After 3 months controlling Congress the Democratic Party has made it clear it seeks the defeat of the US in Iraq. This post analyzes who these people are, and why and how they’re doing it. This stating of the obvious is the base for devising a counter-strategy.
Politicians seek public respect to feed their vanity – as parodied in the 1980s Brit series Yes, Minister and Yes, Prime Minister. Many pols are also corrupt, taking payoffs from special interests and/or feeding at the public trough – Murtha and Pelosi are examples. A minority are also flawed individuals trying to erase shameful pasts, like Kennedy and Kerry.
However motivated, politicians have just two priorities: get elected and stay elected.
There are exceptions – Roosevelt, Churchill, Reagan and Thatcher were (and is Mrs T’s case still are) remarkable for their honesty and lack of vanity.
But Republicans are as prone to these vices as their opponents, so the Democratic quest for national defeat requires another ingredient. That’s the core Democratic base, without which their pols don’t stay in power,
A recent Fox News poll showed a vast chasm running through American society, highlighted by this response:
Do you think most Democrats want the Iraq plan President Bush announced last week to succeed and lead to a stable Iraq or do they want it to fail and for him to have to withdraw U.S. troops in defeat?
16-17 Jan 07
Some one, some another
So about half of surveyed Democrats acknowledge they seek their nation’s defeat – a quite remarkable result.
It’s reasonable to assume the defeat seekers a) want to get rid of the Republican administration at all costs, b) don’t think they will personally suffer from a US defeat, and c) don’t care about the fates of those who will suffer (the US military, US allies, Iraqi civilians etc).
These people are the core Democratic vote – the other half who don’t seek defeat align with majority Republican and Independent opinion, so might not vote Democrat.
From which it follows that any Democratic pol who wants to stay in office or – even better! – be elected President – will bow to this group. Of course a Roosevelt, Churchill or Reagan would not, but the Democratic Party currently lacks people of such talent.
Politicians aren’t super smart – only a bit above average IQ – so they’ll look to emulate past “successes”, in this case the Vietnam defeat.
There are some similarities – both started under a Dem president (Clinton signed the Iraq regime change authorization, Kennedy started US involvement in Vietnam), both wars have lasted more than 3 years, both are fueled by nations the US has not attacked (Iran and Syria now, North Vietnam and Russia then). And of course a Republican is in charge (Bush now, Nixon then).
There are enormous differences – US casualties in Iraq are under 10% of Vietnam, Iran does not (yet) have nukes, and US defeat in Iraq will likely lead an emboldened enemy to launch more damaging attacks on the US.
Still, the match is good enough for the pols, and they might reasonably believe that images of the last US helicopters lifting off from the Baghdad Green Zone will cement their positions for at least the next presidential term.
The Dems have these allies:
1. The world’s MSM, which is overwhelmingly liberal (in the American sense), and anti-American.
2. Most non-military (and some military) federal employees, notably those at State and the CIA.
3. Other special interest groups, notably large parts of the legal establishment including lawyers, and judges (with a small majority on the Supreme Court).
4. The US Islamofasist movement.
Here’s how these groups are working in concert to deliver the US defeat sought by the Democratic base.
1. Demoralize US Voters
The MSM implements this tactic. By reporting – where necessary dishonestly – the worst aspects of situation in Iraq, they’ve fed the national intolerance of long wars (by contrast Brits have fought many long wars successfully – maybe because 3-day cricket matches encourage endurance!).
2. Aid and Comfort the Enemy
Setting a date for retreat of course guarantees that result. The Democratic Congress made this its first priority, gaining praise from America’s enemies.
Also the Democrats oppose action against the proximate enemy (Iran and Syria now, North Vietnam then), thus making a bloody and extended conflict inevitable.
3. Demonize the US Military
This was a very effective tactic in ending the Vietnam War – Americans came to see their military as barbaric, so it became morally acceptable as a scapegoat.
This task, as in Vietnam, is carried by the MSM, supported by the legal profession. Thus the hazing in Abu Ghraib is promoted as a war crime committed by the US military, the Guantanamo facility is misrepresented as a Soviet-style Gulag, and Haditha as a My Lai.
The Washington Post’s recent characterization of the US military as uneducated mercenaries advanced this agenda – by constant repetition of such canards, the demonisation of the military will become a respectable part of the Democratic platform.
In parallel, the US courts have progressively forced the US to grant to terrorists the rights of US residents.
Nevertheless, this tactic has been unsuccessful to date – Americans still respect their military. But don’t be complacent – constant repetition of such messages desensitizes the audience, and as this war continues, that nation could switch to scapegoat its military.
4. Ally With the Enemy (the Hanoi Jane tactic)
The people slaughtering Muslims in Iraq can properly be termed Islamofascists. Their allies in the US are Muslim groups seeking the destruction of Israel, the introduction of Sharia Law in the US, and US defeat in Iraq.
The alliance between the Dems and Islamofasists was announced at the DNC’s recent winter meeting.
So that’s the enemy. A future post will suggest how it can be delayed, disrupted and then defeated.
UPDATE: Feb 10