Ace of Spades HQ

« Okay... Idea | Main | Memorializing The Murderers Of Flight 93 »

December 01, 2005

The Politics Of Victory

Reading the New York Times' unhinged reaction to Bush's speech reminded me once again that there are many "Americans" who would rather see Al Qaeda win than a Republican President.

I'll just keep quoting Gary Kamiya, writing in Salon after the Fall of Baghdad:

I have a confession: I have at times, as the war has unfolded, secretly wished for things to go wrong. Wished for the Iraqis to be more nationalistic, to resist longer. Wished for the Arab world to rise up in rage. Wished for all the things we feared would happen. I'm not alone: A number of serious, intelligent, morally sensitive people who oppose the war have told me they have had identical feelings.

Seems like he got his wish. Is he happier now?

Some of this is merely the result of pettiness--ignoble resentment, partisan hackdom, the desire to be proved right and to prove the likes of Rumsfeld wrong, irritation with the sanitizing, myth-making American media. That part of it I feel guilty about, and disavow. But some of it is something trickier: It's a kind of moral bet-hedging, based on a pessimism not easy to discount, in which one's head and one's heart are at odds.
Many antiwar commentators have argued that once the war started, even those who oppose it must now wish for the quickest, least-bloody victory followed by the maximum possible liberation of the Iraqi people. But there is one argument against this: What if you are convinced that an easy victory will ultimately result in a larger moral negative--four more years of Bush, for example, with attendant disastrous policies, or the betrayal of the Palestinians to eternal occupation, or more imperialist meddling in the Middle East or elsewhere?

Wishing for things to go wrong is the logical corollary of the postulate that the better things go for Bush, the worse they will go for America and the rest of the world.

The Democratic Party and the New York Times (and the whole of the MSM) have a vested political interest in American defeat. They want America to lose. If America loses, Bush loses. If America loses, the Republicans lose. If America loses, the media and the Democratic Party wins. The Democrats take Congress and perhaps the Presidency, the media regains (it thinks) its supposed old reputation as an objective truth teller and National Repository of Wisdom In All Matters.

It's quite true that Bush and the Republicans have a vested political interest in the outcome of this war, too. As has been said too many times to easily count, Bush's Presidency depends on victory. If he wins in Iraq, he will be a successful president; if he is defeated, he will be a debacle.

While there's a selfish interest there, it can't help be noticed that Bush's selfish interest happens to coincide with the national interest. Whereas the Democrats' selfish interest is directly contrary to it.

I simply cannot trust a party or media which has such a powerful interest in American defeat and humiliation. After Bush's speech, liberal media and the Democratic Party have, shockingly enough, joined forces to advance the argument that Bush is too "blinded" by unrealistic dreams of American victory to see the "realities" in Iraq.

Can the Democratic Party and mainstream media not examine themselves to see if they are similarly too blinded by unrealistic dreams of American defeat to objectively judge the situation?

Does Al Qaeda in Iraq engage in actual military actions against US troops?

Are successful attacks against US troops up or down?

Is there a strong possibility that Al Qaeda will gain in strength at this point?

Is there any real hope that Al Qaeda and the Ba'athist revanchists will actually reconquer the country, either with or without a strong American presence there?

On that last point, the answer is clearly "No." The "insurgency" is not a popular one in the sense that we are fighting the majority of the population, and imposing a government on the majority which they do not want. The insurgency is a minority of a minority -- a number of committed murderers who hope to bring back a small unpopular minority ethnic group into power against the wishes of the Shi'as and Kurds -- and has no realistic hope of ever attaining a military or political victory.

They can kill, but they can't capture power.

That doesn't mean, however, that we should abandon Iraq now, or that it is safe to do so. Al Qaeda can't actually win, but they can be defeated. And it's important to do so -- not only does this deny them a powerful psychological victory, it gives us a working, pluralistic, democratic Arab state friendly to our interests.

Does anyone in the Democratic Party or MSM actually think that if we withdraw from Iraq, all of those terrorists will go back to herding goats?

