Friday, November 04, 2005

No Good News

No good news is good news for a liberal. Especially when it comes to the War in Iraq. But some good news is being reported. How can that be? Liberals must invalidate and suppress this good news at all cost. Here is a perfect example of liberal distortion at its best. Lets pick apart another liberals comments regarding positive news in Iraq.

This is some really great progress. It only took 30 months to secure seven miles of highway. At this rate, all the highways in Baghdad province (granting that many are not so dangerous) will be totally subdued in no less than 186 years. Provided, of course, that there is no backsliding...

First is the sarcasm of how it took 30 months to secure seven miles of highway. Apparently liberals do not understand the difference between 'secure' and 'police'. It took less than a month to secure most of Iraq. Unlike Vietnam, we used appropriate military force, and achieved a military objective very quickly. What has been confused is the first objective with the second. And I am no Administration apologist, the second objective of establishing relative peace through police action was botched in a big way. Yet, the US military has never had a large scale police capability, and it shouldn't need one. That is not the purpose of our armed forces, and it was naive to expect it to work quickly as a police force. However, I do support the long term strategic objective of a democracy in Iraq. And I do not know how you would prepare to have such a capability, thats another topic.

None of you is probably old enough to remember hearing similarly glowing reports in 1968 -- only then the story was about how a particularly hostile village on the outskirts of Danang had been successfully quieted.

I think most people are reasonably clear on what the media was focused on in 1968. How about a few of the archived television images from APTN in '68?

Long lines of South Vietnamese walking along carrying possessions being marched by soldiers
Burning houses
Tanks moving along. Some firing machine guns
Helicopter firing on buildings
Desolate streets
Dead bodies
Aerials of US bombing

And of course now libs jump up and down and say, "Yeah, yeah see!" I see alright. I see the liberal defining reference frame is Vietnam, and they have to force whatever they see or hear concerning Iraq into that little box in their head. In Vietnam, we used a militarily self destructive policy of escalating our response based on politics. That policy prevented us from achieving strategic victory quickly. It also opened the door to propaganda driving the outcome of a military engagement. Irregardless, at no point in Vietnam did we expect the US ground forces to police the country en masse. And that is the core of the Iraq situation. There is no large scale sponsorship of insurgents in Iraq unlike Vietnam. The military success removed that. Conversely there is no 'military' solution to quell a internal insurgency in any population, apart from martial law, which is political suicide.

We finish our discussion with the importance of news. The claim is that reporting every roadside bomb, every death, every civilian casualty is more important than focusing on the successful areas. Its more important if the objective is to dissuade the public from supporting the Administration. Its more important if you are a leftist peacenic and want to end what you view is a illegal war based on lies. But if it was inherently important to report death and destruction, would not the news be filled with all the highway deaths in the US? What about news on the prison conditions in some state penitentiaries? Club Gitmo residents have it easy. Want to be morbid? Compare the military death rate in Iraq vs the rate of servicemen and women who perish accidentally. What is important to the liberal socialist Fascist Apologist media is to focus on what will poison the resolve of the American people.

In the end, of course a liberal is going to be hostile to good news in Iraq. It does not fit the agenda. And it is a automatic response. There is no cognition involved. The whole argument of liberals is predicated on their philosophy, and they can not even conceive of being wrong. There can be no good news.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Yo Hommie,

I'm the one who posted the comment on redstate.com that you attempt to dissect here. First, I'm flattered that you found it so engaging. Second, I apologize for not believing the good news. You're probably right about all of it -- I'm sure ten years from now we will all look back on the war in Iraq and realize that it was a terrific success.

Carlos said...

I can't predict the future. I hope we do look back and see success. I beleive every sane person wants to see peace and stability, so thats what we should promote. Right now some of us dissagree on how to get there. All the more reason to keep pushing the debate! No reason to apologize. Keep the fires burning!