< link rel="DCTERMS.isreplacedby" href="http://davejustus.com/" >

Thursday, September 15, 2005

Gateway Pundit: Courageous Iraqis Stand Up to Terrorists

Gateway Pundit posts this bit of great news:

The following is my translation of a headline and article in the September 15 edition of the Iraqi Arab newspaper “Nahrain” 'Loyal Iraqi civilians arrest Terrorist in Al-Kademiah.' 'A number of Iraqi loyal civilians arrested 4 terrorists who were trying to launch rockets to kill innocent people in the Al-Kademiah in the early afternoon (of wed Sept. 14). After Al-Kademiah residents saw the terrorists preparing the rockets to be fired randomly at civilians they, over powered them, arrested them and confined them to a local house. The civilian’s then called the Iraqi security forces who now have them in custody for questioning. This brave and heroic stance of the citizens of Al-Kademiah and their resolve to cooperate with Iraqi security forces in defeating terror and building a free, democratic Iraq free of criminals who want nothing but to kill Iraqis and return them to the dark days which buried the glow of freedom and democracy. Join us to defeat terror by contacting one of these hot lines: Baghdad 813-2426, 813-2429, or 07901737723, 07901737724, 07901737725, 07901737726,
There is more good news in his post as well. It amazes me people can not just doubt, but be absolutely sure that we cannot win the war in Iraq. My analysis is that we have made steady progress since the beginning. That doesn't imply that their have been no mistakes or problems, but while it may often be two steps forward and one step back, the total progress in the effort has been very signifigant. While success is not guaranteed, it continues to seem likely, barring premature disengagement. Of course we have had much less success in the propaganda battle here in America. Despite the real, measurable progress in Iraq support for the war is continuingto fade. Since success in war most often goes to whoever refuses to give up the longest, this is troubling. One gamble that those of us who were pro-war made, and I think were fully aware we were making, was on the staying power of the American people. It is obvious that if we didn't have the will to see the job through we shouldn't have started it. So to support the war, we had to make a bet that the American people would see it through. One big test of this gamble was the 2004 Presidential Election, and it showed that our bets on this matter might well pay off. Public opinion in recent polls is less encouraging, but not disasterous yet. Sadly, a good portion of the discontent about the war is based upon the conclusion that it is not a winnable war. The Bush administration seems to be pretty negligent in successfully promoting the successes in the war, and how we can, and hopefully will achieve victory. Of course their has been some pretty signifigant opposition to promoting this viewpoint. (via The Anchoress)


Anonymous Bob said...

I think the problem with the dwindling support for the war is likely rooted in the fact that the war is taking longer than some Americans would probably like it to.

Remember that Operation Desert Storm ended quickly and the objective was met in a matter of months.

I'm not sure if the objective of this war is clear to everyone. Some say it was to get Saddam out of power (which has been done), some say it's to stop terrorism (far from done) and some say it's to ensure stability in Iraq and silencing the dissidents (not done, who knows how long it may actually take).

In World War II, it wasn't entirely forward progress when the United States entered the war, but there was enough made that Americans stayed behind the cause from start to finish, and in most of the areas the U.S. armed forces headed to, the people they were wanting to help did not resist.

In Vietnam, the United States ran into resistance to its objectives (as in, not all the people who the armed forces were trying to help were accepting of it) and it never seemed the United States gained any ground, meaning the longer it took, the more opposition there was to the war effort (even if it technically wasn't a war, since there was no official war declaration issued).

With Iraq, while it does appear progress is being made, and while I do support staying there until the objectives are completed (even though I wasn't fully behind the war to begin with), the more people hear about dissidents successfully attacking U.S. troops and supporters of the Iraqi government, the more people will question if progress is really being made.

That's especially true when there's almost no way to get an official surrender from the dissidents. If one side cannot or does not give an official surrender, the only way to truly a win a war, some may say, is to take the other side down to the point they never retaliate again.

9/16/2005 11:35:00 AM  
Blogger Dave Justus said...

I think that is a pretty good analysis.

Of course in WWII, the press was enthusiastically behind the war effort. They were anabashedly pro-American.

I don't know that I want that, I want a balanced, factual news coverage wherever those facts might lead. Even if you feel that the press is achieving that goal though, it is far different from what is was like in WWII.

Imagine the following article:

June 6, 1944. After suffering thousands of casualties allied forces have only managed to secure a few miles of beaches on the Normandy coast.

Faced with the daunting task of moving through the hedgerows of Normandy against the combat tried German Armored divisions, some experts warn that quagmire is inevitable.

WWII was an extremely tough test for our country. It may well have been appropriate and necessary for the press to be 100% behind the war and displaying their patriotism for all to see when it is not appropriate now.

One cannot argue though that it can change public perception about the same events.

9/16/2005 12:03:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home