The Left's moral responsibility on Iraq
I respect those who think the Iraq War was a bad decision. Noted liberal scholar Alan Dershowitz got it right when he said that going to war was a tough decision either way based on what we knew at that time. While he disagreed in the end, he said that it was a 51-49 disagreement. Anyone who felt going to war was a ludicrous decision, according to Dershowitz, just isn't being fair or thinking deeply enough about it. I share his analysis, though after much pondering, I came to support President Bush's decision.
The question now is what must happen with Iraq. Our nation was clearly divided about going to war, but surely we can agree that winning now is imperative. It is particularly critical to the long term credibility of America and for American confidence in our military capabilities. Moreover, if President Bush is right about the transformational power of a constitutional democracy, a stable and democratic Iraq is critical for Iraqis, critical for peace in the Middle East, and critical in our larger War on Terror.
In light of this, I am exceedingly troubled by the Left's rhetoric about the war. I believe and know many of my liberal friends to be sincere in their convictions. I do not question their love for our country, and I do not believe they would knowingly and intentionally act in ways that would hurt America.
With that said, I believe they are hurting America, and hurting it badly. I do not believe many on the Left understand the international and long-term implications of their words and actions. Many are so caught up in hatred of Bush and the GOP that they would almost prefer to see failure in Iraq and rejoice at the "incompetent" Bush administration than to see us succeed. This both saddens and angers me.
Osama Bin Laden's recent message to the world was a stark reminder that we have an enemy who hates us and would love to see more innocent Americans die. One of Bin Laden's weapons is public opinion. He and the Iraqi insurgents (i.e.-terrorists who slaughter their own people) are trying convince unstable Muslims that we have bad motives, and that we are losing in Iraq. The more he can convince them that they are winning and that America will lose its resolve, the more young radicals will sign up to slaughter and be slaughtered. The more they are convinced of our bad motives, the more they will fight with passion and recruit their friends. In other words, the message to the young Middle East radicals is that we went to Iraq for some nefarious reason and that we are losing and losing our will in Iraq. This creates more terrorists, which means more Americans will die.
In what disappoints me to no end, I must confess that this is the exact same message we hear over and over and over and over again from the NY Times, the "peace" activists, Daily Kos, Dick Durbin, John Kerry, and the rest of the liberal crowd. Make no mistake about it, these messages are sent around the world and heard by young Muslims who are fertile for seduction into a life of terror. I fear that Democrats are so frustrated about their lack of power that they are jeopardizing America and American lives by viewing the world through dark and unwaveringly partisan glasses.
If American and world attitudes toward the war are crucial to effective implementation and eventual victory, then Americans have a moral responsibility to shape this attitude in a way that is positive. This does not mean that we should refrain from asking questions or calling our President to be more effective in Iraqi democracy-building. But it does mean that if Democrats really support our troops, if they really believe in a strong America that is looked up to in the world, they will spend a vast majority of their time discussing the war actually promoting the effort here at home and abroad. And they should spend a distinct minority of their time criticizing the implementation of the war.
As I see it, the Left has two options. One option is to continue to oppose the war, even though this doesn't seem to accomplish much. The person choosing this option must, as Dennis Prager rightly argues and one LA Times columnist recently admitted, confess that they do not support our troops. The other option is to say, "I did not support the war to begin with, but now we are there. I wholeheartedly want to see us win this war more than I want to see a Democratic President in 2008. I will work to support our troops and ensure that we have a healthy Iraqi Democracy when we leave."
So let me challenge those of you on the Left who love America and wish to see freedom blossom in Iraq. Will you please, because of your love for peace, work to shape public and world opinion on the war in our favor? Will you please not have a Dana Carvey-ish knee-jerk "No!" every time our President speaks about the war? Whether or not we should have gone to war is completely and utterly irrelevant now. If you will not take up this challenge, I fear that your actions and words will continue to inspire the recruitment of more civilian-killing "freedom fighters", more of our troops will die, our enemy will increase their resolve, America may lose its resolve, and our country will, at the end of the day, be significantly worse off.
The question now is what must happen with Iraq. Our nation was clearly divided about going to war, but surely we can agree that winning now is imperative. It is particularly critical to the long term credibility of America and for American confidence in our military capabilities. Moreover, if President Bush is right about the transformational power of a constitutional democracy, a stable and democratic Iraq is critical for Iraqis, critical for peace in the Middle East, and critical in our larger War on Terror.
In light of this, I am exceedingly troubled by the Left's rhetoric about the war. I believe and know many of my liberal friends to be sincere in their convictions. I do not question their love for our country, and I do not believe they would knowingly and intentionally act in ways that would hurt America.
With that said, I believe they are hurting America, and hurting it badly. I do not believe many on the Left understand the international and long-term implications of their words and actions. Many are so caught up in hatred of Bush and the GOP that they would almost prefer to see failure in Iraq and rejoice at the "incompetent" Bush administration than to see us succeed. This both saddens and angers me.
Osama Bin Laden's recent message to the world was a stark reminder that we have an enemy who hates us and would love to see more innocent Americans die. One of Bin Laden's weapons is public opinion. He and the Iraqi insurgents (i.e.-terrorists who slaughter their own people) are trying convince unstable Muslims that we have bad motives, and that we are losing in Iraq. The more he can convince them that they are winning and that America will lose its resolve, the more young radicals will sign up to slaughter and be slaughtered. The more they are convinced of our bad motives, the more they will fight with passion and recruit their friends. In other words, the message to the young Middle East radicals is that we went to Iraq for some nefarious reason and that we are losing and losing our will in Iraq. This creates more terrorists, which means more Americans will die.
In what disappoints me to no end, I must confess that this is the exact same message we hear over and over and over and over again from the NY Times, the "peace" activists, Daily Kos, Dick Durbin, John Kerry, and the rest of the liberal crowd. Make no mistake about it, these messages are sent around the world and heard by young Muslims who are fertile for seduction into a life of terror. I fear that Democrats are so frustrated about their lack of power that they are jeopardizing America and American lives by viewing the world through dark and unwaveringly partisan glasses.
If American and world attitudes toward the war are crucial to effective implementation and eventual victory, then Americans have a moral responsibility to shape this attitude in a way that is positive. This does not mean that we should refrain from asking questions or calling our President to be more effective in Iraqi democracy-building. But it does mean that if Democrats really support our troops, if they really believe in a strong America that is looked up to in the world, they will spend a vast majority of their time discussing the war actually promoting the effort here at home and abroad. And they should spend a distinct minority of their time criticizing the implementation of the war.
As I see it, the Left has two options. One option is to continue to oppose the war, even though this doesn't seem to accomplish much. The person choosing this option must, as Dennis Prager rightly argues and one LA Times columnist recently admitted, confess that they do not support our troops. The other option is to say, "I did not support the war to begin with, but now we are there. I wholeheartedly want to see us win this war more than I want to see a Democratic President in 2008. I will work to support our troops and ensure that we have a healthy Iraqi Democracy when we leave."
So let me challenge those of you on the Left who love America and wish to see freedom blossom in Iraq. Will you please, because of your love for peace, work to shape public and world opinion on the war in our favor? Will you please not have a Dana Carvey-ish knee-jerk "No!" every time our President speaks about the war? Whether or not we should have gone to war is completely and utterly irrelevant now. If you will not take up this challenge, I fear that your actions and words will continue to inspire the recruitment of more civilian-killing "freedom fighters", more of our troops will die, our enemy will increase their resolve, America may lose its resolve, and our country will, at the end of the day, be significantly worse off.
posted by Anonymous @ 11:25 AM
<< Home