Redstate

By gamecock Comments (6) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

During a probing Halloween interview about the Iraq War, staunch war supporter Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) repeatedly bemoaned weak support for the war by the American public as a threat to victory, while obviously oblivious to the fact that his own rhetoric, and that of many of his GOP war supporter colleagues, helps to justify such scepticism and pessimism.

What made the interview so revealing was the historically informed interviewer, Ralph Bristol, host of the radio talk show that bears his name on Greenville/Spartanburg's AM1330/950 WORD in Sen. Graham's home state of SC. See links:

http://www.newsradioword.com/
http://www.ralphbristol.com/

As I have argued for the past three years, the Iraq War is one of America's finest hours with respect to our accomplishments and even more so with respect to costs incurred when compared to past US wars and with congruent wars in world history.

Yet, Sen. Graham, like most elected officials, and even most unwavering war supporters, has bought into the Drive-by Media-driven conventional wisdom meme that the war has been "mishandled" and that because of same, Iraq is a "mess" requiring a new "plan" or "strategy." Of course, if one wishes not to face the raised eyebrows of Tim Russert and more importantly, to be re-invited as co-stars on Sunday TV shows, one must accept the meme and only then argue for victory.

Most conversations about the war between elected officials and the media are juvenile arguments over meaningless semantic phrases like whether we are "winning" (we won't know we were winning until we have won) and should "stay the course," but even that conversation may be had only after the obligatory re-hash of the WMD intell failures and star chamber-like inquisitions as to whether the poor soul would still vote for the war knowing what we know now. And of course, one must accept that we really know what we know now, ie that since we didn't find the volume of WMD that we expected, that surely they never were there. That we know. Uh huh...

See Amir Taheri on why if we saw the war through the enemy's eyes, public support would be high. There is no excuse for the GOP and their alternative media outlets not to communicate the truth about the war that deserves to be told to honor the troops and to respect the American people.

http://www.benadorassociates.com/article/20213

But Graham didn't get the luxury of an un-challenging canned cliche interview with Bristol. No sir. Bristol challenged Graham on his certainty that more troops at the outset and now would solve all Iraq's problems. Bristol refused to accept the CW that the war has gone badly and is going badly or that the US and not Iraq is responsible for security.

I was happy that Graham got to hear that view, because while I am all for the democratization project as a long-term draining of the swamp that produces terrorists, the main reason we are there is to prevent future 911s by eliminating a terror sponsor state (done) and preventing the establishment of a replacement for same.

The Iraq battle is part of a long war that we can't make shorter by making getting out of Iraq the main goal. If Iraqis need to have a Civil War to put down the Baathist deadenders and their al Qaida allies, then let them have at it. We are there to kill terrorists that are only too happy to come there for their 72 virgin-bound ticket/Big Sleep/Dirt Nap and to prevent the re-establishment of a terror sponsor safe haven state, with oil money for WMD fueled 911s.

As Bristol deconstructed all the beltway assumptions, Graham sounded like his eyes were in a deer meets headlights mode. He came away exhibiting America's post-WWII war ignorance and ignorance of what history teaches is necessary to stay free.

It also glaringly revealed Graham and his GOP colleagues' failures to properly inform the public about the war in historical context rather than the Media bushlied 20/20 hindsight context, and their culpability in producing the very sceptical American public they fear could succumb to cut and run Democrats' desire for another glorious Vietnam-like retreat (But please don't show us the millions killed by the falling dominoes. If its not on film it doesn't happen in Greenwich Village.).

But war ignorance is not the only problem. The other problem is that Graham and too many others see themselves as armchair Commanders-in-Chief whose duty is to never fail to let the President and the Public know their every thought about how the war should be fought. After all they, not the generals, have the greatest quality to direct war strategy: ie a majority of votes from their respective states for a cushy 6 year job saying my honorable friend to some of the sorriest people on Earth with co-starring roles on TV if they will only please, please criticize the man elected by a majority of all the states so the Libs can enjoy the fantasy that Bush is stupid and they are smart.

Graham and his colleagues voted for the war. When they did so, then as now, the Constitution vested the plenary power to WAGE war in one man, not 100 or 535, and for good reasons. He displays all the reasons why every time he opens his mouth to express support and a desire to win (and for that he is to be admired as are Lieberman and the GOP) but then can't resist reciting the litany of defeatism, lest anyone in Georgetown think him unenlightened. Having put troops in the field, they owe the troops all they can do and say to help them and tearing down their CINC 24/7 doesn't cut it.

Notice that I have not mentioned my usual complaints about the Democratic party's bushlied, defeatist contributions to weak public support for the war? And all redstaters know my utter contempt for my former party.

The reason I haven't is because the GOP could cure that problem if they had the spines to not care what the media thinks and call their Dem colleagues on the carpet for speech that emboldens the enemy and costing American lives. The GOP senators could shame the Dems into silence if only they could give up being CINC's in waiting themselves and the fawning faux admiration of the media.

They could start by censuring Senators Lurch and Thing from Massachusetts and famed Nazi Hunter Turban from Illinois.

But let's not get fixated on the freaks. Its not them that are the danger. Its the so-called moderates that can't think, much less say, the word victory and with whom that the enemy in Iraq, Saddam's lawyers and Kim Jung Il regularly shares talking points with.

Lindsey Graham was the first republican I voted to send to Washington, DC after my 20 years in the democrat party before my 6/2001 epiphany (see I loved tax cuts before the war) and when this talented lawyer is in your corner, he is the best advocate you can find. And he also states a great case for the war as well, in between preening negativism. But Lindsey is, like most Americans, weakened by affluence and the vacation from history we have had since Korea and WWII.

Thankfully George W. Bush gets it.

Ralph Bristol gets it too, and we can only hope that Graham's exposure to Bristol's wisdom helps him to grow and do his duty to present a united front to the enemy and stop calling dishonorable democrat senators his honorable friends.

Gamecock also writes for www.race42008.com.

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronald Reagan