"Democrats are more interested in taking the president of the United States down a notch than in winning a war...”
Despite Democratic majority leader Steny H. Hoyer’s insistence that “There is nobody in this Congress (namely his party)who wants to lose this war,” it is becoming increasingly evident that, even if the terrorists suddenly proclaim that they are giving up the fight and resorting to more diplomatic means to achieve their ends, the war on Iraq would still be considered lost by most Democrats. This reality was made resoundingly clear by Senator Harry Reid recently when he unambiguously declared that the war in Iraq is lost. What; already?
Although it must surely be music to the ears of the terrorists, this may not be perceived as an assessment that is necessarily bound to demoralize the troops. By now American troops have realized something that a good portion of the American population already acknowledges, and that is that Democrats are more interested in taking the president of the United States down a notch than in winning a war, thus any such declaration is merely an attempt to humiliate the president and what they consider to be his detestable policies; it’s a wonder that it has taken them this long to start being frank and tell everyone how they really feel about the Iraq war.
Senator Reid’s logic behind his conclusion is that violence has actually increased after the surge; he completely ignores the possibility that the insurgents’ accelerated campaign of violence on the eve of this surge (which apparently the media has failed to cover with as much diligence as the suicide bombers’ frequent escapades) could be more of an indication that the terrorists are desperately trying to give the impression of endurance at this pivotal moment in the conflict. Senator Reid has taken the bait, and is now trying to paint this resistance as the prolongation of our inevitable defeat, a picture the terrorists are more than happy to have the Democratic senator convey on their behalf.
While the Democrats defiantly court the president’s veto by reconfiguring the troops funding bill ad nauseam, generals on the ground have wisely begun implementing preventive measures such as cutbacks in what are considered to be nonessential supplies and repairs. These will eventually extend to the laying off of some of the temporary forces and other forms of attrition which according to Army Comptroller Nelson Ford will result in the troops’ “degradation of readiness standards”. To put it more bluntly, the lives of the soldiers, which Democrats claim have always been their main concern, would be placed in serious jeopardy the longer this bill is delayed.
Michigan’s representative Peter Hoekstra put it very succinctly when he asked “If Harry Reid believes that this war is lost, where is his plan to win this war?” The fact is that, in spite of all the plans Democrats claim they have put forward to “win the peace” in Iraq, no such realistic plans exist other than what could be characterized at best as an utopian hope of renewal in the hearts and minds of the most ardent jihadists in that region and at worst the unconditional surrender on the part of American troops.
One can only hope that Democrats at least unconsciously realize that a timetable will undoubtedly represent a direct signal to the insurgents that Americans are the ones setting the terms for their own surrender. The moment the president announces a date in which the troops will be “redeployed”, insurgents will have declared victory, and rightly so. Why should they continue to slaughter innocents if they know that in only a few months they will have a much better chance of gaining access to the body politic of that country through the same means and with a lot less resistance, as Americans will no longer be there to protect the country?
But a more pressing question Democrats will now have to face is, since they have clearly acknowledged that we have already been defeated, why not take the soldiers out right now instead of capitulating on a future withdrawal date months down the road, knowing full well - at least according to their own assessment of the state of affairs in Iraq at this present juncture - that more time spent in this “quagmire” will only mean more American lives lost?