A More Optimistic Epistle On Iraq

With mid-term elections coming we're hearing a lot of paincky talk about how Iraq is lost, that the US has failed, and so forth. A more optimistic epistle is needed, because Iraq has come too far from Saddamite tyranny to collapse or be allowed to collapse.

"Iraq has slipped into civil war," reads one of the standard assertions. Even today the MSM and the Democrats don't know what a real civil war looks like and even the most pessimistic accounts of Iraq don't come close to a real civil war. And virtually no one has noticed that escalation of violence by guerrillas and anti-democratic militias is aimed almost exclusively at US TV cameras. Given the abysmal quality of the MSM's coverage of the war it's pretty obvious that the enemy wants to make it look worse than it is, and is succeeding with the MSM.

There is also the cheapshot coverage of Donald Rumsfeld and the rote that he must be fired as Defense Secretary, that he no longer has the respect of the services, etc. That a great deal of resentment comes not from ineptitude on his part but from a military establishment that is generally resistant to change (remember the campaign for the Crusader artillery gun that Rumsfeld vetoed, for one) is of course never considered; his big "blunder" in Iraq likewise has less to it than the critics think.

We of course also hear the rote that "we didn't send enough troops." That we're building a national Iraqi army, that it has been involved in taking charge of fighting the enemy, and that we've generally been on the offensive against guerrilla and militia holdouts, is of course glossed over.

The reality is things are very tough in Iraq, that the task of finishing off the enemy is very daunting. But the fact is we ARE succeeding, even though so many don't wish to notice. We are succeeding because we have finally taken the initiative against Islamo-Arab imperialism and the enemy knows we are succeeding. General Wesley Clark has put out commericials repeating the rote that the war in Iraq has increased terrorism, ignorant as always about the difference between offense and defense and ignorant that the enemy is now on the strategic defensive. Osama Bin Laden hasn't been captured - so what? His organization is in ruins, his two largest base nations (Iraq and Afghanistan) are no longer bases or sanctuaries for him, and the only "attacks" he's able to launch are small-scale acts of violence with little strategic value or effect.

The Democrats want us to lose because they don't take the threat seriously, not now and not before. They fear US success; they don't have genuine concern for American lives - they speak unctuously about slain American servicement only to score propaganda points, as shown by John Kerry's insult to American servicement presently fighting in Iraq.

The reality is we are in Iraq because we have to be, and we need to stay the course, because doing so will achieve success. The Islamo-Arab enemy knows this, and this is reason enough to support winning in Iraq.