Last week, Harry Reid was widely criticized for saying that the Iraq war "is lost." On
Power Line, I explained why I thought Reid's comment was both incorrect and politically misguided. Today, Reid
backed off his claim, and, almost as though he were taking my advice, couched his criticisms in terms of a "failed policy" rather than a "lost war:"
The Senate majority leader drew criticism from Bush and others last week when he said the war in Iraq had been lost. He did not repeat the assertion in his prepared speech, saying that "The military mission has long since been accomplished. The failure has been political. It has been policy. It has been presidential."
There is an irony here; Reid is echoing the "mission accomplished" banner for which President Bush has long been abused. But news accounts haven't focused on this point, instead, they have emphasized Reid's claim that the President is in "denial" on Iraq:
Reid noted disapprovingly that in a speech last week, Bush repeatedly said there were signs of progress in Iraq in the wake of a troop increase he ordered last winter. "The White House transcript says the president made those remarks in the state of Michigan. I believe he made them in the state of denial," said Reid.
In fact, though, there are signs of progress in Iraq, both as
measured statistically and as reported by many observers. It is Reid, not Bush, who doesn't want to address the evidence, but rather seeks to achieve his objective by bullying. There is an interesting parallel here to the Democrats' tactic on global warming. There, too, they refuse to engage the evidence offered by skeptics, and instead insist that the debate is over and anyone who disagrees with them is "in denial." This is, in general, not an approach that is followed by people who have strong arguments and evidence on their side. So it shouldn't be surprising that many people conclude that what Reid fears in Iraq is not failure but success, as suggested eloquently by
Chip Bok:
Reader Comments ( Page 1 of 16)
1. Absolutely spot on assessment of Reid's shameful surrender-monkey rhetoric. Every suicide bomb and announced US casualty brings a smile to these idiots' faces allowing for the "I told you so" bs that they are now spewing daily. It's unbelievable what the Democrats and the MainStreamMedia will resort to to achieve their political goals.
The parallel to global warming denial is also spot on. I see a crossover opportunity for the Dems and the Hollywood LearJet Liberal set... buy a carbon offset for each American soldier and each Iraqi civilian that you endanger by the emboldening surrender rhetoric that you generate.
Jaxon at 12:32PM on Apr 23rd 2007
2. Another intellectually lazy 'analysis' from the folks at powerline. Reid said that the war was lost militarily, so his second speech was not backing off that claim in any way. But that would not be obvious to those who only read the headlines. Does powerline actually read the articles?
It also, of course, does not mean that Reid agrees with the Mission Accomplished banner that was hoisted 4 years ago. 4 years is a long time (about the time it was from the attack on Pearl Harbor to VJ day).
I don't think anyone thinks that Iraq can be won militarily now. Which is why Bush can't find a 'war czar'.
Evidently our friends at Powerline are in denial.
Mike at 2:16PM on Apr 23rd 2007
3. John -- The graphic to support Senator Reid's comment is here:
http://www2.blogger.com/post-edit.g?blogID=20177887&postID=7791278916884931894
Bob Leibowitz at 2:18PM on Apr 23rd 2007
4. Well, the graphic is here, actually.
http://canticleforleibowitz.blogspot.com/2007/04/senator-reid-declares-mission.html
Sorry for the operator error!
Bob Leibowitz at 2:39PM on Apr 23rd 2007
5. Wow a historian. It was about four years -- and the use of 2 atomic bombs -- from Pearl Harbor to VJ day. Are you suggesting we should follow that example in every war?
Mike 2 at 6:43PM on Apr 23rd 2007
6. Setting aside the issue of accuracy, or the good-faith belief of the declarant, suppose that in 1943 then-Senate Majority Leader Alben Barkley had declared to the press, "This war is lost." What would today's Majority Leader Reid think of such a statement by his predecessor? Indeed, what would anyone think? Public statements that give aid and comfort to the enemy--any enemy, any war--by any American leader, are treacherous. We cannot bring ourselves to say such things, because we live in a nonjudgmental age, when national false modesty and self-criticism are considered virtues, and patriotism is an embarrassment. The the succinct answer is that Alben Barkley would have been removed as Majority Leader and his name would forever be synonymous with treason.
Coach at 3:45PM on Apr 23rd 2007
7. Hinderaker,
Global warming is a complex subject that you don't understand. I doubt any of your readers (including me) know much but the basics. As with other esoteric topics we know Jack about, we go to the authorities on the matter and ask them what they agree on. Nearly all say certain things about global warming and nearly all disagree with you. If some jack-ass scientist started telling you how to do law, you'd (rightly) tell him to button up. So why not be cool and let science go its course. Current assessments of G.W. scientists may be way off, but your two cents aren't worth even that.
For all of you who don't believe that Iraq is not improving, go to this site. http://www.juancole.com/index.html
Why not read something you disagree with for a change instead of Hinderaker. Maybe Hinderaker is lying to you. It could be possible. If you don't read people who disagree with you, you might just be reading to be soothed. Maybe Hinderaker is your version of a pacifier.
Gronk,
lil_turk at 4:13PM on Apr 23rd 2007
8. Your readers may have missed this movie by BBC on Global Warming Swindle:
http://video.google.ca/videosearch?q=the+great+global+warming+swindle
Don't forget to get both lines.
