On another forum, poster “frd” writes, regarding Iraq:
“Today during his press conference President Bush, defending his troop surge in Iraq, insisted that the insurgents attacking US troops in Iraq “are the same ones who attacked us on Sept. 11.”
Frd, like nearly all Dems and members of the political left (and yes, including some mis-quided or politically-panicked Republicans) for selfish electoral purposes are heavily invested in a strategy of failure, defeat, and retreat as the only option in Iraq, and are thus reduced to cheerleading and providing comfort to those declared enemies of their own country, and of the liberties that they themselves enjoy in being able to do so.
Frd also hears only what he want to hear. President Bush in his press conference was also very clear in pointing out in his response to the question, that the direct perpetrators of the attacks are dead, a large number of the planning leadership is dead or captured, and bin Laden himself and his lieutenants – none of whom are in any apparent hurry to commit martyrdom and themselves go meet Allah with the 72 black-eyed beauties – while still a threat, are less of a threat than they would have been had they not been pursued.
What he also pointed out was that al-Qaeda in Iraq (or al-Qaeda in Mesopotamea) has sworn allegience to bin Laden and to his stated objectives against the West.
While al-Qaeda has splintered and become more of a brand name, a flag, and a propaganda franchise than a central command structure, it is nonetheless the same organization that attacked us in 2001, and that is waging war against us and the Iraqi’s now, in Iraq – and who will continue their stated objective of combative jihad against the West IN the United States, as soon as it is able – if we do not continue to act to degrade and resist that capability, wherever we find it.
Al-Qaeda may or may not have had a presence in Iraq prior to the removal of the Saddam regime. Saddam may or may not have been providing them actual or tacit support, much like the Iranian regime is certainly providing some forms of support to them now.
There can be no question however that al-Qaeda, and others who share their violent antipathy for the West, are now in Iraq, fighting to prevent the creation of a stable, democratic government of reconciliation in Iraq that is supportive of the West against them.
Estimates are that 70% to 80% of the violence in Iraq is being instigated by al-Qaeda or similar jihadic groups (including Hezbolla and the Iranian regime), with the express purpose of fomenting sectarian violence and civil war that will prevent reconcilation and the Iraqi government’s consolidation of power, and which will create the sort of political and media environment needed to encourage the weak-kneed politicians of the West to force a withdrawal of US troops from Iraq so that al-Qaeda can move out of the camps in the Pakistan-Afghanistan frontier, and back into a quasi-national environment, where they will have access to airports, banks, industrial capacity, vast oil wealth, and territory politically safe from invasion.
Perhaps frd and others who share his dislike, contempt, and even hatred for George Bush, are comfortable in carrying the water for the jihadists, as long as it suits the reflection of their own political views. The enemy of his enemy is perhaps his friend, whether he chooses to admit the connection or not.
What is interesting and instructive in watching the media coverage of the interim progress report, is that true to form, those of a liberal bent are intent on characterizing the glass as “half empty”, rather than recognizing the potential it contains.
Fully eight of the “benchmarks” being pursued were reported as having “satisfactory” progress, in an operation (approved by Congress, led by a general commissioned by Congress specifically to execute it) that has just barely gotten underway, and is not slated for completion and final assessment until at least September.
Eight areas were identified as “not satisfactory”, as in not YET. Even in those areas, some progress can readily be observed, if one is willing to look.
In two areas, progress was characterized as “mixed”, neither entirely satisfactory nor totally unsatisfactory.
“Mixed” results do not qualify as either “defeat” or “failure”. In fact, the movement for all benchmarks seems to be overall in a quite positive direction. A few doomsayers are stating that they do not expect that progress will be enough in the “short term”, which is a long way from saying “never”.
And enough for what? Enough to convince those who have already decided and declared that we have “failed” and that the “war is lost” that perhaps they were mistaken? Or “enough” to show 200 years of political and social “progress” in the space of two or three months? Not even our own Congress works that quickly – unless it’s to raise their own salaries.
