Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Victor Davis Hanson :: Townhall.com Columnist
When Good News is No News
by Victor Davis Hanson
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


There’s an old expression about war: “Victory has many fathers, while defeat is an orphan.” But in the case of Iraq, it seems the other way around. We’ve blamed many for the ordeal of the last four years, but it is the American victory in Anbar province that now seems without parents.

Over the last few months, the U.S. military forced Sunni insurgents in Anbar to quit fighting. This enemy, in the heart of the so-called Sunni Triangle, had been responsible for most American casualties in the war and was the main cause of unrest in Iraq. Even more unexpectedly, some of the defeated tribes then joined in an alliance of convenience with their American victors to chase al-Qaida from Iraq’s major cities.

As President Bush recently told U.S. troops about Anbar province: “It was once written off as lost. It is now one of the safest places in Iraq.”

But that dramatic turnabout in Iraq is rarely reported on. We know as much about O.J.’s escapades in Vegas as we do about the Anbar awakening or the flight of al-Qaida from Baghdad. When we occasionally do hear about Iraq, it is just as likely through a Hollywood movie — “In the Valley of Elah,” “Redacted,” “Lions for Lambs” — preaching to us how the U.S. was mostly incompetent or amoral in fighting a hopeless war.

The Abu Ghraib prison scandal of 2004 warranted 32 consecutive days on The New York Times’ front page. Congressional appeals for timetables and scheduled withdrawals, amid cries of “fiasco” and “quagmire,” were regularly reported this summer. Now, though, there is largely silence in newspaper headlines about the growing peace in Anbar province.

Why this abrupt amnesia about Iraq, given a radical drop in American casualties and entire cities now largely free from serial violence?

Many anti-war critics are so invested in the notion of the Iraq war as the “worst” something or other in U.S. history that they cannot accept the radical turnaround after over four years of war.

Other opponents have simply changed their argument from “Iraq is lost” to “Even if we do win, it will not have been worth the cost.” Either way, good news from the front seems to translate into no news.

Even some supporters of the war are leery and hesitant to tout American success. Maybe they remember past optimism over successful elections and the euphoria over the purple fingers — all occurring prior to the Shiite/Sunni sectarian bloodletting of 2006.

New uncertainties elsewhere also overshadow Iraq — the falling dollar, martial law in Pakistan, skyrocketing oil prices, and fear of a soon-to-be nuclear Iran. Amid all that chaos, Iraq may no longer be our chief worry.

The military — unlike the Bush administration — is strangely silent about its recent successes. The caution is not just due to uncertainty over whether the Sunni Triangle will stay won for good.

Instead, the September testimony of Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, and the reaction to it — whether the “General Betray Us” Moveon.org ad or Sen. Hillary Clinton’s jab that to believe the general’s testimony required a “willing suspension of disbelief” — reminded officers how Iraq will loom large in election-cycle domestic politics. Getting drawn into such politicking is something responsible military leaders try to avoid.

Nevertheless, we may be witnessing one of those radical, unforeseen reversals in America’s wars that have often changed our history.

The White House was burned by British forces in late August 1814; a little more than four months later, the British were routed at New Orleans. During the Civil War, the Union army was on the ropes in July 1864 yet outside Atlanta by September. The Germans were driving through France in March 1918, but fleeing toward the Rhine by August. The communists took Seoul in early January 1951, yet were pushed back across the Demilitarized Zone a little more than three months later.

Of course, we don’t know the final outcome in Iraq, given the remaining problems of Shiite militias and diehard al-Qaidists — and the question of our own remaining resolve.

The U.S. Army and Marine Corps may well soon stabilize the Iraqi democracy once deemed lost. Or perhaps, in the manner of Vietnam between 1973-5, the public may have become so tired of Iraq — despite the improvement — that it simply wants it out of sight and out of mind.

Either way, history is now being made while we sleep.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Victor Davis Hanson is a classicist and historian at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and a recipient of the 2007 National Humanities Medal.

Be the first to read Victor Davis Hanson's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

splitting hairs.
Who gives a damn about wether they like us or not. Long as we can work in unison to get the job done so we can go our separate ways.
I do like your thinking on Iran. I am convinced Iran will happen sooner or later.

