Invested in Defeat

Have we ever seen a political party invest so much political capital in defeat in Iraq as the Democrats have done? Never in American history with the exception of the Democrats during the Civil War has a party been so committed to a negative outcome in a military confrontation.

What will the Democrats say to General Petraeus? Will they accuse him of wearing rose colored glasses? Will the Democrats grill the general over the political failures -to date- of the Iraqi government? Will the Democrats ignore the clear signs of positive changes in Iraq?

Why has the Democrat Party adopted the "Lose at all costs" approach to the conflict in Iraq? Sure, there are still many problems to solve in Iraq. Sure, the country is divided along tribal, religious, and regional lines. And it is an open question whether the Iraqi government, the current government and future governments, can unite all the factions into a coherent functioning national government. But why have the Democrats taken the negative road in this struggle? Do they think the American people want defeat in Iraq. A portion of the Democrat base surely wants the United States defeated in Iraq just as the same portion invested heavily in the US defeat in Vietnam. That explains a lot about the Democrat Party. Many of the current leaders in the Democrat Party cut their political teeth on the American defeat in Vietnam. Just ask John Kerry. The Iraqi situation reminds them of their fixation on Vietnam.

But the main reason the Democrats invest in defeat in Iraq is because of George Bush. Success in Iraq means Bush gets credit for vision, for military actions. for courage, for diplomacy, and for doing the right thing. Democrats cannot allow that to happen.