|
|
|
|
2/1/05 Failing History Again and Again and Again The Democrats have some powerful liabilities, these days. Liabilities like Sen. Edward Kennedy (D - Mass). For over half a century the Democrats have struggled to stay on the right side of national security issues. They championed people during the forties and fifties who were, they argued, wrongly accused of being Soviet spies, most of whom turned out to be Soviet spies. They opposed our war in Vietnam, convincing the American people to give up the fight and leave our millions of allies in South Vietnam to the tender mercies of the Viet Cong, who slaughtered many and hounded many others onto boats where most died seeking the freedom we gave up defending. They opposed the policies of Ronald Reagan, proclaiming with certainty that he was going to drive our allies into the hands of our enemies and provoke our enemies into greater violence and totalitarianism, when in fact what he did was destroy our enemies and make the world safe for our friends, who promptly deserted us. His policies, which they characterized as "reckless war-mongering", set millions of people in places like Poland, the Czech Republic, and Ukraine on the path to the freedom they now enjoy. And now, in the days leading up to Sunday's elections in Iraq, people like Ted Kennedy were proclaiming Iraq Bush's "Vietnam", a "quagmire" from which there is no clear "exit strategy". Kennedy is right about one thing: Iraq is Bush's Vietnam, but unlike the real Vietnam, the "exit strategy" is not an abject abandonment of our friends to the brutality of our common enemy, but to stay long enough to help our friends develop the capability to defend themselves against our enemy. The elections, which Kennedy conceded would provide an opportunity, are not a gateway to our withdrawal, as he tries to deceive us into believing, but an affirmation of our liberation of the people of Iraq. They were dancing in the streets, and the new mayor of Baghdad, who replaced the assassinated former mayor, declared that there should be in that city a statue of George W. Bush. (Of course, although Kennedy and his ilk continue to deny it, our troops were welcomed as liberators and showered with flowers in most of Iraq as the victory in the military operation developed.) Kennedy spoke of the "insurgency" as though it were a movement to overthrow foreign occupiers and liberate their own nation, when we all know that these are not "insurgents" striving for liberation of their people--liberation of the people is OUR goal, not theirs--but the goal of these terrorist megalomaniacs is, as they have stated explicitly, to strip from all people of the world the right of self-determination and impose on them a tyranny that would make Saddam's regime look like Mr. Rogers' neighborhood. Kennedy also spoke of the "insurgency" as though it were actually succeeding in any of its aims. In fact, it is succeeding in none of them. The infliction of casualties on our armed forces and the police, armed forces, and innocent civilians of Iraq is not their aim, it is a means to an end. The end is to achieve several goals: 1) To break the will of the American people. Despite the redoubled efforts of people like Kennedy to fulfill that goal, the American people have so far resisted, and so the "insurgency" has failed. 2) To prevent Iraqi police and armed forces from growing into the capability to fight the "insurgency" effectively and maintain the peace. They have failed; even when lines of applicants are blown up, they continue to line up. 3) To inflame the jealousies of the Iraqi people and force them into internecine warfare. They have failed. All Iraqis voted in large numbers, other than those living in very dangerous areas. Voters stood in line despite audible explosions and gunfire, defying the "insurgents". But liberals will bank on the forgetfulness of the American people and on the generally sympathetic view of historians (most of whom are liberal, these days). They are not held to account for their past predictions that failed to come true, or positions that they held in opposition to the progress of human liberty, and perhaps they will not be held to account this time, either, except by sites like this one (and perhaps the Fox News Channel). But time will tell. Modified: 03/21/2005 |
|
|
All Original Content (C) 2003, 2004, 2005 SoothSeeker.Com
SoothSeeker Welcomes your Comments at letters@soothseeker.com Report problems to webmaster@soothseeker.com
Hits on this site:
|