Iraqi Parliament itself wants a timeline, it gets kind of hard to blame the Democrats for not wanting to support the troops. They are representing the wishes of the majority of their constituents, not the 28% who still cling to the “Commander guy” and his inept administration. And it’s interesting that you keep using the phrase “adult” as if it’s the Democrats who mismanaged the Iraq quagmire. Sorry, the old refrain that all the hippies are traitors is not resonating like it used to.
May 12th, 2007 at 10:35 am
Oh come on, now, Kougar, the congress loaded that bill up with so much pork, it was a joke, and everyone knew it was a joke. And as to a timeline, it doesn’t really matter if 60% (your figure, polls are meaningless to me because I know how easily they are manipulated) of the people “want a timeline” that doesn’t mean a timeline is right or sensible. A “timeline” does nothing but tell the enemy to check their calendars for the date they can unleash hell.
‘
Thinking still trumps polling, every time!
‘
Signs of progress and benchmarks are reasonable. TIMELINES are just stupid. The stupidest way to fight any war.
‘
But progress and benchmarks cannot be fairly assessed if the troops are scrounging. So, I’m all for progress and benchmarks…but the congress has to be fair about giving the troops what they need while we’re watching the progress and marking the benchmarks.
‘
And I’m not just picking on the Dems, here. I’d be happy to yell at the GOP for screwing the troops, too…just as soon as they start. Until - ALL of these people voted the troops into harms way. They have to take care of them now. It’s really that simple.
May 12th, 2007 at 11:03 am
Certainly it’s time for War Bonds. Since the US Government is already borrowing at insane levels from creditors in the Peoples Republic of China, we clearly need all the money we can get.
/And, of course, we must borrow from ourselves, if no one else, because the other alternative would be to increase taxes, and nobody wants that, no matter how much they support the troops.
/It may take us a little time to pay down all those credit cards, our student loan debt, and the second mortgage we took on our house so we can pry loose some significant cash, but we can do it.
/And I don’t doubt we will do it if asked. After all, the American people are always better than the government they elect, especially if its a Democratic government.
/It’s probably also time for a Draft, as that pernicious Democrat Charley Rangell keeps insisting. After all, isn’t this “war on terror” an all out thing, demanding sacrifices by everybody, rich or poor, high or low, of all ethnicities, races, and creeds?
/In fundamental fairness, surely, our 3,000+ Gold Star Mothers are currently too narrowly concentrated by place and class.
/While were at it we should probably consider wage and price controls and gas rationing. We can handle those 50 mile freeway work commutes collectively if we all pitch in, and reducing our oil dependence on nations like Iran, which we will probably have to invade soon anyway, would be a great help to the war effort.
/This war has unquestionably degraded the actual condition of our military men and equipment to dangerous levels. It’s time we put ourselves on a war footing and bring the overwhelming muscle of American manufacturing to the task of making war material.
/Oh. I forgot. We no longer have any manufacturing to speak of. It’s mostly in China, making investment cash for the Chinese.
/We have chosen to make a war in Iraq which has made our position in the world far worse than before the war by any realistic measure.
/We have evicerated the strength of our own troops and equipment by employing them thoughtlessly and incompetently. We have no evidence whatsoever that continuing to fight in Iraq will be any more successful than the four years we have fought there.
/In fact, through those four years, where we did nothing different than what we are doing now, the situation has gotten steadily worse. We are unlikely to be “militarily defeated” so, if we do not withdraw, our casualty rate will continue indefinitely, probably doubling by the time the current President leaves office.
/So, yes, lets raise some War Bonds, let’s continue to permit the President to throw good money after bad, and let’s let the good times roll.
May 12th, 2007 at 11:48 am
If war bonds are issued, where do I buy them?
*
I fear that the American people have begun not to care. Not only that: I also fear that the Democrats are seeking an even further separation of civilians from those in the Armed Forces, that any request for aid and support will be met with indifference by the public in the future.
*
I think the President will soon come to the Point of No Return, the “Washing of Hands” moment. “I did all that I could, and you still want to spit at them because you want to spite me. I give up. You are absolutely responsible for anything that my happen to the troops and the public due to your policies, your total negligence and total indifference to the events at hand and to the threat before us. The blood of innocent Iraqis - and American troops and civilians will forever be in YOUR hands.”
*
And yet, the Democrats won’t care.
*
Of course, when the next mega-terrorist attack hits our soil and our interests around the world, they will be the first ones to blame Bush. Go figure.
