Thursday, May 26, 2005

Why Is Anyone Upset Over Winning A War?

Democrats, Amnesty International, Hollywood types (usually all one and the same), all have vented a lot of spleen because the US is fighting in Iraq, and steadily winning, as shown by recent offensives in Iraq's western desert regions toward Syria made possible by the insertion of "indigs" into towns to keep terrorists out and thus free up American forces for bigger game.

Yet liberals in general have been upset over the war. Of course all of what are now liberal cliches about the war get regurgitated - the US didn't find WMDs in Iraq (the use of the term Weapons of Mass Destruction is a curious holdover term from Soviet Russia), Bush lied about the Iraq threat, etc. It's all tiresome and as is usual with liberals, inaccurate, as any close reading of what the US actually found in Iraq with regard to unconventional weapons indicates - namely that Iraq was streamlining its programs precisely to make people believe it didn't have unconventional weapons. In other words, classic military deception, feigning weakness to hide strength.

Liberals also scream about how the threat of international terrorism has supposedly increased with the war, which is a baffling argument given how suddenly international terrorist groups are seeing their leadership arrested, funding cut, and so forth around the world, two of their largest sanctuaries and armers (Iraq and Afghanistan) are now in Allied hands, and attacks against the West simply haven't happened to the same degree as in the 1990s, when the US demonstrated the refusal to fight back depressingly common to the 20th century.

A big part of the reason (perhaps the primary reason) for liberal angst about the war lies in a quote of an anonymous Bush Administration official in Stephen Hayes' book on Iraq and Al Qaida (this isn't an exact quote on my part, I'm citing this by memory) - "If Iraq was backing Al Qaida.......then the whole counterterrorism policy of the 1990s was a failure." Indeed, what the war has shown is that the whole approach to fighting Islamo-Arab aggression in the 1990s was a failure, and the "failure" to find unconventional weapons points to a larger insecurity with the left - if Iraq was successfully hiding unconventional weapon programs, making it look like they had none, then not only was the whole UN inspection regime a failure, but that regime was NEVER going to succeed no matter what.

Thus is the cherished conceit that an international predator can be "managed" into benevolent behavior taking a severe beating in Iraq. It exposes the left as being fools about such matters and betrays the backward quality of those cherished bumper stickers - War Is Not The Answer? It Is Against Saddam.

No comments: