Iraq critics are blowing in the wind

[igloo]

Iraq critics are blowing in the wind

Cal Thomas (archive)

August 25, 2005 | printer friendly version Print | email to a friend Recommend to a friend

The following lyrics should be sung to the tune of "Blowin' in the Wind."

How many times can this nation draw down,

When faced with a difficult war?

Haven't we seen what retreat has produced,

Whenever we've tried it before?

With polls showing a decline in public support for the effort to establish stability and self-determination in Iraq, aging hippies from the '60s and their anti-all-war progeny have surfaced and are picketing and singing their protest songs at President Bush's ranch and at venues where he speaks.

What do those favoring a pullout of American troops from Iraq think would happen if the president followed their advice? Do they seriously believe the United States would be safer and no longer a target of fanatical religious extremists, who believe it is their mandate from heaven to forcibly wipeout out all things Western, secular, Jewish and Christian? If they believe peace would then be given a chance, they are naive at best, and idiots at worst.

Since the American Revolution, there have been those among us who, when faced with tyranny, preferred accommodation to confrontation. There were many at our founding who wished to remain under British rule and accept whatever benefits they believed came from such a relationship. They chose not to fight in the revolution, but were happy to accept the results of independence produced by those who did.

During the Civil War, Abraham Lincoln received advice to give in to the Southern rebellion. If he had done so, the Union would have divided and history changed forever.

In the last century, both world wars had opponents who preferred either not to be involved, or to "settle" with the tyrants seeking to subjugate Europe and America to their totalitarian rule.

Recent history - from Vietnam, to Lebanon, to Mogadishu - has shown that quitting before the job is done means more, not less, trouble for the United States and for those it promised to help. Those retreats emboldened the likes of Osama bin Laden, who has stated that America does not have the stomach for protracted warfare. Why shouldn't he believe that when he has witnessed examples of the U.S. choosing to cut and run, not stand and fight?

This war and its peace is America's to win or lose. If the U.S. withdraws before Iraq is ready to stand alone, the effort will have been wasted and we will invite more war. Our enemies cannot be pacified by outreach programs. They won't be mollified by allowing them to build mosques and schools among us that preach and teach sedition. Their religion does not reflect diversity and tolerance of other faiths - political or doctrinal - in any nation where the most radical strain dominates.

Pulling out of Iraq before the job is done is not an option. Victory is our only option. In his address before the Veterans of Foreign Wars in Utah on Monday, President Bush correctly said, "They have a strategy, and part of that strategy is they're trying to shake our will" and "a policy of retreat and isolation will not bring us safety. The only way to defend our citizens where we live is to go after the terrorists where they live."

Why is this difficult for the president's opponents to understand? There is no going back. We would not be "safer" (whatever that means) had the president chosen not to liberate Iraq from Saddam Hussein. Do the 8 million people who, as the president said, "defied the car bombers and killers and voted in free elections" deserve to be abandoned at this crucial moment? Only if America's word means nothing and the blood of our brave volunteer soldiers is without value.

It took the United States from 1776 to 1789 to compose and ratify a Constitution and form a new government. There were intense debates over the role of religion, federalism, states' rights and many other issues. These were not unlike some of the subjects being debated now among Iraqis.

The president has repeatedly stated his objective in Iraq and in the wider war against terrorists. What is the objective of his critics and what is their forecast of what would occur following a precipitous U.S. withdrawal? They have an obligation to tell us, unless they are just blowing in the wind.

[destruction]

Wednesday, August 24, 2005

Bush can't admit Iraq war a losing gamble

Copyright © 2005 Blethen Maine Newspapers Inc.

We'd worry about the poker player who tosses the deed to his house into the pot in a desperate attempt to recoup the loss of his paycheck, his savings, and his car.

But in the real and deadly game that President Bush's playing in Iraq, he is doing just that. His plan is to keep doing the same thing and hope for a different outcome someday.

Cindy Sheehan and other Gold Star Mothers are asking "Why?" Bush's Iraq plan killed their sons and daughters and they want to know "for what?" They no longer accept Bush's platitudes about "noble causes" or his transparent lies about an Al Qaida connection to Saddam, and his doom saying about an evil dictator and non-existent weapons of mass destruction.

Furthermore, a growing number of Americans now realize we cannot win a civil war in Iraq any more than we could win a civil war in Vietnam. The people we are fighting can disappear and reappear by mingling with the Iraqi people since they are mostly Iraqi people.

Their insurgency grows stronger with each of our "successes." When we kill one, two take his place because the dead man was someone's brother or son or neighbor. Freedom is not on the march, but anger over the continued American occupation is.

There's a country song about knowing "when to hold 'em and when to fold 'em." Maybe Kenny Rogers could sing it at the next Republican fundraiser.

Tony Nazar

Wilton

http://morningsentinel.mainetoday.com/view/letters/1892575.shtml

[igloo]

Wow..destruction, what a response....you are as intellectually bankrupt as they come

[destruction]

Wow..destruction, what a response....you are as intellectually bankrupt as they come

[igloo]

Case closed.