Of course not. They will have carved out safe haven in Sunni areas of Iraq and will have a base of operations to freely plan and execute further attacks against America.

The Democratic Party and MSM cannot be allowed to prevail. Ultimately, though they don't admit to themselves as Gary Kamiya did, they seek a victory for Al Qaeda, for they have, by their own conscious choice, aligned their interests with the terrorists'.

posted by Ace at 11:43 AM

Comments

"Can the Democratic Party and mainstream media not examine themselves to see if they are similarly too blinded by hopes of American defeat to objectively judge the situation?"

Surely you jest.

Posted by: Redhand on December 1, 2005 11:46 AM

Really, I thought it was a serious post until you threw in teh funnay at the end.

Posted by: Dave in Texas on December 1, 2005 11:58 AM

Go back and read the final line of that first quote:

A number of serious, intelligent, morally sensitive people who oppose the war have told me they have had identical feelings.

People who can write stuff like that and not mean it in a completely over-the-top, Paul Lynde-sarcastic kind of way... Well, let's just say self-examiniation isn't exactly their forte.

Posted by: utron on December 1, 2005 12:01 PM

Part of the MSM pro-Bush bias is evident as they are steadfastly refusing to fix the blame on him and his fat-cat corporate allies for creating an imaginary XBOX360 shortage.

Since Bush takes order from the Jews, and the Saudis, its obvious that Saudi money is blinding Bush apologists from mentioning the money Jew-friendly Microsoft is making from all the ebay sales of X360's. Sometimes at over 300% of retail. Bill Gates, a prominent Jew/Saudi American Prince (JSAP for short) is pulling off the greatest crime since the Jews used prohibition to tarnish the Italians image.

Its so obvious, yet noone talks about it!!!!

Oh, and we are about to lose the war in Iraq. Spin that, bitches.

Posted by: joeindc44 on December 1, 2005 12:06 PM

utron, another symptom of the disorder is found at the end of the article:

But after watching the president, we couldn't resist reading Richard Nixon's 1969 Vietnamization speech.

We tried with all our might not to read it. No luck.

Posted by: Dave in Texas on December 1, 2005 12:08 PM

A number of serious, intelligent, morally sensitive people who oppose the war have told me they have had identical feelings.

A number of serious, intelligent, morally sensitive people also believe in alien abduction, the theory of Atlantis, "Crystal Power", Dianetics, and many other figurative pant-loads. And I love that thing about feelings -- to so many on the Left, it's about how you feel. Their aching hearts will heal the wounds of the world!

Bunch of goddam whiny crybaby namby-pamby jello-heads. This is what drives me insane about the political situation: I'm deeply exercised about our so-called Republican Party, but what's my alternative? A whiny "everything is our fault" Democrat Party? Please.

Posted by: Monty on December 1, 2005 12:09 PM

For those of you who have read the Tao of Homer, there is one fella who laments the anti-intellectualism of Americans. Why, he moans, do US dunderheads not listen to their betters. Well, the answer to that question is "because you intellectuals aren't too smart." You can spot an intellectual as the person who holds the worst ideas.

And as everyone else is pointing out that "A number of serious, intelligent, morally sensitive people who" "secretly wished for things to go wrong ... for the Iraqis to be more nationalistic ... to resist longer...for the Arab world to rise up in rage ... [and] for all the things we feared would happen." Such a person is not serious. not moral. and not intelligent.

But since 70% of Americans know that the DNC is downplaying the war purely for political reasons, its not likely to work.

70%. lalalala. 70% nanahahanah 70%
!!!!!!!

Posted by: joeindc44 on December 1, 2005 12:16 PM

I read this in our local "alternative" paper over lunch yesterday:

http://www.austinchronicle.com/issues/dispatch/2005-11-25/cols_pagetwo.html

I want to drive to this guys house and hand him an award I made out of typing paper, glue, sparkles and macaroni that says "Best Policy Analysis Evar." Then take a dump in his yardand wipe my ass with his cat.

