Posted on 11/24/2006 6:46:08 PM PST by kristinn
I'm reading an astonishing number of comments on Free Republic these days by posters who have joined the ranks of the anti-American left in calling for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq. Some claim to have military experience, some claim to be patriotic Americans and some claim to be smarter than the rest.
These posters are joining the Murtha-Rangel-McDermott treason caucus. Oh, they say they love the troops, but their decision to abandon them in the field speaks otherwise.
Three years ago, the United States led an international coalition to rid the world of one of the worst regimes on the planet. Saddam Hussein was an international terrorist: He financed terrorism, he trained terrorists and he harbored terrorists. He waged war on Iran, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Israel. He waged war on the people of Iraq, including genocidal campaigns against the Kurds in the north and the marsh Arabs in the south.
Saddam successfully subverted the Oil-for-Food program and was wearing down support for continuing the sanctions keeping him in check.
He had numerous contacts with al Qaeda over the years. He tried to assassinate a former U.S. president. He maintained research capabilities to implement nuclear, chemical and biological weapons as soon as the sanctions were lifted. There is evidence that some of these programs would have been operational within a year even with the sanctions in place.
The decision to remove Saddam and his regime as part of the Global War on Terror was correct.
Three-and-a-half years after Iraq and the world were liberated from Saddam and his terrorist regime, there are those on Free Republic who are clamoring to give up, surrender, cut and run, stab the troops in the back, betray the Iraqis, betray our allies in the GWOT, spit on the graves of our fallen heroes and join Cindy Sheehan, Medea Benjamin and Ramsey Clark in bringing about America's defeat in the GWOT.
It's only been three-and-a-half years--only six months since the freely elected government in Iraq was formed. In that time, what has been called a mini-Marshall Plan of construction and reconstruction has come to fruition. The Iraqis have held three national elections, they have held numerous local elections, fourteen out of eighteen Iraq provinces are relatively peaceful and stable.
Six months ago, when the Iraqi government was formed, the experts said the war would be taken to Baghdad because our enemies in the region could not abide the example of a free, democratic society in the Middle East. For once, the experts were right. The battle of Baghdad has been a prolonged Tet Offensive style operation of headline-grabbing attacks intended to sap the morale of Americans and Iraqis alike.
From what I've been reading on Free Republic lately, a lot of Freepers have fallen for the enemy's ploy and are howling like barking moonbats for our immediate withdrawal from Iraq. Some of that talk is couched in talk of 'we're fighting a PC war like Vietnam!' The soldiers I met in Iraq recently told Debra Argel Bastian to pass on a message to the Vietnam vets criticizing the war: With all due respect to your service, this is not Vietnam. It is not being fought like Vietnam. Please let us finish our mission.
But our enemy is playing the Vietnam ploy to great benefit. They know they can count on the American and world media to broadcast their propaganda. They work with leftist Americans to sabotage the war effort at home. They know these leftist Americans have allies in the Democratic party. They know they do not need a military victory--only political and psychological victories are needed to defeat America.
You guys are playing right in to their hands. Congratulations.
There are those who argue that murder and dictatorship is the mindset of the Middle East and that will not be changed by our actions. Funny how those who smugly denigrate the Arab peoples' capacity for freedom forget the wholesale slaughter of millions of Westerners by Westerners at the hands of Western dictatorships just a few generations past.
I hear complaints that the Iraqis aren't standing up. Yet, to use one common example, when police recruits are slaughtered in bombings, Iraqis line up the next day at the same recruiting center. The insurgency is small in number, but they are able to do enough damage on a daily basis to stretch out the time it will take to secure the whole of Iraq.
At this time of our testing, the American people are starting to go wobbly. Sadly, many Freepers are too. Our troops and their Commander-in-Chief are not, thank God. It's only been three-and-a-half years. The progress made has been phenomonal. Throw in the towel now, and you'll just have the terrorists follow us home. Everyone knows that, including you. I'm not willing to pay that price, not now, not ever, but you are.