DUMMY
I like how now the DEMS are screaming about IRAN but for how long? We already know that the DEM LED PARTY is for RETREAT and Surrender in IRAQ so how long would we be in a WAR with IRAN until the LIBS start screaming to bring our boys home.
I think when DEMS start talking about WAR that it is only as a POLITICAL STUNT to make people think they care. HOGWASH, So as a LIBTURD would state leave the WAR situations to the WARPUBLICANS.

perversion in Wash
Minorities
We need to show more sympathy for these people.
They travel miles in the heat.
They risk their lives crossing a border.
They don't get paid enough wages.
They do jobs that others won't do or are afraid to do.
They live in crowed conditions among a people who speak a different language.
They rarely see their families, and they face adversity all day every day.
I'm not talking about illegal Mexicans; I'm talking about our troops!
Doesn't it seem strange that many members of Congress are willing to lavish all kinds of social benefits on illegal's, but don't support our troops?

Please pass this on; this is worth the short time it takes to read it.

Good news
A couple months ago, Moqtada Al-Sadr instructed the Mahdi Army to lay down their arms and cease killing Americans and Iraqi security forces.

I've yet to see any conservative pundit or military spokesman talk up this good news, even though it has dramatically affected the drop in US casualties and violence in general.

Why is that?

Apollo
What better position to neutralize Iran than a presence in an allied Iraq?

Rabid Dogg
Oh, so you're one of those who think there were no Islamists until the nasty old U.S. went stomping on their territory?

You must be ignorant of the history of the Barbery Wars, where they claimed to fight us "because the Quran tells us to".

Bin Laden claimed he was only pissed at us because of our bases in Saudi. Guess what? The bases are now gone. Has Bin Laden even said "thank you"?

And what exactly have the Bangladeshi done to deserve their attacks? Or the citizens of India, the Sudan, Algeria, the Philippines, Nigeria, Thailand, Kenya, Tunisia, Kosovo, or Somalia, to name a few?

You, sir, are beyond ignorant; you are willfully so.

George Bush, Sr. called it.
The first gulf war was a short one. The Republicans at that time understood that the anti-war left would not support a sustained war and so they didn't fight one. I believe the expression "opening the gates of hell" were Bush Sr.'s words.

Which is exactly what happened.

Since Vietnam the liberals have been strongly anti-war. As Donald Rumsfield once quipped, "You don't go to war with the country you wish you had, but the country you have."

You can wish that they anti-war crowd in America would just go away, but wishes won't buy you a cup of coffee.

Any war plan that did not factor in the propaganda was a stupid war plan.

The left has been ant-war for over 30 years. This development is no surprise to anyone. The only surprise would've been if the doves had become hawks.

No Republican has yet taken on the task of explaining why the advice of the first Bush president was ignored with respect to war in the Middle East.

This is why think tanks and their paid cronies are worthless. They get paid to say something and they say. Victor knows d**n well the left has been ant-war for 30 years and even a six-year-old could've predicted the lefts behavior on this.


Allah or Jesus
To Islamic Terrorists:
“Would you rather have an Allah who says to kill me (Infidel) to go to heaven or a Jesus who says for me to love you because I am going to heaven and He would like you to be with me.”

Please go to http://www.MissionGateMinistry.org under “Allah or Jesus” for the unedited article and follow-up articles “A Simmering Volcano” and “Letter to Iraqi Patriots.”

Press on!
Rick Mathes
MissionGateMinistry@msn.com

That powerful US of A
We're so powerful, we can create terrorists out of thin air by conducting a war 5, 10, 15, 20, even 30 years in the future.

Dogg displays his deep faith in this astonishing, mystical power when he writes: "tee hee - you think they were "terrorists" BEFORE the war?"

