Do the bad guys -- the terrorists in their Afghan caves and Iraqi redoubts -- want George Bush defeated in this election? Bush critics, among them the editors of The New York Times, have worked themselves into a lather over the mere suggestion that this might be so. A front page ``analysis'' in The Washington Post quoted several Republican variations of this theme -- such as Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage saying that the terrorists in Iraq ``are trying to influence the election against President Bush'' -- then noted that ``such accusations ... surfaced in the modern era during the McCarthy Communist hunts.''
Intimations of McCarthyism constitute a serious charge. But the charge is not remotely serious. Of course the terrorists want Bush defeated. How can anyone pretend otherwise?
.
.
.
The Islamists and Baathists in Iraq are conducting their own Tet Offensive with the same objective as the one in 1968: to demoralize the American citizenry, convince it that the war cannot be won, and ultimately encourage it to reject the administration that brought the war upon them and that is the more unequivocal about seeing it through.
It is perfectly true, as Bush critics constantly point out, that many millions around the world -- from Jacques Chirac to the Arab street -- dislike Bush and want to see him defeated. It is ridiculous to pretend that Osama, Zarqawi and the other barbarians are not among them.
Oliver North writes on a similar theme:
To listen to John Kerry [and John Edwards] explain [their] position(s) on Iraq is to submit oneself to mental torture.
.
.
.
These guys could use two front row seats at a good motivational seminar. They clearly don't understand the tenets of leadership when they change their positions as often as they do. They don't understand the effect their carping criticisms have on the troops on the ground and their families back home when they charge that Americans are dying for a mistake.
They don't understand the nature of warfare or the nature of this enemy when they suggest that the War on Terror can be neatly wrapped up in a matter of months. The United States will be engaged in a prolonged offensive against terrorists at home and abroad for many years. That offensive is, and will continue to be, fought with military, diplomatic, legal, financial, law enforcement and homeland security efforts.
Our commander in chief understands that and has conveyed that message not only to our troops on the ground but also to the citizens of this country. Bush understands that victory is made more difficult when carping critics like Kerry and Edwards rally the masses to the cause of appeasement.
In spite of what the naysayers preach, there are positive signs to be embraced.
.
.
.
It's precisely this progress that makes Iraqi insurgents continue their suicide missions. They believe that increased violence will cause the coalition to retreat and relinquish the fledgling Iraqi democracy into the clutches of Hussein's henchmen.
As one Marine officer put it: "Those achievements, more than anything else … account for the surge in violence in recent days -- especially the violence directed at Iraqis by the insurgents. Both in Najaf and Samarra, ordinary people stepped out and took sides with the Iraqi government against the insurgents, and the bad guys are hopping mad. They are trying to instill fear once again."
Whether he realizes it or not, in his impatience to win votes Kerry eagerly plays the defeatist role cast for him in a play written by the terrorists. I, for one, have heard enough of his pessimistic soliloquy.
No comments:
Post a Comment