"You Read it Here First: We Won the War"

Well, it's surely not the first time most people have read this, but it's a welcome example of the news of the American (near) victory in Iraq finally making it into the n news.

Somebody has to write this. The United States has won the war in Iraq.

I'm compelled to proclaim victory because, these days, winning wars has become politically incorrect in Western societies. So much so that some political leaders opposed to the war refuse to recognize the definition of victory or to utter the word.

More than five years after the invasion, I still come across people who say they don't know what victory in Iraq means. That's on purpose. Feigning ignorance allows them to deny the obvious political and military progress that has been made and continues to be made each day.

The truth is, President Bush has been consistent in defining victory. Bottom line, it's leaving behind a functional and democratic Iraq capable of defending itself from internal and external threats. Iraq is on an irreversible path to meeting those goals. Even Bush has raised the specter of "time horizons" for troop withdrawal. Previously, the president eschewed timelines, maintaining that troop reduction would be dictated by conditions on the ground. Security has improved so much in the past 18 months that Bush is not only open to troop withdrawals, American forces in Iraq could actually dip below 100,000 by the end of this year, down from approximately 140,000 today.

The reason for victory is simple -- the 30,000-troop surge that began in early 2007 and concluded less than a month ago has worked.

I have to wonder what the average, non-news-junkie American thinks of the media. Surely they must be noticing that currently the media is not only embargoing a newsworthy story about a onetime Democratic Presidential and Vice Presidential candidate having a love child and arranging a massive, donor-funded cover-up of that, but the media is all but embargoing the fact that we have either largely won or almost entirely won the War in Iraq.

Is the media also embargoing news of the (near) victory in Iraq only in order to protect Elizabeth Edwards, too? After all, she is a very partisan, very liberal, and very anti-war woman; perhaps the media just doesn't wish to discomfort her with further bad news about American victories.

And does the average American appreciate having MSM Censors decide what he should and shouldn't know about major political figures and major wars? Does he appreciate that "gatekeeper" service the media is providing to him, or is he beginning to find it creepy and sorta fascist?

posted by Ace at 05:06 PM

| Access Comments