May 12th, 2007 at 3:03 pm
I’ve only been reading this blog a short while, and am impressed with the Anchoress’ writing. However, I’m contiually amazed at how shrill she becomes when discussing the Iraq war. It’s like a switch is turned, and it’s all emotion (usually negative). This idea that since the Democrats and Congress generally authorized the use of force in Iraq they are now obligated to keep writing blank checks for the Bush administration is beyond ludicrous. The American people trusted Bush and Cheney that a preemptive strike against Iraq was to prevent mushroom clouds in our own cities, and they had the highly respected Powell sell it to us and the world. Now that we know that this was based on selective and often erroneous intelligence, how can we trust these people anymore? Keep writing blank checks and starting war bonds? Please. And again, we have accomplished the military mission..Saddam has been deposed, the WMD’s were never there, and we have given the Iraqis a government, 3 elections, and trained over 300K police and seecurity forces. I’d say the American military’s mission is accomplished and that we need to bring them home.
PS And Anchoress, you may want to reconsider calling a timeline “stupid”. The idea that the terrorists will “mark their calendars” is absurd. They’ve already marked them, and they’ve already unleased hell. Sorry, calling your opponent’s ideas stupid is not an argument…it is in fact “name-calling”!
May 12th, 2007 at 3:30 pm
It never fails - no matter how temperate I try to keep the tone of the blog in the face of a million truly shrill, unendingly nasty blogs - the first time I get the least bit angry, I get called “shrill.” I guess one man’s “shrill” is another’s “fed up.”
‘
Kougar, we’ll have to agree to disagree on whether timelines are “stupid.” To me anything that says to an enemy, “hey, if we’re not happy with things by October 8, we’re outta here,” (basically saying to them, “so you just wait until October 9 to do what you’re really itching to do,”) is a stupid idea. You seem to think differently, and that nothing will get any worse than it is. I’m not willing to make the Iraqi people, or our reputation test that theory.
‘
I’m still fuzzy on the “namecalling” thing. I think if I’d said “the proponents of timelines are stupid people,” that would be namecalling. I sometimes have stupid and foolish ideas - I often do stupid things - but I am not a stupid person. There is a distinction, and it’s not even a particularly fine one. Btw, I don’t think of “shrill” as “namecalling” either.
‘
I do think it’s really funny to hear the Dems suddenly announcing - all over the place - that the mission is “accomplished” - such a statement actually opens things up to say “we’ve done good things, there, despite Bush” but the double edge to that sword is that then Bush must get some positive credit, which we know is anathema to the haters.
‘
The “mission” was accomplished long ago except that if you go back to Bush’s speech to the joint houses of congress in September 2001, if you go back to his Whitehall speech, if you go back to his speeches to the UN, to the Congress when they voted, to the day we went into Iraq, he always said the same thing - this is not going to be fast or easy, because it’s about more than finding WMD, it’s about bringing liberty to a people we screwed once before, and more importantly, it’s about establishing a workable democracy in the very heart of the Middle East, in the very heart of the terrorist training grounds, because the vision was to bring a people into the world of marketplaces and ideas, so that terrorism as a means of movement might be overcome.
‘
If you think about it, this is something the Democrats and the left should have loved…it was all about pulling people away from the “root causes” of terrorism and offering them a better - more productive - alternative.
‘
It was a visionary plan, and a noble one. It was so noble that other countries starting making moves toward demanding democracy themselves, but got stalled as we stalled in Iraq and then began playing political games.
‘
So, we’re willing to abandon a noble and great plan, for a shrug and a “well, that didn’t work…it got really hard.”
‘
Our soldiers and troops keep volunteering to go back and establish that vision. Too bad the rest of the country hasn’t the heart for it.
‘
If, as you say, “They’ve already marked them, and they’ve already unleased hell.” I think you’re shortchanging what real hell can be, Kougar.
‘
But this is just a difference of opinion and a discussion - a give and take. It’s something we really should be able to have at every level within our communities and in our country, and the politics on both sides has become too poisoned. I read what you said, considered it, disagreed with it. That doesn’t make you or me bad people. Or “stupid” people. It just means we disagree.
