"The invasion of Iraq was, in ways that have since become hard to dispute, a terrible mistake."The MSM has tried to portray this slant ever since the US led a Coalition to Liberate the Iraqi People. The same flimsy logic many Democrats held and promoted prior to the Reelection of President Bush. This is the message they employed with the American People, and lost in significant fashion.
"Just about everyone now agrees that the sooner we find a way to withdraw, the better for us and for the Iraqis."Jacob Weisberg writes this foolishness in
"Dead With Ned, Why Lamont's victory spells Democratic disaster" for the amusing Slate, linked by the mighty Drudge.
Here, he further reveals the misguided nature of the Democrat Faithful. Weisberg wishes to leave his moonbeams, and have them too...
First, one must ask Mr. Weisberg, how abandoning the Free Iraqi People, helps the Iraqis create a stable Democracy? Or suggests taking the
"global battle against Islamic fanaticism seriously"?
It doesn't... In fact, having the US 'run away' from Iraq, would signal 'surrender' to the Islamic Terrorists and the entire World.
Thus, the author quickly becomes nothing more than a fashionable entity. Wishing to appear 'reasoned', but offering the same vapid suggestions of those he refers to as "anti-Lieberman insurgents".
Mr. Weisberg assumes 'everyone' believes the use of Force in Iraq was a mistake, delcaring his partisan blindness. This is certainly the obsessive view in Liberal Democrat Partisans circles, and may comprise a vast majority in the Elite Media Establishments, but is hardly the consensus of the American Public. (Unless you believe the MSM Establishment's push-poll adventures...)
Weisberg writes,
"The problem for the Democrats is that the anti-Lieberman insurgents go far beyond simply opposing Bush's faulty rationale for the war, his dishonest argumentation for it, and his incompetent execution of it."It is hard not to giggle, reading Mr. Weisberg's effort...
He endorses the 'moonbat' mentality, he maintains is a 'loser'. For example, if this President used faulty rationale for the use of force in Iraq, then Hillary,
Kerry, Edwards, etc., all pushed the same 'dishonest argumentation' for the Operation. (Repeating the same partisan contradiction, often encountered in the 2004 Presidential Election):
"It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capability to wage biological and chemical warfare and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." Sen. Hillary Clinton, Congressional Record, 10/10/02"In Mr. Weisberg's world, one must conclude
The Iraq Liberation Act passed in 1998, was merely a gross deception. Should we also pretend Saddam wasn't rewarding the PLO for suicide bombings,
Zarqawi never ran to Baghdad after being trounced in Afghanistan, or
Saddam Hussein's Philanthropy of Terror?In regards to incompetency, the Iraqi Liberation continues to have one of the lowest casualty rates for a military operation in US History. This Commander in Chief empowered the US Armed Services with a very difficult endeavor, and labeling this as one of 'incompetency' actually demeans the US Military and the
Allies in Operation Iraqi Freedom.
The Mission intended to remove a Monstrous Dictator who was a threat to the Region, the World, and was accomplished in record time. Since, we have witnessed historic Elections in Iraq, a Constitution, an Elected Government, a new Iraqi Military, the growth of a Free Nation in the Heart of the troubled Arab World, now Fighting along side Americans in the essential GWOT.
Clearly, there was a plan...This admirable Mission has revealed the UN's horrid
Oil for Food Scandal, uncovered the concerning
Nuclear Arms Network of Abdul Qadeer Khan with Iran, Libya, North Korea, etc., encouraged a treacherous Libya to capitulate, inspired the Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon, and put serious pressure upon the despotic Mullahs of Iran,
(* evidence of their increasing self destructive agenda).
Mr. Weisberg wishes to 'express support for the war in principle while becoming increasingly strident in criticism of its execution'. He fails to understand the context of any use of force requires resolve, patience, discipline, loss, pain, sacrifice, strength, etc... As if the World will suddenly be better off, with a nightmare named Saddam oppressing Iraq, because the endeavor is truly difficult.
One has to wonder if Mr. Weisberg would characterize the current Israeli Operation, fighting for their existence against those committed to their elimination, as a 'mistake' ?
Mr. Weisberg feels one can 'talk' a good game, living in a fantasy of 'principle', without getting one's hands dirty. He seems comfortable demeaning those who are engaged in this life and death stuggle, which is beyond theory or fashion. Another Liberal Democrat who cannot understand the serious nature of the challenge in the Field, opting to 'run away' from the issue altogether, because it is 'too tough'.
The fact is, Mr. Weisberg represents what he laments. Another Liberal Partisan Democrat, who is just as blind as those he calls "anti-establishment insurgents", aiding the downfall of the modern DNC.
