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 5 of 16)
61. Maybe we can find the lost war when we find
Karl Roves lost emails......
Judith at 9:47PM on Apr 23rd 2007
62. We started it, no we didn't 911 did! so we need to finish the war with a bang! If we back out, we will be attacted! Bush isn't making mistakes. This is the way the world must go to fullfill Bible propecy. Allot of propecy has already come to pass. The Bible says when the end is near 'we will hear of wars and rumors of wars"natural disaters will increase which we all know about the floods, fires, hearthquaks ets. God put Bush in office, not the voters. Read the last chaper in your're Bible. You will realized that global warming is a a part of the end times also. Our time is limited, the tribulation is soon to come. Bible propecy is what you should follow, not any person or group. Investivate it for yourself. You'll see the Bush basing is not called for. If you live during the tribulation you will wish for death that will not come. This will be your last chance to except Jesus as your Lord and Savior. the sooner the better, he's coming back like a theft in the night, be ready! It's heaven or hell, we will all face him on our judgement day. This is the truth, do your own research and you will see that this is the end plan of God, not Bush.
sandy lewis at 8:57AM on Apr 24th 2007
63. I think we all have a lot to learn. To begin, there is no WAR in Iraq. It is a Conflict like Nam and Korea. The United States has never lost a war and never won a conflict (unless The Gulf War was a conflict).
Over the years we have been given many tales of why we went/are in Iraq. The latest seems to be to teach them how to defend there new found democracy. Lets make it simple using low numbers. Lets say our grunt soldiers (Brave Fighters) are between 17 years old to 21 years old @ 90%. They went to Boot Camp for how many weeks??????? That should equal the number of weeks it takes to train the grunt Iraq. The higher ups, they don't need training as the Iraqs have been fighting someone almost forever.
Our fighting forces are brave. They are doing what they are told. I for one, been there, done that as many have. We once won a great war, the Revelutionary War. We did this by sniper power hiding in trees etc. The British lost because they were not used to this kind of fight. In todays world to play I hit you, you hit me,is foolish. If we were to go to WAR bomb them from afar until someone surrenders, tell them it is unconditional surrender, or, we keep bombing. This would lower the American casulty rate to less then 100 rather then thousands. I will bet it would also have lowered Iraq casualties as well.
I by no means have all the answers but wake up every morning wondering if GWBJR has any of them, or understands the questions.
TomCue at 10:07PM on Apr 23rd 2007
64. DIDNT BILL CLINTON SAY WE WOULD BE OUT OF KOSOVO IN ONE YEAR. WASNT THAT LIKE 10-11 YEARS AGO. WERE STILL THERE
curt at 10:08PM on Apr 23rd 2007
65. President Bush is in denial and it worries me that someone as stubborn and unwilling to listen to only the Vice President and a hand full of misinformed individuals could take the country into another war with iran , or God knows who else. In my opinion , now is the time to impeach Bush before he puts us in another botched up mess like Iraq.
ROBERT W. SMITH at 10:25PM on Apr 23rd 2007
66. Amazingly the Democrats have forgotten War maybe hell, but failure is worse! Islamic terrorist are as terrifying today as Japan was in WW II, the Viet Cong in 1968, or Quantrail's Raiders in the Civil War. Rather than acting as Anti-War protestors, standing in the way of Patriotic Americans'who have chosen to honor American interest as you attempt to discredit President Bush as Commander in Chief of all U.S. Armed Services, consider resigning!
Jerry at 10:38PM on Apr 23rd 2007
67. SEN. REID IS CORRECT!
WILLIAM F. BUCKLEY ON IRAQ
This might disappear from the NRO site because it only seems to archive for only about a year, so I'll reprint it here.
NATIONAL REVIEW ONLINE
February 24, 2006 2:51 PM
It Didn't Work
By William F. Buckley Jr.
"I can tell you the main reason behind all our woes—it is America." The New York Times reporter is quoting the complaint of a clothing merchant in a Sunni stronghold in Iraq. "Everything that is going on between Sunni and Shiites, the troublemaker in the middle is America."
One can't doubt that the American objective in Iraq has failed.
Steve J. at 10:42PM on Apr 23rd 2007
68. The war is a disaster. We DO want to win! We wanted to win the war when it started. But Bushie couldn't do it. It's been what, 4 - 5 years now? He's still saying stay the course. Yeah, he can stay safely on the golf course while our boys in Iraq walk a shooting gallery. Nine more today. Nine more blown up.
How sick must the parents of those nine be, if they had voted for withdrawl in the last election, voted the dems in there, only to get the finger from George?
And no, Reid is not "backing down." He's backed by election results. Bush is just pissed off because he'll have to veto the spending bill.
Samantha at 10:54PM on Apr 23rd 2007
69. I have lived in Nevada for over 25 years. Senator Reid has consistently won his elections by very narrow margins primarily because he has "taken" the vote in Clark County (Las Vegas) which is nothing more than extension of southern Califonia mentality. HE DOES NOT REPRESENT THE BULK OF NEVADA!!! He certainly does not represent me or my interests. In fact he is an embarassment to most clear-thinking Nevadans. I apologize to the rest of the Country for him....
Dave M
Dave M at 12:21AM on Apr 24th 2007
70. Dave M -
William F. Buckley thinks Harry Reid is correct about Iraq.
Steve J. at 11:10PM on Apr 23rd 2007
71. amen!
marlon gueits at 11:15PM on Apr 23rd 2007
72. #43 brent, FUCK YOU!
steve england at 11:25PM on Apr 23rd 2007
73. Dave M -
George F. Will also agrees with Sen. Reid:
Togetherness In Baghdad
A surreal facet of the Iraq fiasco is the lag between
when a fact becomes obvious and when
the fiasco's architects acknowledge it.
By George F. Will
Newsweek
Nov. 6, 2006 issue - Many months ago it became obvious to all but the most ideologically blinkered that America is losing the war launched to deal with a chimeric problem (an arsenal of WMD) and to achieve a delusory goal (a democracy that would inspire emulation, transforming the region).
Steve J. at 11:27PM on Apr 23rd 2007
74. We could have quit every war we were ever in because we were losing in all of them. In the Revolutionary War we only won ONE battle, the last one. In the Civil War, the North lost for over 14 months. In WWI and WWII we were decimated for q quite a while before we began winning. Reid is Neville Chamberlain all over again. How dare he give aid and comfort to the enemy in an attempt to win the White House. And what has happened to America that the people don't turn on him.
As to the casuality of war in Iraq, Democrats decry the loss of so many soldiers in our four year war with Iraq in support of the newly elected government. Why don't I believe their tears are real????
American War time fatalities:
Iraq 3,200 Nam 65,000
Korea 35,000
WWII 480,000
WW I 280,000
Mexican War 13,000 (one year war)
Civil War 500,000
Revolutionary 8,000 (13 colonies, 12 million population)
Killed on American inner-city streets with Democratic Mayors, in the same four years as the war: 4,500 dead for nothing. Not soldiers, just kids.
Soldiers die in combat fighting for something. The kids in the inner city are dying for NOTHING! Funny how you don't hear Democrats mourning their loss. Know why? NO VOTES!!!!
What phonies Democrats are.
Joey at 11:29PM on Apr 23rd 2007
75. It was not too many years ago that Reid would have been executed for treasonous statements. Worthless son of a bitch has thrown in the towel as a true blue left wing maggot. I "loathe" these loser statements mostly by left wing, liberal, bought off by Soros, democratic party inspired butt wipes. This dumb ass Reid should be voted OUT OF OFFICE.
Louis Carrillo at 11:37PM on Apr 23rd 2007