‘
None of which changes the fact that the Democrats voted in this war, that they know we can’t really pull out without disaster and chaos, but that they’re more interested in playing politics. Some believe that we will not be allowed to properly fight the war until the Dems have the WH, and so may take credit…perhaps. If so, that is staggeringly immature, and sinfully wasteful, and there has already been too much waste. The Democrats first obligation is to keeping us safe (we haven’t been attacked again in 6 years…did you think on September 12, that such a thing would be true? Do you think if AlQ could have killed 30,000 in the WTC they wouldn’t have done so?) And part of that is funding the troops.
May 12th, 2007 at 3:59 pm
Frankly, I agree, Anchoress. This is a long term thing, and we the people should be more involved, and vote with our chequebooks, as it were. Many of us liberals think we do have to finish what we start, and do need to support our soldiers-politics be damned. Many republicans may think that we need to end it. My point is that, beliefs on the war transcend party lines for many of us-this would be a great way for us to take politics out of the equation, since now that the decision has been made, politics have no place (IMHO). Also, this is an extraordinary effort- I think it should be funded by extraordinary means, and not swallow other budgetary concerns.
May 12th, 2007 at 4:12 pm
Buy a share of freedom today.
May 12th, 2007 at 5:56 pm
Wow, I was actually looking forward to reading an objective account of the positive developments in the linked WaPO article. Anchoress, I will not quibble any further about the justification for going into Iraq anymore with you, since it’s clear we will disagree about almost everything. However, the article you linked to was written by none other than L. Paul Bremer! I mean, could you find someone a little less biased! Come on Anchoress, you have to do better than this! Mr.Bremer is engaging in a little historical revisionism in a desperate attempt to mitigate the inevitable bashing he will take in our children’s history books. Mr.Bremer’s mistakes in squandering billions of taxpayer dollars, telling thousands of Iraqi soldiers to take their guns and go home, and his overall inept handling of the situation in Iraq prevent me from taking ANYTHING he writes seriously. Like George Tenet and Gen. Franks, he should do the honorable thing by returning his Medal of Freedom and retiring from public life altogether.
PS Before you link to the “positive spin” on Iraq, at least warn us that it is by someone with an axe to grind!
May 12th, 2007 at 6:16 pm
written by none other than L. Paul Bremer! I mean, could you find someone a little less biased! Come on Anchoress, you have to do better than this! Mr.Bremer is engaging in a little historical revisionism
‘
Yes, how wayward of me - everyone knows the last person to go to for perspective is someone who was there and is actually sticking to the story. The only really credible people are the ones either were there, or weren’t there, but knew someone who was, and who in either case have only negatives to relate! What was I thinking!
‘
Yes, Kougar, I think it’s time we stop quibbling any further, since it’s clear we have very different opinions.
‘
Just because someone has handled a thing ineptly does not mean that nothing he relates can be considered credible. I have sometimes been an inept mother; that doesn’t mean I can’t credibly tell you about a situation regarding child-rearing that actually reflects well upon me or my kids…unless one has decided that my occasional ineptness means that I had no periods of eptness and that every word coming out of my mouth is suspicious because I might be wanting to bouy myself up.
‘
But if that’s what someone has decided about me, then there’s nothing I can do for them. Sometimes a thing is what it is, even if you don’t like it to be that way. This is why so many people really can’t stand it when they’re reminded that Bush was not the first to talk about WMD in Iraq, or that AlQuada did not attack our interests for the first time in 2001.
‘
I guess the difference in extremism (and in “hater-ism” which I’m starting to think is a real “ism” we should recognise) and everything else is that there is nothing Bush, or Bremer, or anyone connected to Bush…or even I, your humble and lowly correspondent…could ever say to you on this issue that would be remotely credible, because “the thing’s not working; there have been mistakes and etc.” Whereas, I still actually listen to Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton and weigh things they say, even though they were talking about WMD in 1998, and responding very little (and ummm…ineptly) to terrorism throughout the 1990’s. I was respectful of Hillary, for hanging in there and remaining consistent on Iraq until Obama jumped in and scared her into her current - unintelligible - position. Her previous (co-president, remember!) “ineptness” had not forever sullied for me her ability to ever say anything on that subject again. Ah, well…silly me. I should have realized…that’s simply not the way it lays: the Clintonian ineptness in handling terrorism in the 1990’s had already and forever negated anything either of them had to say about anything concerning Iraq or the WOT ever again. Is that the standard, these days? I’ll try to adjust.
‘
When will I learn?
‘
We’ll have to move on to the next disagreement, Kougar, because once I see a thing is hopeless and destined for circular/repetitious back-and-forth, I don’t give up time or my limited energy to it.
