Tuesday, August 07, 2007

Perceptions Of Iraq War
Are Starting To Shift

by Michael Barone - August 6th, 2007 - Townhall.com

It's not often that an opinion article shakes up Washington and changes the way a major issue is viewed. But that happened last week, when The New York Times printed an opinion article by Brookings Institution analysts Michael O'Hanlon and Ken Pollack on the progress of the surge strategy in Iraq.

Yes, progress. O'Hanlon and Pollack [two democrats] supported the invasion of Iraq in 2003 -- Pollack even wrote a book urging the overthrow of Saddam Hussein -- but they have sharply criticized military operations there in the ensuing years.

"As two analysts who have harshly criticized the Bush administration's miserable handling of Iraq," they wrote, "we were surprised by the gains we saw and the potential to produce not necessarily 'victory,' but a sustainable stability that both we and the Iraqis could live with."

Their bottom line: "There is enough good happening on the battlefields of Iraq today that Congress should plan on sustaining the effort at least into 2008."

That's not what almost all their fellow Democrats in Congress want to hear. Freshman Rep. Nancy Boyda of Kansas, who unseated Republican Jim Ryun last fall, bolted from a hearing room when retired Gen. Jack Keane described positive developments in Iraq.

When liberal democrats pray for the defeat of our nation so stubbornly that they reject any news that does not support their view, something is seriously wrong. War is messy. George W. Bush has not been a great war President. He has backed some failed strategies and he has not felt it important to maintain public support for the war. That said, WAR IS MESSY. The only thing worse than a poor leader during war is to tolerate back stabbing traitors who eviscerate the will to win the war.

Unfortunately, that is where we find ourselves in the face of a democrat program predicting defeat that can fairly be called traitorous. More than 60% of the American people want to quit the war at this point in time. No matter what the consequences. If the consequences of quitting are that we see nuclear bombs go off in American cities, these appeasers are convinced they will not be held accountable. They close their ears and reject that possibility. That is today.

This article claims that it is possible to change the perception that quitting is the best answer. Since defeat is not reality but merely a preception born of the MSM's campaign of negative predictions and projections of defeat, a change in precption is possible. Enough people have accepted these predictions that we get the current majority support for quitting. We don't have to change everyone's minds. We just have to sway about 15% of the American population to have a majority supporting the war.

This article says the trend has changed. The key question is how fast will the perceptions of a working majority of Americans change?


Post a Comment

<< Home