Of course they weren't, Dogg. The Hamas, Hezbollah, and Islamic Jihadi guerillas through the 70s and 80s, the anti-US Iranian students and Mullahs in the 1970s, the WTC bombers in 1993, the Lebanon Barracks bombers in the 1980s, the Khumar Tower and Kenya/Tanzania Embassy bombers in the mid-90s, the WTC bombers in 1993, the Cole bombers in 2000, the WTC bombers in 2001, the active terror cells all over the US -- they all happened because the Islamists PROPHESIED the invasion of Iraq decades before it happened, and took up arms to vanquish the brainless, Bush-misled invaders when the prophecies actually came to pass.

I'm so impressed with the prophetic power of Islam that I'm going to find myself a Quran and a turban, and consider Islam myself.

Of course, it's just possible that Islamic radicalism existed on its own long before the Iraq war... NAAAAAH, what am I thinking? OF COURSE Bush created the terrorists in 2003.

Friggin' IDIOT.

Bush & Powell
In The first war,it was Colin Powell that told Bush to stop.In the second it was Powell that told Bush to go for it.Was this a cover up for his first mistake.Just wondering.

The Problem for Repubs/cons...
Is convincing the american public, that no news from Iraq is good news. As it stands now the vast majority of americans, in poll after poll,
disapprove of Prez Bush and his handling of the
Iraq War, or for that matter if the war itself was worthwile. They want the U.S. to get out of Iraq, turning the responsibility for security and fighting the insurgency to the Iraqi military and police force, who it seems the repubs/cons have zero confidence in their ability
to defend themselves.

Republican prez candidates who take the position of "staying the course until victory is won in Iraq" (whatever that means)do so at their own peril and practically guarantee that dems will
have control of the White House and the Congress.
Then you will see a dramatic change of direction and drawdown of U.S. troops in Iraq, which is exactly what the vast majority of the U.S. public wants in this situation.

But They Support The Troops!
The libs support the troops-- the Al Qaeda Troops. Do you expect them to be happy that their smug predictions of defeat and disaster have turned to ashes in their always open mouths? Soon they'll be talking about how 'we' won in Iraq in the same way that speak of how 'we' won the Cold War and labeling the defeated IslamoNazis 'conservatives' just as they did with the discredited communists after the Berlin Wall fell. Without defeating the libs we can never defeat the terrorists.

testing
testing

What are we winning?
The current Shiite-dominated government in Iraq is Iran-friendly and Sharia law endorsing.

The only real friends we have in Iraq are the Kurds, and they don't even want to be part of Iraq, never did. In addition, we have to kowtow to Turkey, who threaten(terrorize) not only their own Kurdish population, but Iraqi Kurds as well.
We blew our chance to "win" in Iraq during in 2004-2005.
Now our best hope is three distinct regions(actually 4 counting Baghdad) where the citizens have self-determiation based on ethnic, cultural and religious elements. One of these will be intrinsically linked to Iran regarless of our actions.

SO WHAT'S NEW?
Leftists in the media have been badmouthing America with lies and hatred for decades.

Move on, people. There's nothing to see here.
Same old bile from liberals.

"I despise Republicans and everything they stand for." - Howard Dean, DNC Chairman.

"The extra chromosome right wing." - Vice President Al Gore

"You effing Jew *******." - Hillary "Smartest Woman In The World" Clinton

Dems. are over-invested in Iraq's loss
When the troops start coming home next year, and--heaven provide--Iraq starts functioning as a recognizible democracy, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid will look sillier than ever standing on the Capitol steps with their white flags up their rear orifices.

But--wait--they have predicitons of ec. doom and gloom to seize upon. What glorious people.

For those who haven't heard, the subprime banking debacle is directly related to Dem. laws that impel banks to make loans to bad risks with terrible credit histories. This upside-down purpose is to show banks serve the "poor" and don't discriminate.

That bad risks with poor credit backgrounds are not able to carry mortgages should hardly be a big surprise. But in DC, the libs. are never responsible for the atrocities they commit.

sharia law and iran
it is gratifying that violence is down and americans are not dying at the same rate they were two months ago but.....

al-sadr (who is in iran again), alsistani and hakim control the country. not us and certainly not al-maliki.

it is the clerics with ties to iran who have the power.

if the goal is a stable ally, we have not won.
most of the cities in the south are now under sharia law not democratic rule of law.

as we lessen our footprint the clerics will exert more and more influence and we will have a another iran or pakistan on our hands.