‘
It’s okay, though…I’m sure we’ll have lots to disagree about before we completely run out of subjects.
May 12th, 2007 at 7:01 pm
Amen Anchoress. Rock on!! By the way call it shrill call it not being calm but a little anger in my view is highly alright right now.
How many days was this troop funding bill delayed because the Democrats wanted to defeat the Supplemental on “Mission Accomplished” day. We know they delayed it for a publicity stunt.It was well documented in the MSM HOW IS THAT JUSTIFIABLE!!
I am a pretty average guy. I have friends in Iraq. I know there are some over there that prob oppose it. But goodness, I have talked to two of my friends on leave recently and they think the Dems are nuts on this. Another, by email has told me they have no idea what they are doing and its affecting lives.
May 12th, 2007 at 8:40 pm
Anchoress we can buy “Patroit Bonds”
http://www.savingsbonds.com/bond_basics/PatriotBonds1.cfm
The problem is there is a catch
” Special Note: The proceeds of the Patriot Bond will go into the Treasuries General Fund and are not specifically earmarked for the war. Monies for the war and other federal government spending also draw from this general fund, which may contribute to fighting the war on terrorism. At this time, economists are urging people to spend to help spark the economy rather than save with war bonds.”
May 12th, 2007 at 10:01 pm
I’m not so sure this would do any good as long as it’s tied to an unpopular war as the war in Iraq. It certainly wouldn’t have near the same response as WW II war bonds.
Even a lot of people that might be initially inclined to support it might be reluctant to put money into what seems to be a losing proposition.
A better idea might be to establish something along the lines of “Homeland Defense Bonds”, which would be utilized in the overall war on terror and homeland security.
Or even just “Defense Bonds”, the money for which could be utilized where it is felt to be most needed, including but not limited to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
May 12th, 2007 at 10:25 pm
You know, Pagan…I like that idea a lot.
May 12th, 2007 at 11:35 pm
Would You Buy War Bonds?…
The Anchoress has an excellent post about Congress and the stalemate we are now in regarding funding our troops.
The Anchoress used to be a liberal and says she will change her registration to Independent before the next election, but she is concerned…
May 12th, 2007 at 11:50 pm
A, I think Kougar is your thorn in the side just as Paul had one.
.
If we can get War Bonds sold without Congressional approval I will gladly invest in them even if I don’t get a return on my investment.
.
Someone has to be an adult and since it’s not Congress it must be the masses of people who elected them.
.
Kougar,
.
This “blank check” phrase is wearing pretty thin. You and Pelosi seem to like it a lot, but it’s not a blank check. The president is asking for $90 billion dollars to care for the troops and their needs. If you write a figure on the check it’s not blank.
.
Even things we don’t consider such as hot meals for the troops are in jeopardy as those hot meals are cooked by contractors who don’t work for free. So in addition to not allowing them to keep up the equipment and get better equipment Congress is refusing to feed them anything but MREs. They deserve better than that.
May 13th, 2007 at 12:17 am
Your description of the Democrats’ attitude towards the war reminds me of W. H. Auden’s poem, “The Unknown Citizen”: “when there was peace, he was for peace/ when there was war, he went,” only, in the Democrats’ case, it would be “when the polls said ‘go to war,’ they funded war,/ when the polls said ‘no war,’ they reneged.”
The funny thing about the poem is that it’s about the total absence of will of this “Unknown Citizen,” who is identified only by a number, and whose “monument is erected by the State,” which has controlled his entire life: “Was he free? Was he happy? The question is absurd:/ Had anything been wrong, we should certainly have heard.” So we are being controlled by politicians who allow themselves to be controlled by the mere semblance of public opinion. Great.
May 13th, 2007 at 11:05 am
Mr. Kougar has mentioned the fact that L.Paul Bremer has a vested interest in asserting himself to be right. And, in fact, the article seems to be less about justifying the actions of the United States and more about shoring up his private reputation.
/Be that as it may, we can take his argument as it stands, because it is the same argument this administration has made over and over. Thus: what we did in Iraq was morally correct no matter what the military consequences. So, “to drive members of the Baath Party from public life and to disband the Iraqi army” because the Baathists were like Nazis and and the army had been used to oppress Iraqis.
/Very fine and noble–as far as it goes. But the real mistake was not that we did these things, but that we did NOT have the country under control when we did them. Not the what but the when. So the people we had garrisoned and accounted for were left to slip back tracelessly into the general population and form an insurgency armed from completely porous borders with Syria and Iran.
