Combs Spouts Off

"It's my opinion and it's very true."

  • Calendar

    October 2020
    S M T W T F S
     123
    45678910
    11121314151617
    18192021222324
    25262728293031
  • Recent Posts

  • Tag Cloud

  • Archives

Embracing defeat

Posted by Richard on April 20, 2007

Any day now, I expect Rep. Nancy Pelosi (Shadow Secretary of State) and Sen. Harry Reid (Shadow Secretary of Defense) to announce that they're heading for an undisclosed location in the Middle East to meet with representatives of Syria, Iran, al Qaeda in Iraq, and the Mahdi Army. Their purpose? To begin negotiating the terms of surrender for the United States.

I think Rob at Say Anything has their number:

So Harry thinks the war is lost.  Today anyway.  But just three days ago Reid was still talking about giving the troops a “strategy for success” and giving the troops “every penny” they need.

Which is it?  Are we going to try to be successful in Iraq or are we just going to give up and come home?

I think the answer for the Democrats is “neither.” They aren’t interested in trying to win the war in Iraq (as evidenced by Harry’s declaration of defeat above) nor are they interested in withdrawing gracefully. …

The Democrats want nothing less than a full-scale defeat and embarrassment for the President in Iraq, because that’s what will help them the most politically.  They want that, and they don’t care how many troops have to die to get it.

Burning Zeal and Judicious Asininity thought along the same lines about the undermining of morale, comparing Reid's declaration of defeat to Tokyo Rose and Lord Haw Haw, respectively.

Engram at Back Talk has a marvelous post entitled "When al Qaeda talks…" You really need to read the whole thing, but I can't resist quoting this gem:

I wish al Qaeda would directly attach puppet strings to Harry Reid so they could make him say these things without having to kill 200 innocent Iraqis every few weeks. It would be much more efficient that way.

You ought to read Jed Babbin's new column, too. For a lighter take, you can always count on ScrappleFace: "Reid Supports the Troops Who Lost the War"

But the best counterpoint to Reid's contemptible claim comes, naturally, from a Milblogger in Iraq, SSG Thul (I'm quoting almost the whole post because it's too good to excerpt; but click the link anyway, check out his blog, and maybe leave a note of thanks in the comments):

This is the creme de la creme of what the Appeal For Courage is all about. The leader of the majority party of the United States Senate has proclaimed to the world that the war in Iraq is lost. Done. Over. So what the heck are we still doing here then? Why isn't he making plans to fly us home tomorrow?

Oh yeah, that's right, because we haven't lost the war. In point of fact, we are winning the war, though you would never know it from what the media reports. Here in my room, I have a small TV that stays perpetually on the AFN news channel. CNN, MSNBC, NBC, CBS, and Fox are all represented. Yet from none of these news sources have I heard even a peep about the fact that the Coalition yesterday announced the transfer of security responsibilities of the 4th Iraqi province to the Iraqi government. Instead we hear about the wave of bombings in Baghdad. Not one of the anchors that are interviewing the 'live from the Green Zone' reporters has apparently taken notice of the fact that the reporters are no longer wearing body armor.

So you might ask how we can be winning the war when all you see on TV news is reports of bombings and death squads and such. The answer is simple. All of those reports come out of Baghdad itself. There are no reporters out here in the provinces. In nearly 13 months, I have seen one reporter here at Al Asad, and that was a gentleman from 60 Minutes who has been following our brigade from training through deployment to Iraq.

The name of this blog comes from the oath I swore when I enlisted in the Army. I will support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. And though I don't consider Sen. Reid an enemy, he surely is not an ally. He is heading a group of politicians who are actively trying to undermine the war effort, and would prefer that we lose the war to further their own political ends. They want to set a timeline for military withdrawal to coincide with the 2008 elections. To further his political career, he is intentionally putting my soldiers and I more at risk.

According to Sen Reid's logic, we would have surrendered to the Germans in December of 1944. During the Battle of the Bulge, the German Army nearly broke the Allied front, and the US suffered one of the highest casualty counts for any battle of the war in Europe. Yet less than 6 months later, the war was over, with Germany surrendering unconditionally.

According to Sen Reid's logic, President Lincoln should have surrendered to the Confederacy in the spring of 1864. The battles of Cold Harbor and the Wilderness, on top of the costly victory at Gettysburg the summer before, were proportionally much worse than the recent suicide bombing campaign in Baghdad. Yet just a year after Cold Harbor, the Confederacy was a footnote in history.

I can only hope that the American people at home will trust the soldiers on the ground instead of the politicians trying to advance their careers. If we can hang on long enough to win the war, it will be a tough time to be a Democrat in America. Stabbing the troops in the back during a war will be hard to live down.

Bravo, Sergeant! Bless your noble heart, stay safe, and know that many here at home support you and your mission and have the utmost admiration for and confidence in our troops.

The Appeal for Courage that the Sergeant mentioned is something I blogged about last month. If you're active duty military, Reserve, or National Guard, please go there and sign up.

Subscribe To Site:

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.