Anti-war Chickendove Democrats: Investing in Defeat

If victory in Iraq was oversold at the outset, there are now signs that defeat is likewise being oversold today.- Thomas Sowell

If I've been acccused of "overselling" victory, count me in, guilty as charged. Although I believe that victory has always been possible, undermined mainly by a political will not to win, rather than the belief that "democracy cannot flourish in that region of the world", that "we are babysitting a civil war", that the real battle against terrorism and al-Qaeda isn't in Iraq, etc.

I may have remained optimistic overall, throughout the past 4 years, but this does not mean I do not recognize setbacks and strategies that have failed, as they inevitably occur in any war. Such is life.

In stark contrast, many of the war critics do not acknowledge the successes that we have achieved. It has not all been doom and gloom, every step of the way. The biggest downslide had been the bombing of the al-Askari Mosque of Samarra. The so-called "civil war", instigated by al-Qaeda. That and the demoralizing nature of the MSM-style of news reporting which has undermined American resolve, political will, endangered military and civilian lives, given aid and comfort to the enemy, and distorted public opinion and perception.

I believe that many anti-war Democrats are so cram-filled with BDS and blinded by partisan politics, that they honestly (and for some, dishonestly) cannot perceive anything other than bad news, in regards to Iraq. The level of depth in the negativity is such that it works to sabotage any attempts to win in Iraq.



As Tony Blankley writes, victories cannot be reliably predicted; but neither so can defeat be reliably predicted. The Democrats have invested so much of their political capital in it, that they own defeat. They have become the Party of defeat. How else does one excuse the efforts of liberal bloggers who slander and malign the character of the General who leads America's forces into war? These liberal bloggers ache for an American defeat and do much to undermine American victory. Why? Because an American victory in Iraq would be perceived as a George Bush victory.

Their political partisanship, Bush-hate, and egoes are all invested to see Iraq as a failure. Why else do they want to paint this as "Bush's war" rather than "America's war"? Why else do can they never acknowledge good news when it happens, and act happy about it? Why is it so rare to see lefty blogs who say they "support the troops", but never talk about sending care packages, contributing to military charities, showing the kindness and nobility of our soldiers toward Iraqi children and helping the Iraqi people? All they can do is disparage on and on about abu Ghraib, Haditha, and prop up on their shoulders, a Scott Thomas Beauchamp. What a great political and ideological investment the left have made. Too bad it doesn't beat to the same drum as to what is in America's best interest.

And just what is in America's best interest?

Victory in Iraq.

This is what my side has invested in. And it just so happens that most of us are also in the Republican Party. It didn't have to be this way. But it's the way it's worked out in this moment in history: Democrats are for defeat. Republicans are for victory.