/Let’s articulate a principle that almost all of the people who are still supporting this utter disaster simply refuse to face: In the ordinary world a moral action means absolutely nothing unless you can make it stick.
/No matter how moral any of the things we have done to Iraq are, from purple thumbs on women in burkhas at the voting booth to the dispersal of the Iraqi army, we have not made them stick.
/To make them stick we would have needed to be in complete control of the entire country. We never have been. We still are not. We are now not even in control of Baghdad, which, for a while, we were.
/The real reason to withdraw from Iraq is not that the mission wasn’t moral and noble, but that the mission has not been accomplished and, under the terms and conditions set by the administration to accomplish it, it CANNOT be accomplished. It requires complete control of the country. We cannot get it and neither can our Iraqi proxies.
/In the battle of Gettysburg, Lee ordered an open infantry charge against entrenched artillery. It was a noble thing, all agree, but Pickett’s Charge was also a worthless military blunder. Lee had sense. He understood that he had made an unrecoverable mistake and withdrew. He didn’t keep sending more infantry to charge the same line of cannon.
/Would that those in control had such sense before the unrecoverable military position generates twice as many casualties and wastes three times as much money as we now have. But they do not and they will be in control until 2009.
/So all those of us with sense have left is to hang it around the neck of those who have no sense, such as Mr. Bremer.
/On him it still looks good.
May 13th, 2007 at 12:44 pm
Literacy,
When politicians allow themselves to give voice to public opinion, we call that political system….democracy. Yes, sometimes politicians must make decisions that go contrary to public opinion. The problem is, this is no longer a Democratic issue that you guys can use to bash the anti-war critics with. No we have Republican congressman going to the WH and basically telling the President “We don’t trust you, you have no credibility, our districts are prepared for defeat”. You also have many retired generals who are not liberals by any stretch raking the Bush administration over the coals. I think in a democratic society, the combination of all these voices cannot be dismissed as the wails from the liberal fringe…these are mainstream and increasingly conservative voices being heard. You conservatives are going to find the GOP less and less enamored of this whole thing come Sept, and then who will you blame?
May 13th, 2007 at 8:40 pm
Thank you ANCHORESS…
This was not ’shrill’, the truth can never be…
I feel mindsets like ‘Kroouger’?
are upset, because they sense deep down it is the truth, and cannot handle this reality.
The democrat bigotry towards republicans, has allowed many partisans to hope (work) for the failure of the liberation of the Iraqi People.
It is simply stunning, but it is true.
Political opportunity has blinded so many, and political hatred has inspired others, to demean, debase, undermine, a very admirable endeavor.
Operation Iraqi Freedom is worthy, and we should encourage the fight for liberty, the defeat of monstrous Radicals who inspire terrorism, and the empowerment of democracy.
Democrats are on a side of an ugly political realm, that matches their attempt to maintain segregation.
They cannot recognize the folly of their position, which is openly working for the abandonment of the Iraqi People to a nightmare.
Some have allowed their ‘anti-American’ mindset to shape their vision, others have let their hatred for Conservatives, many haven’t bothered to pay attention, etc.
It is a sad conception. Imagine if these fools had forced the USA to stop the advance into Germany, because of the painful loses in the Battle of the Bulge.
It seems a vast number of Liberal Democrats wanted to let Millions live under the Oppression of the Soviet Union.
How does one enlighten the blind?
I would be more than willing to purchase as many War Bonds as I could…
I did even try to volunteer for such a Mission, but my age and medical condition is a problem.
Last Friday, at a swank NY City shin dig, I encounter some of the most spoiled, self serving, fake, mindsets.
Yes, many made it quite clear they were partisan democrats.
It was really sad, to see such denial, as the brave Free Iraqis, Free Afghanis, Polish, American, British, Etc. continue to fight monsters for Our Freedom.
And they will continue, with all of Our support, despite those who unwittingly wish to aid the likes of Osama, al Qaeda, and like minded Fascists with grand plans of death.
The Free World is not going to let the misguided liberal ignorance endanger Our existence.
May 13th, 2007 at 8:57 pm
No matter how moral any of the things we have done to Iraq are, from purple thumbs on women in burkhas at the voting booth to the dispersal of the Iraqi army, we have not made them stick.
As you say, one of the ways to make them stick would be to take control of the country - a huge misstep by this administration made, I think, because they were so very conscious that if they played “too hard” you folks would be more hysterical than you already were.