Tom Kubitz
Tom Kubitz at 4:19PM on Apr 23rd 2007
9. Re: Posting #6 by lil_turk. Followed the link to Juan Cole's site and scanned the ten days of postings about Iraq. Interesting, it appears that our forces neither killed nor captured any insurgents during that period. Seems Mr. Cole only sees one side of an argument and makes some rather outrageous and unsubstantiated claims such as of the 18,000 individuals being held by coalition forces in Iraq only 250 are foreign fighters. First, I don't believe the statistic on its face and second, since Cole can't seem to acknowledge enemy casualties I question his intellectual honesty on any statistics.
Scrooge at 4:42PM on Apr 23rd 2007
10. Mike (in #2),
Did you just say that Reid said in his first comment that the war was lost militarily, but that in saying in his second comment that the mission was accomplished militarily he's not backing off his first comment? Did you mean to say he "didn't" say it was lost militarily in his first comment, therefore the second comment...
To me, it doesn't much matter whether he's saying it is lost militarily or politically. In either case "lost" is pretty final, and it seems fairly obvious that it's not over. As the Powerline guys point out, there is all kinds of evidence that there is progress being made and if progress is being made, do we want to declare that we've lost? If we say, "The terrorists can blow up 300 people. It's over. We've lost." What do we say if we do pull out and the terrorists shift there focus to attacks here, or in Europe? If they can begin to successfully blow up more people and things in Europe and here, do we don our robes and start abiding by sharia law because we've lost?
Isn't it fairly clear that the divisiveness of having the leadership of one of our political parties declaring defeat, on ANY grounds, provides a certain lift to the extremists who blow people up? Isn't it obvious that saying, "We're leaving on X-date" would give them comfort, and a way to plan (not to mention a way to recruit)? To have the incredible success of not only blowing up a large number of people, but to acheive the higher goal of having one of the leaders of the enemy nation declare that that means you've won and they've lost... Don't you think that if you were a terrorist in Iraq that would incentivize you to do it again and do it more? Why does Reid hand them a win for blowing up innocent people, rather than hand them a defeat by saying how pathetically weak and small someone needs to be to even consider such an act, and reminding people that OUR soldiers are building and protecting rather than destroying and killing?
I often wonder where we'd be in this war if BOTH sides in this country had stood united and didn't give the terrorists the propaganda victories it gives them so freely. Comments like Reid's guarantee more of the same because you keep doing something if it's getting you the result you want. Reid gave them exactly what they wanted. However you want to parse it, or accuse the Powerliners of not reading past the headlines, you have to know that in the planning rooms of AQ in Iraq they're not looking for the context of Reid's statement, they're celebrating the headline "Reid says 'war is lost'" and planning a way to try to get him to say it again.
irishlad317 at 4:51PM on Apr 23rd 2007
11. Shame! Shame on anyone playing politics with Iraq and the safety of our troops. Anyone that doesn't realize a blank check and no accountability accomplishes nothing is playing politics with the lives and families of our soldiers. Harry Reid showed tremendous courage to challenge the establishment with the truth. President Bush's problem is "Affirmative Access" cuts out half of America from working with him to solve the problems and win this war. The Conservatives don't have a monopoly on the best and brightest! If Harry Reid didn't offer a different perspective, then we'd have a King! Shame on anyone that won't support and defend the Constitution. America doesn't want to hear anyone talk about a "Lost War" because we don't want to swallow our pride and impeach Bush and Cheney. No one wants another 9-11 or Virginia Tech to happen again.
Cecil Jones at 4:49PM on Apr 23rd 2007
12. Reid has a knack for putting his foot in his mouth -- he is an uncaring idiot and I have no idea how he got where he is. Go back to your hick town, Harry ... you embarrass all Nevadan's who have a brain.
vicki at 7:57PM on Apr 23rd 2007
13. BU$H IS THE ONE IN DENIAL. HE KNOWS DAMN WELL THE WAR IS LOST AND IS ONLY TRYING TO KEEP IT GOING UNTIL HE IS OUT OF OFFICE SO HE CAN PUT THE BLAME ON SOMEONE ELSE. BU$H LACKS CHARACTER, MORALS, ETHICS AND INTEGRITY. HE CAN'T ADMIT HE IS WRONG BECAUSE HE IS TOO STUPID TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE HELL HE HAS DONE. DIRTY ROTTEN LOUSY REPUKE!
ANN at 5:06PM on Apr 23rd 2007
14. Remember - The American Military never runs - only the Democrats in Congress and the Senate - nuff said
loumondelli at 7:08PM on Apr 23rd 2007
15. Dumby is in denial...
And it ain't just a river in Egypt.
After 4 years of lies, including the WMD Whopper that got us into this mess in the first place...
Somehow anybody with an IQ over room temperature is supposed to believe this Administrations "numbers"?
(Guffaws!)
Too bad Reid doen't have any cajones...
Otherwise Dumby and the rest of his lying cabal or crooks would be emoting over what to put on their tombstone facing the gallows or firing squad - after an impeachment and conviction for treason.
BT at 5:19PM on Apr 23rd 2007