Military Scum Doggg
I like how you always defend the terrorist because we know you hate Bush. So my question is to you personnally. How many of your family are in IRAQ fighting for your freedoms to spew American Hatred toward our troops. I have 7 family members in Iraq and none of them I repeat myself none of them are whining about their mission as much as your whining ARSE is about what they are doing. Remember SURRENDER AND RETREAT the DUMBOCRAP MOTTO. Your party ought to be ashame to state that you support the troops. You know what i say about the DEMS supporting the troops. WHEN WHERE AND HOW? Beacuase you wouldnt believe it by your scumbag remarks all the time you are on this internet spewing your hatred for this COUNTRY.

The Anti-War Left is
Nothing more than Drug-Addled, Draft Dodging, Leftover Hippie, Cowards reliving their So-Called ‘GLORY DAYS’. Now their Queen/King will be The DNC Nominee. Hopefully the YEARS of Drug Abuse will be The Yucatan Impact that kills of these Pathetic Dinosaurs.

Military SCUMDOGG
How the hell would you know what IRAQ is going to become. You have your head so far up the DAILY COS and MOVE ON.ORG you couldnt see into the future. The only thing you see is AMERCA hatred. Thats why I will now and always call you SCUMDOGG.,

chuck and all of wisdom
__The negative comments we read on this thread, along with past MSM propaganda, speaks of their twisted embrace. Much, the same way, their non-comment on positive news, speaks of their wanting desires. They are nothing without turbulance, or turmoil, has this is what their lives are. They need to cry, and whine, has they play on the passions of our society. We all stand, arm, in arm, with a clear vision of the cause, while they, being of the cause, hide their connection with load cries, and with silence. Switch hitters that embrace the moment of turmoil when beneficial to them, and silence when the benefit of turmoil is not present. At that time, they are pressed to create turmoil, that benefits them. We now hear their deafening silence of the surge progress, while we loudly hear them try and recoup dollars spent on the war, for their factions who are dependent on them. It's all about our money for the left, and their spinning in turmoil trying to recoup their losses.

New York Coward
President Bush joined The National Guard and was honorably discharged. Rumsfeld & Cheney had student deferments as did MILLIONS of others. President Bush is not the first guy to have drinking problem. She Man Clinton is such a coward that he ran to another country. You and He have a lot in common.

More Of The Same
Even if there is good news it is spun by our fabulous MSM so as to be as gloomy as possible.

As I write this I am looking at a November 7, 2007 AP headline that reads "2007 BLOODIEST YEAR FOR US TROOPS IN IRAQ". The sub-headline reads: "Despite Recent Decline, Deaths Reach 853". The story goes on to note six new deaths and how the death toll is more than the previous worst year's death tolls. The sharp reduction in bombings and deaths is treated as window dressing and de-emphasized.

This will not change. If Al Q announced their surrender and that they were on their way en masse by boat to turn themselves in at Gitmo, the stories would push how Al Q was merely a small part of the problem: "Despite Surrender, Problems Remain, Bush Denies Ongoing Quagmire".

While we rejoice at the good news and hope for more, it is prudent to remember that there will be ongoing ups and downs. The "Mission Accomplished" banner and the happiness over the purple fingers waved in the air at the election were important milestones to be sure. However, the difficulties to come afterwards made the Dems' pooh-poohing of any and all positive news seem sober and prescient, and made our good feelings seem childishly hubristic by comparison.

Recognizing this is a long, hard, crooked road we're traveling, I've tried to avoid getting too elated over positive developments and too depressed when the going was worst.


Good to hear
Let the good news ring out throughout the land: Anbar province is now one of the safest places in Iraq. This must mean we will now be able to fly commercial into Baghdad airport and start building malls in Anbar for the Bush twins to visit. We will be able to start bringing our troops home in time for Christmas, and all will be well in the land of milk and honey. You know if an NFL team goes 0-15 but wins their last game, that doesn't make the season a success. If you spend a trillion and 1/2 dollars and now can't afford health coverage for children, that is not success. If thousands of our troops are returning home with major stress disorder's that is not success. The right wing is alway's complaining about liberal's "cherry picking" examples to prove their point. Geez, I wonder what the right wing is doing now?