‘
Another major misstep was in not going into Fallujah full bore when we were challenged to do so with the murders and desecrations of those four contractors. I believe those folks were looking to see if we’d bring the hammer - which is something they understand and respect, and which they had to know they deserved (much like a kid will know damn well that he needs and deserves to be punished) and we never did bring it, because - again -we were trying to fight a nice, sensitive and tidy war.
‘
I think had the administration not made those two serious mis-steps, things would be very different today. I also think that they screwed up because they were anticipating criticism from the left and trying to fight within those parameters that the left might find (barely) acceptable. A disaster, and yes, Rummy and Bush screwed up.
‘
Nevertheless, now that you’ve admitted that there are both moral and noble components to this vision - in it’s larger sense - how can you say, “hey, we couldn’t make it stick in a couple years; it’s too hard, we have to go - we have to abandon these people AGAIN - we have to just tell the world that America, the last noble superpower, can’t stomach a fight.
‘
But who made the arbitrary determination that “enough” time has pass for things to have “stuck,” in a land where people have been tyrannized, subjugated, tortured and terrorized for 35 years, a land of tribal mentalities? For crying out loud, how long did the Berlin airlift go on for, how much time did we spend helping other countries come to a stable democracy? Iraq is supposed to do it double-quick?
‘
Say anything you want (and I’m sure, Joseph, that you don’t mean to sound as condescending as you did) I still maintain that if any president but Bush had envisioned this operation and gone for it - particularly if that president were a Democrat - you folks would be saying precisely the things I am saying, and suggesting that people give the endeavor more of a chance than “we threw it against the wall, it didn’t stick, we’re out.”
‘
And if a Democrat president had done this, he or she would be heroic in your eyes.
‘
And if in ‘08 the Dems take the WH, we may finally see all of those arguments and all of those praises from the left, for that president.
‘
Sometimes a jar is hard to open…one person can’t do it, the next does it easily. The first says “I started it for you.” It’s a joke…but it’s also something that rings true. Bush has had the hardest part. The Dems are afraid to allow the surge to have a bit of time, because - egad - it might work…and this thing cannot be allowed to succeed under a GOP president, esp not one named Bush.
‘
That’s the bottom line to Pelosi and the rest. Unconscionable, but nothing they’ve done suggests that they’re capable of doing anything but playing politics with this situation, until they have all the power. Over a year ago I noted that we would hear no good news on any subject while Bush remains in office, and that has been borne out. Absolutely nothing good or positive can be allowed -or acknowledged - to have happened on Bush’s watch. It would destroy all their lovely narratives, you see. The one that says one person is capable of nothing but screw ups and never, never, never does a single good or correct thing. Which is simply impossible, unless you harbor enough hate in your soul to want to believe it.
May 13th, 2007 at 9:25 pm
THE FIGHT FOR LIBERTY…
If an objective basis is maintained in human history, if the Free World survives with a bit of truth, those supporting the Democrat Party at this time will be considered in a horrid light.
These fools are actually encouraging the Radical Militant …..
May 13th, 2007 at 9:48 pm
In 2003 an engineer friend who I had worked closely with for over two years was sent to Iraq to inspect the power plants. He traveled for some 9000 miles all over the country, usually alone; never with security nor was he armed. He said he never saw any reason to fear for his life nor did he expect or have any serious problems during his travels. He is not a naive person.
Some of the records seized from Saddam’s government, recently translated, indicate he had a plan to start an insurgency if he lost the war. If my friend did what he did believing from what he saw and heard from our international headquarters security group that his movements were safe, who was he, or I for that matter, to doubt the occupation of Iraq was succeeding. Our mistakes once the insurgency began are legend, but we were the liberator of an oppressed people and the methods we used in Germany and Japan, or even the Philippines in 1900, were not those that fit our purpose in Iraq. It appears that as to fighting the insurgency, we have finally relearned the lessons were had forgotten from fighting the Imperial Japanese Army and developed late in the Vietnam War or viewed when the British fought in Greece and Malaysia, but the American people can’t seem to see over the walls at the local mall. Our original tactics, to me, appeared wrong but seemly were developed to minimize causalities and the public concern. That didn’t succeed when the perceptions of even fewer Americans are developed by having served in the military or have had a close relationship to someone who has. Many also have no sense of history as I see from ordinary public conversations. Therefore that we have lost less personnel in Iraq than what was lost during peace time in previous years does not penetrate the public mindset.