So lets see, we’re making progress, things are moving forward on the ground – so I guess the answer is to quit now and get out before we embarrass ourselves by succeeding.
What difference can a few months make? Let’s see – as Bush and others have repeatedly pointed out (to those with hands firmly over their ears), in just November of 2006 al-Anbar province in Iraq was declared as effectively “lost”, and was an al-Qaeda stronghold.
In a remarkable turn of events, Iraqi Sunni’s (remember, al-Qaeda is Sunni, and looks to Sunni’s for support) in al-Anbar in large numbers have now taken up arms AGAINST al-Qaeda, joining the same US and Iraqi forces that many had been fighting against only a month or so prior.
Al-Anbar is now one of the more SECURE areas of Iraq, and political reconciliation activities are beginning to take place at the local level, with the knowledge, encouragement, and often participation of the Iraqi national government.
Al-Qaeda, an increasing number of Iraqi’s are deciding, is so fanatical and extreme, so brutal, oppressive, and indiscriminate in it’s methods, that it is a greater threat to Iraq and Iraqi’s than are the “infidel occupiers” – who, it is interesting to note, common Iraqi’s are in many cases beginning to regard with greater trust than even each other.
The “Anbar Awakening” movement is catching on, independently and from the grass-roots across wide areas of Iraq. Now increasingly in Diyala province (now the area of certain “surge” operations against al-Qaeda and other extremist networks), ordinary Iraqi’s are increasingly coming forward and providing information to Iraqi and US troops, that are enabling operations to kill or capture insurgent networks, as well as infiltrators, sympathisers, and saboteurs within the ranks of the Iraqi government, police, and military.
What will a few more months bring?
Failure is always possible. War and progress is never a sure or steady thing, and there are many players with opposing objectives. But long-term success is even more likely than failure, and as Senator McCain continues to point out (in spite of predictions that he would “flip” in order to save his struggling presidential campaign), success in Iraq is “imperative”, and must not be abandoned.
In an earlier post, I made the point that “Now is not the time to ‘quit’, just because the road has gotten a little bumpy. Bailing out of an aircraft in flight, just because you don’t like heights, are clastrophobic, and have encountered some turbulence, is hardly a wise move.”
Another poster in that “other” forum, a respected opinion editor for the local Gannett newspaper going by the screenname “Bylinepjw”, responded with this comment:
“Bailing out of an aircraft that is going down in flames and certain to crash is most assuredly a wise move. We’ve lost both engines and the fuselage is riddled with bullet holes, Breck. We’re going down. You and the president are the only ones still tapping the fuel guage and trying to figure out how we could possibly have run out of gas. The rest of us are trying to figure out when and how best to bail out, so as to save ourselves.”
With all due respect to Byline, this aircraft is a long way from going down in flames and certain to crash, in spite of his own perhaps fervent wishes that his own vitriolic views of his president be vindicated by such an event – and even though he joins with those who seemingly hope to ensure such a result by sucker-punching the pilot and pushing down on the yoke.
At least he’s honest about one thing. He admits that his desire is to “bail”, rather than to complete the mission and land the plane somewhere other than in the middle of the ocean.
There are no parachutes on this airplane, folks. We’re over enemy territory, and the ocean is full of sharks. The path home leads us right over the target area, and the fastest and safest way back is to keep on flying forward, and to work together to get the job done.
“The real debate over Iraq is between those who think the fight is lost or not worth the cost, and those that believe the fight can be won and that, as difficult as the fight is, the cost of defeat would be far higher.” –Pres George Bush, 9-12-2007
To frd, Byline, and I’m sure a few others, that may sound hokey and like just so many words – but they’re true.
To anyone else otherwise dependent on the media (or frd) to tell you what they perceived President Bush to have said, read or watch it for yourself:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/07/20070712-5.html
