Tuesday, April 08, 2008

Petraeus And Crocker In The Lion's Den

In the battle for Iraq, al-Qaeda and Moqtada al-Sadr's Iranian backed Mahdi Army have both suffered significant losses.

But they've done quite well when it comes to the battle in Washington DC

The last time General Petraeus was in Washington, he was blatantly and cheerfully insulted to his face by anti-war politicians looking for a headline and street cred with the likes of MoveOn and Code Pink. That was back before his ingenious counter-insurgency strategy really had time to work and affect things on the ground.

In view of Petraeus' obvious success and his stature with the American public, those Democrats in Washington with a vested political interest in an American defeat are a lot more subtle than before, but the script hasn't changed. They're still willing to hand our enemies a victory.

With all the whining about a supposed lack of political progress in Iraq ( since they can't credibly attack what our warriors have accomplished on the ground any more) it is simply outrageous that certain members of congress and a couple of Donkey presidential candidates would cite Maliki's recent offensive against the Mahdi Army as evidence of a lack of progress when it's exactly the opposite.

Do any of them care that a year ago, Maliki was Al-Sadr's dog, and that the idea of him as anything but a Shiite ideologue was a fantasy? By taking on Mookie and his boys, Maliki has proven to Iraqis at large that he's not just there to keep the Shiites enshrined as overdogs, but to be a national leader for all Iraqis.It's by no means the end, but it's the beginning of the end.

And far from being the failure it's been painted as in the dinosaur media, the offensive did well enough for al-Sadr to beg for a ceasefire. In this part of the world, that's a plain admission of defeat.

But you'd never know it, to hear Nancy Pelosi, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Defeat and retreat for America is their script, and they're sticking to it.

Thankfully, John McCain took up the gauntlet on behalf of Petraeus:

Another significant part of Petraeus and Crocker's testimony involved the connivance and interference of Iran and their continued efforts to sabotage us and attack our forces. Of course, Barack Hussein Obama's response to that was to propose that we sit down at a table with them and make nice to them.

That nonsense aside, President Bush is going to have to make a decision, if he hasn't already about what he's going to do about that particular rattlesnake.

Iran gets more poisonous and dangerous with each passing day.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

anyone thinking the current occupant of the white house will do anyting to iran is delusional.
he just wants to do business with them.
and this stuff about selectively attacking the bases in iran linked to attacks in iraq is a good way to prove the impotence in our strategy in the M/E.
if you're gonna attack iran, you show this man a picture of the iranian president and all the mullahs having sex with his mother.