My son is serving in Iraq, but I would feel a greater loss if he was killed in a training accident or on our nations highways than if he died performing a duty he feels is necessary to defend his family and country. He simply says it is his turn (to serve).
May 13th, 2007 at 10:01 pm
Have been reading Anchoress for a long time, sporadically, I admit. However, one thing remains the same–petty right wing sophistry in the midst of some profound and insightful musings on culture and spiritual life. It isn’t cute or smart anymore to echo Malkin, Coulter, Fox News. Bush vetoed the bill through ego, not for the troops, just as he went to war for ego, not for security or freedom. How sad are those who are blind to the corporatist-fascist
agenda. This is the “deliberate un-think” that insists it thinks. This is not high school. We need adults who see what is beyond the smart retort and talking points. I would hope you are one of those adults, but posts like this make me doubt.
Catherine
May 14th, 2007 at 5:51 am
Hmmm…see, if you read me more than “sporadically” you’d know I dislike both Fox News and Coulter (Coulter rather intensely) so I don’t “quote” them or even pay attention to them, and I link to Ms Malkin, who has one hell of a work-ethic, btw, once in a while but do disagree - particularly on the immigration issue - when I disagree. I think you could fairly say I’m no one’s mouthpiece and do think for myself, even if my musings strike you as sophist, infantile, fascistic and unthinking. You should read me more, Thearosa! ;-).
‘
I like the handle, btw.
‘
Sad that you couldn’t come here and leave all the “corporatist-fascist” rhetoric aside…I could get that at almost any leftist website among thousands; it doesn’t really add anything new to the conversation, does it? I like to think that when you come here you’re reading things you’re not reading at a thousand classically liberal-to-right sites, although, sadly, sometimes it seems I cannot help but think as other folks think and express those thoughts, with which I could not reasonably expect everyone to agree, all the time!
‘
I thank you for the kind words at the start, though. Much appreciated.
May 14th, 2007 at 8:23 am
I almost hesitate to jump into this discussion, because I just don’t have the ability of our dear Anchoress to put my thoughts into writing. That said, here goes. . .I am surprised things have gone as well as they have in Iraq because of the constant drum beat of negativity from the press and the opposing political party in Congress (as well as some RINOs.) This war has been fought on the front pages of the most liberal newspapers in this country, picking apart everything this President has done for the past 6 years, giving him credit for nothing. The press has taken delight in making public any & every detail that might help the enemy, from Bin Laden to the insurgent groups in Iraq & Afghanistan. They broadcast the means by which those responsible for trying to keep this country safe were legally monitoring in-coming phone calls from foreign countries that might be a means of detecting future attacks. They let Bin Laden KNOW how we were tracking his phone calls. Of course things were not done perfectly in Iraq ~ this is war, after all. Hindsight is always 20/20. . .imagine if WWII had been fought in this same way, with newspapers/columnists divulging everything they possibly could, and in a way to make the President look bad in the worst possible way. There’s be a few European countries that would be speaking German. I think this war could have been over a long time ago had the likes of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, the NYTimes & Washington POST and most news outlets (CNN & the alphabets come to mind) not given aid and comfort to the enemy. The insurgents and their supporters (Iran, Syria) are counting off the days on the calendar until our brave troops get yanked from Iraq and redeployed (thank you John Murtha, who should resign in disgrace for his public remarks). I think President Bush will be judged much more kindly in the future ~ he is doing everything he possibly can to keep this country safe. He deserves our support and needs our prayers. It’s a pity that more people can’t get over Bush Derangement Syndrome just enough to give credit where credit is due.
May 14th, 2007 at 10:58 am
Piano Girl,
I think we’ve heard enough of the old refrain that the “liberal media” has been inaccurately reporting the very, very, very bad news from Iraq. If anything, most observers say it’s worse than can be decribed. I’ve been there myself, and just when you think you’re safe in the Green Zone, BOOM, a terrorist blows himself in the Green Zone Marketplace. In terms of the media being a propaganda tool for Al Qaeda, I think you’re overstating the case, and it really smacks of partisan finger pointing as opposed to the actual facts. Would you prefer that the press lie to the American public just so we can win the “propaganda war”? And it’s also ironic that the Bush administration thinks it’s okay to out clandestine CIA agents whose expertise is WMD! Oh, and don’t forget that it was the Bush administration that posted archived documents from the Saddam era showing how to build an atomic bomb. So if anyone is handing Al Qaeda a means to really hurt us, it has been the Bush administration. Nothing you’ve said couldn’t be found at a myriad of conservative sites, all with the same refrain: the hippies in the media are in cahoots with Al Qaeda. Sorry to be so disparaging, but this is truly a playground argument.