Let me close by offering similar sentiments recently offered by two men 'in the know' on the situation in Iraq who are not giving up. First, Kurdish Regional Government Prime Minister Barzani: "When I was in the United States recently and read the negative news in the Washington Post, New York Times and in the network TV broadcasts, I even wondered if things had gotten so bad since I had left that I shouldn't return."
Next, Gen. Abizaid: "When I come to Washington, I feel despair. When I'm in Iraq with my commanders, when I talk to our soldiers, when I talk to the Iraqi leadership, they are not despairing."
Don't you think it is appropriate to criticize Freepers who have given up, when the troops haven't?
And thanks for the reports from Iraq, Kristinn. They're great pleasure to read.
Speaking of pleasure, I still chuckle over something that happened during your Freep in Philly. You prompted Sheehan to say the dumbest thing a Leftist ever said: If freedom weren't free, they'd call it expensivedom! Keep the faith!
Give 'em Hell, Kristinn!
We dishonor our troops by leaving before victory is achieved. doesn't anybody but us get it?
Depends on who you ask. Some of us welcome debate. Others must experience bleeding from the ears whenever criticism of the actions of certain politicans is heard to judge from their acidic responses.
Okay, but ...
FoxNews has been running a bit where GW is saying "I'm not sure what we are going to do [in Iraq]."
That is very unsettling. If HE doesn't know, who DOES?
That bit makes the Administration sound more and more inept at their handling of Iraq.
Maybe GW needs to give Jon Carry a call. At least we know Jon Carry has a plan .... for all occasions.
Despair is not a strategy.
Taxman Bravo Zulu Kristinn!
Simply put, those of us who support prosecution of the GWOT with all our military might and expertise are right, and the LIEberal/Socialist/Marxist Bastards who follow of "Cut and Run" Murtha and the rest of his weak-kneed, lily livered syncophants are wrong.
The USA must stand and fight against tyranny and for FReedom!
It is as simple as that.
If you think it's bad now, wait until the RATS (& their lapdog the MSM) really start exercising their power.
Ping
Is it unpatriotic to question if we are actually using enough ruthless fire power of if we have enough boots on the ground?
I don't think so.
The troops don't make the decisions.
Go ahead, ask your question.
....usually prefaced by, "I used to be a long time conservative, but......"
I've seen no evidence of this at all. Regardless, a cut'n run poster would be ZOTted. Ergo, I don't see the purpose of this thread.
Cheers.
I have no desire to see this turn into another war, where our troops apparently died in vain; that means seeing Iraq through to victory. Our opposition on the left knows nothing other than Viet Nam, and attempts to recreate it with every military intervention. What has me dismayed, though, is the apparent sacking of Donald Rumsfeld, in favor of the James Baker ISG "realist" camp, who reportedly want to negotiate with Iran and Syria. I'm not cutting and running, but more than just a little bit of doubt is beginning to trickle in, as far as the administration's commitment to not cutting and running themselves. I would feel much better if this was negated and laid to rest.
How about those of us who were on board with the decision to go in, on board for the removal of Saddam, on board for the killing of his sons -- but wonder why, now, we are (apparently) just sending Marines and soldiers out on patrols, waiting to be blown apart by those who aren't being turned in by other Iraqis. Bush and the people around him have, to my eye, decided to minimize violence against the "innocent" and find many more of them to protect than seems legit. We need vicious, continual, utter destruction -- and then, when enough of them are dead, we come home. Bush could start with retracting the silly idea that Islam is just another God-worshipping religion. Just who, exactly, is being weak-kneed?
Premise #1: Muslims are not capable of making Democracy work
Thus, the only circumstances under which I would support staying in Iraq are:
Premise #2: we can use "dumb" technology and level the whole country, "good" and "bad" Iraqis together
If we haven't reached that point (and I do not think we have), then we shouldn't have our militay in Iraq.
I would humbly submit that neoconservatives need to go back to first principles.
I'm with you...thanks for posting this!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.