Bobzmcishi
We dont have a problem with Medical Aide for children we just forgot that you LIBS consider yourselves children at the age of 25. I think we already have a program for middle aged LIBS and it is MEDICADE You Libs always invent programs off the back of the tax payer that is a failure just like the Social Secrity Program. which by the way was not intended to be a retirement plan for the elderly PER FDR. The problem with the soldiers I see coming home is that they cannot believe that a COUNTRY (DEMS and REPS) that sent them to WAR want them to surrender and retreat(DEMS) with their heads hung low. Wow that must be a proud PATRIAT that would want that to happen. I have 7 family members in this WAR and I know what they feel and it isnt PATRIATIC like your DEM PARTY and HARRY REID with WE HAVE LOST THE WAR. Now thats my hero. NOT

VoteVets.org Ad on Rush Limbaugh

Everyone in the US
can freely enter an emergency room and be treated for free by the charity laws that govern hospitals.

Universal coverage will mean gov't dictatorship of when you can be treated, how, and by what if any medications. It will also mean the finally the gov't not only has all of your financial records but the it has now also acquired your entire private medical history. Where are the libs. defending privacy here?

Medicare already skews the entire field of medicine by rationing what it will and will not pay for. No medical system is ever going to cover and pay for everything.

Soc. Sec. and Medicare are already bankrupted, and the boomers are just entering the system. So what are you going to pay universal health care with?

And don't give me that s**t about covering the children, because they are already covered by charity care, and I pay for it through my private ins. whenever I pay for any medical visit or procedute--in the very same way uninsured motorists are paid for by insured motorists.

UH OH
heney won't like this:

BAGHDAD - Iran seems to be honoring a commitment to stem the flow of deadly weapons into Iraq, contributing to a more than 50 percent drop in the number of roadside bombs that kill and maim American troops, a U.S. general said Thursday.

The comments by Maj. Gen. James Simmons marked rare U.S. praise for Iranian cooperation in efforts to stabilize Iraq. Washington has repeatedly accused the Islamic Republic of aiding Shiite militias and trying to foil U.S. goals in Iraq and the region.

But it remains unclear why Iran may have decided to choke off the suspected weapons pipeline. One possibility is that Iran — the most populous Shiite nation — is seeking to shore up the struggling government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, a Shiite, in the belief it will help Tehran's long-term interests.


Stick and Move?
For those who are of the opinion that “victory” signals the start of a hasty retreat, I call your attention to history. What would the outcome have been if we had adopted the attitude of cut and run immediately after World War II?

Would Germany have become just another state of the USSR? Would Japan be one of the world's most successful economies? Would Israel exist as a state or at all? There are too many more examples to list here.

And what if we hadn’t maintained a presence in Korea? How long would it have taken for someone of Kim Ill’s character to have marched south? Do you think Kim Ill is a threat to world peace now? Imagine this nut-job with all the resources of the south at his disposal!

My point is war is not a stick and move proposition. How long should we maintain a presence in Iraq? As long as it takes to reasonably stabilize Iraq. The cost of doing business now is a drop in a bucket compared to the likely outcome an early withdrawal would thrust upon us!

The stability of the entire Middle East relies on the outcome in Iraq. Imagine Iraq engaged in an all out civil war followed by Iran taking advantage of the opportunity to march on Baghdad! The terrorist attacks on America thus far would seem minuscule in comparison to what would be unleashed should the entire region become terrorist friendly! Not to mention, by necessaity, we would become engaged in an even larger conflict!

And for those who rely on the stable flow of oil from the Middle East to ensure your livelihood (who doesn’t?), are you in a hurry to give-up your job, home, car…? Perhaps in the future we will become energy self-reliant; however, I don’t see it happening in the near future!

So for all you anti-military (America) scum-bags; be thankful most of your forefathers did not adopt your attitudes. If they had, we would surely be wearing swastikas today or worse! How much anti-patriotic puke would you be allowed to regurgitate under a fascist state?

http://klintons.com
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.