Iraq=D.C.

[dude1394]

I cannot add anything to this.

http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber...12/04/iraq-dc/

Iraq = D.C.

Having opposed the liberation, the left now demands instant democracy in Iraq.

The left is so vested in defeat in Iraq that they are making ridiculous demands on a nation that is recovering from about 20 years of war (beginning with Iran) and 30 years of tyranny.

Nation building is difficult, which is why the governor of Texas eschewed it in the 2000 presidential debate. Spreading democracy is a vaccine against terrorism, which is why the president embraced nation-building post-9/11.

Bush Derangement Syndrome is the only explanation for the lleft’s flip-flop from its historic embrace of idealism.

Writing in Salon today, Juan Cole trotted out the latest placement of the goalposts by the left: “Appearing on ‘Meet the Press’ on Sunday, Democratic Sen. Jim Webb of Virginia gave some needed perspective on the U.S. troop ’surge’ in Iraq. Webb, a Vietnam veteran and former secretary of the Navy under Ronald Reagan, recently returned from a visit to Iraq. He said that it was inaccurate to attribute the recent reduction in violence entirely to Bush’s troop escalation. Moreover, Webb said that any security improvements in Iraq would only help if accompanied by political progress. He criticized the administration for ‘the failure for the last five years to match the quality of our military performance with robust regional diplomacy’.”

This replaces Harry Reid’s declaration 6 months ago that military success was impossible, the war is lost.

The change in demands from the left shows that we won militarily. Democracy is more difficult to deliver. It takes time and patience. Let us review:

In 1999, Nato troops and U.S. bombers led a 78-day war in Kosovo to rid the region of a brutal dictator, Slobodan Milosevic. 8 years later, talks continue on a final resolution of its status. Russia has threatened to use it UN veto to nix any deal that does not suit Vladimir Putin, who wants to resurrect the Soviet empire.

In Korea, the 3-year war between North and South ended in a cease-fire in 1953. The corrupt government of Syngman Rhee ended in student riots in 1960. A year later, General Park Chung-hee led a military coup and held power until 1979. This gave way to Choi Gyu Ha’s government, followed by a military coup a year later. Direct elections came about in 1989.

In Italy, a black market flourished but the 1st Republic was installed in 1948, roughly 3 years after its liberation. Its first election was marked by violence and U.S. efforts to keep communists from winning — and by Stalin’s efforts to buy the election. Southern West Virginians and Cook County Democrats run clean elections by comparison.

In France, the 4th Republic was installed after the war. It went through 21 changes in prime ministers in 11 years. The 5th Republic came about in 1958.

In Japan, Gen. MacArthur ruled the nation for 7 years. In 1952, its democracy was established.

Now then, 60 years after the war, troops remain in Italy, Japan and Germany, which took 45 years to re-unite.

54 years later, U.S. troops remain in South Korea.

109 years after the Spanish-American War, U.S. troops are in the Philippines. They left momentarily in World War II, ousted by the Japanese.

In none of these nations would anyone suggest that there has been a war. That’s because with the exception of an occasional Baader-Meinhof gang, no one is taking potshots at our soldiers.

Those wars have ended. This one will end soon, when U.S. Army casualties reach zero.

That does not mean there will not be political violence and acts of terrorism.

The left’s demand for instant democracy is laughable.

“In Baghdad, politics are a mess. Critics of Bush’s policy complain that the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, a Shiite fundamentalist, has not reached out with sufficient vigor to Sunni Arabs to seek reconciliation. In fact, the situation is far worse than that,” Cole wrote.

Oh? Two months into the fiscal year, Congress has yet to pass a federal budget. Critics of Harry Reid complain that “he has not reached out with sufficient vigor to” Republicans “to seek reconciliation. In fact, the situation is far worse than that.”

Congress mirrors conditions in the Iraqi parliament because of the left’s refusal to accept victory.

[Male30Dan]

[George Gervin]

serioulsy dude. since the war first began the goal posts have been moved along with each challenge that has arisen. the apologists have revised their objectives from Iraq becoming a " beacon of democracy" in the middle east to " we are hoping for a friendly ally" in the Middle East to help us combat terror. Quite a change don't you think? I am not sayinmg that the dems haven't been as consistent as they should have been but to somehow ignore that the right is doing it as well is intellectually dishonest.

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by George Gervin

serioulsy dude. since the war first began the goal posts have been moved along with each challenge that has arisen. the apologists have revised their objectives from Iraq becoming a " beacon of democracy" in the middle east to " we are hoping for a friendly ally" in the Middle East to help us combat terror. Quite a change don't you think? I am not sayinmg that the dems haven't been as consistent as they should have been but to somehow ignore that the right is doing it as well is intellectually dishonest.

I would propose that if Al Queda had not attacked us in Iraq that you would be seeing a beacon for democracy in the middle east. The story is yet to be told. Of course during the time when AlQueda had instigated the reprisals, things were looking pretty dang bad but I don't recall Baghdad Bobs in the republican camp talking about how great things are going.
Requiring an utter refusal of reality.

Things were looking tough but manageable until AlQueda attacked us and the iraqis and then all heck broke out.

THAT's when you tighten up your boots and win. Not run.

What's terribly discouraging about the dems now is that Harry Reid KNOWS that what he's saying is complete and utter bs. Worse...everything that he and the dems have been pushing for is just what AlQueda wanted, surrender.

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by George Gervin

serioulsy dude. since the war first began the goal posts have been moved along with each challenge that has arisen. the apologists have revised their objectives from Iraq becoming a " beacon of democracy" in the middle east to " we are hoping for a friendly ally" in the Middle East to help us combat terror. Quite a change don't you think? I am not sayinmg that the dems haven't been as consistent as they should have been but to somehow ignore that the right is doing it as well is intellectually dishonest.

In a general case however moving the goalposts for practical reasons is one thing. In other words, it looks like there is a heck of a lot bigger insurgency, al queda is attacking us, etc. Then you look to stabalize the patient first, so yes the goalposts moved.
I have no problem with that to be honest.

What the dems are doing now isn't moving the goalposts for the good of america or the iraqis, but for the good or their political power. Harry Reid honestly would rather see us lose there than just admit that it's working, isnt' that what you read from that?

[George Gervin]

Originally Posted by dude1394

In a general case however moving the goalposts for practical reasons is one thing. In other words, it looks like there is a heck of a lot bigger insurgency, al queda is attacking us, etc. Then you look to stabalize the patient first, so yes the goalposts moved.
I have no problem with that to be honest.

What the dems are doing now isn't moving the goalposts for the good of america or the iraqis, but for the good or their political power. Harry Reid honestly would rather see us lose there than just admit that it's working, isnt' that what you read from that?

Well as I have already mentioned that I have been less than enthused by the democrat leadership.. I don't think Reid wants to lose, rather I think he wants Bush to lose and he is trying to straddle both sides.. Stupid if you ask me. In my opinion there is no political price he would pay if he simply shut up about Bush and praised the troops for getting a handle on things.

[alexamenos]

Bush Derangement Syndrome is the only explanation for the lleft’s flip-flop from its historic embrace of idealism.

The left never flip-flopped on it's historic embrace of idealism, they changed parties.