May 14th, 2007 at 11:13 am
“Many also have no sense of history as I see from ordinary public conversations. Therefore that we have lost less personnel in Iraq than what was lost during peace time in previous years does not penetrate the public mindset.”
‘
You brought a very important point here, amr.
‘
Just last week, I watched a History Channel doc. on the Spanish/American War (1898). This is something that I had to study on my own even while at college, because it is given so little attention in schools here. But at the same time, it is not given enough attention at schools in Puerto Rico, where I was born and raised.
‘
I wondered for a long time why people don’t understand that things like stability and crushing of insurgencies take time, that wars don’t last just 100 hours, and why people are so willing to give it up so quickly when things seem to go sour, no matter what the troops on the ground tell you.
‘
1898.
‘
That first foreign intervention outside of the mainland has given Americans an UNREALISTIC blueprint as to how to win wars, an unrealistic expectation about the enemies to face and the time it would take for those things to fall into proper place (including the enemies’ defeat), and a horrible blueprint for the media to follow on how to manipulate the information given to the masses and to influence public opinion beyond the powers of anyone in government to do anything about it.
‘
I know that “You furnish the pictures, we’ll furnish the war” comment from the Hearst newspapers is apocryphal, but there is a slant of truth to it. We can see it manifest itself in our 24/7 news cycle, which has done a lot more than the “yellow journalism” of that era to imprint into the American psyche the worst misinformation has to offer.
‘
Not to mention that our educational system - and many parents, to be truthful here - have failed miserably to teach history and geography to their children. No wonder I was so livid when I overheard one lady at my church say a couple of years ago, “But I never thought they [soldiers] would still be in Iraq that long!”
‘
Remember. 1898. Oh, BTW. PR was ceded by Spain to the US as part of the treaty that ended that war. We sure should understand those things like the palm of our hands.
May 14th, 2007 at 11:56 am
Not to butt-in, there, Kougar, but I am tired of reading the charge from the left that “you guys just want the press to lie and not report the bad news…”
‘
No. We know there is bad news in war, and we’re not saying it shouldn’t be reported. We’re saying REPORT THE GOOD NEWS, and please don’t tell me there is none, because embedded bloggers manage to find good news pretty regularly.
‘
Case in point: this story is not in the NY Times or too many other places, today.
‘
I’m too busy to engage in this ongoing dialogue today, but please…let’s not pretend that the press doesn’t bury or suppress positive reports coming out of Iraq. We had a big AlQaeda kill yesterday and it’s not being talked about anywhere.
May 14th, 2007 at 2:09 pm
[...] the “Sighing” Sphere Is it time for War Bonds? Saturday Scan of the ‘Sphere Biofuels more expensive sez Gore The Bootstrap Nation; Bill [...]
May 14th, 2007 at 3:47 pm
When I was in the early grades of elementary school, every Friday was “Stamp Day.” We would bring our dimes to school and purchase stamps that we pasted into a little stamp book and when we filled up an entire book, we could turn it in and be issued a $25 War Bond/U.S. Savings Bond. Each stamp cost 10 cents and you could purchase as many as you wanted each week.
This practice began before I was born and was discontinued when I was in 3rd or 4th grade. It was an outgrowth of the War Bond drives of WWII and continued thruout the Korean War. By the time it was discontinued, I had accumulated close to $9000 face value in bonds (remember that a $25 bond cost $12.50) and those bonds paid my tuition for the first couple of years of college many years later when they reached their full maturity.
There were many benefits to this program. It taught very young children to save, it gave you a sense of contributing something to the country, and it was easy and everyone could participate. I remember how thrilled I was each time I pasted the last stamp in a book and could turn it in.
At the beginning of the War in Iraq, there was alot of talk about how to get the country as a whole to feel involved. Since it was VP Cheney out front on the issue, I wrote to him and suggested reestablishing the War Bond stamp program. I got an answer back but it wasn’t encouraging. So I submit it here. I still think it is a good idea. It worked for many years during and after WWII, so why not now?
May 15th, 2007 at 11:50 am
Glad you liked my idea, Anchoress. It’s one that I’ve had for some time, though I’ve never actually blogged about it. Maybe I will now, when I resume blogging next month.