Posted by: tachyonshuggy on December 1, 2005 12:19 PM

the MSM and Left are our enemies too

Posted by: None Dare Call it Treason on December 1, 2005 12:45 PM

Ace, dunno if you care, but I had a similar posting today on this topic, making similar points.

As usual, you beat me by, like, 20 minutes. F'ing jerk.

Cheers,
Dave at Garfield Ridge

Posted by: Dave at Garfield Ridge on December 1, 2005 12:55 PM

Dave,

Your post is old.

Posted by: ace on December 1, 2005 01:03 PM

Excellent post. Thanks

Can we now please switch from msm to 'Big Media Quislings"?

Because that's what they are - they accept all of the benefits of living in the US, but they hate America so much that they don't care who the enemy is - they want the US to lose.

Posted by: max on December 1, 2005 01:49 PM

Excrable on the Imus Show this morning. Imus talking with The Donald says we should just apologize to Saddam and re-instate him as Iraq's president. The Donald laughs and agrees that we'll never win. He had a friend--who was there in Iraq!--who told him so!

If you get a chance to either read a transcript or listen to the audio, it will turn your stomach. Two morons.

Posted by: OregonGuy on December 1, 2005 01:51 PM

Let's get down to business:

Will Sleeper Cell be any good? Should I get showtime? Or will the "bad guys" be sponsored by enron?

Anyone have an xbox360 for sale?

Posted by: joeindc44 on December 1, 2005 01:56 PM

Imus. Ha.

The man's show is broadcast on MSNBC.

Enough said.

Posted by: Edward R. Murrow on December 1, 2005 02:01 PM

Read this, it's sort of related. It's one fellas theory on why lefties (and by implication some part of the MSM and the dems) are opposed to the war. http://www.claremont.org/writings/crb/fall2005/helprin.html

Posted by: rakmjn1 on December 1, 2005 03:07 PM

By Bart
12/01/05
WASHINGTON (al Reuters) - Hawkish Democrat, Jack Murtha, congressman for Pennsylvania, spoke to reporters today and said, "The troops in Iraq are worn out."

Murtha really did say that. The hawk is still calling for immediate (and safe) withdrawal (redeployment) from Iraq. Perhaps he doesn't remember voting to NO to immediate withdrawal less than two weeks ago.

Who's this guy "hawkish" for, exactly? I am flabbergasted that one of our elected officials would publicly talk-down our military in the middle of a war and nobody is saying anything about it.

Either Murtha is an old foolish liberal who thinks the military is a jobs program and genuinely cares for them (in a retarded way), or he's part of the DNC's subterfuge campaign for the Republican defeat on the WOT.

Posted by: Bart on December 1, 2005 03:45 PM

The News York Pravda jst prints the usial sewage it always prints

Posted by: spurwing plover on December 1, 2005 04:40 PM

Drudge is finally headlining the Murtha quotes I posted on 7 hours ago.

Murtha's telling the whole world, including our enemies and our soldiers, that we are worn out and broken militarily.

But don't question his patriotism.

I question his mental competence.

Posted by: Bart on December 1, 2005 10:38 PM

"The Democratic Party and MSM cannot be allowed to prevail. Ultimately, though they don't admit to themselves ..., they seek a victory for Al Qaeda, for they have, by their own conscious choice, aligned their interests with the terrorists."

If you are not with me, you are with my enemies, but don't question my patriotism. How can some people be so blind? Hatred will do that for you and it seems the leftist hatred for Bush knows no bounds.

Posted by: docdave on December 2, 2005 12:08 PM

This is the same old saw the Democrat party played throughout the later stages of the cold war! --
which they also insisted was "unwinable." They said that Ronald Reagan was naive; that his world view (specifically that America stood for freedom, while totalitarian communism constituted an "evil empire") was outdated and simplistic. Democrats claimed that the very best the world could ever hope for was a permanent stalemate; that it was only through detante and the endless counting of warheads (if not outright unilateral american disarmament) would we be safe.

And yet, all it took to topple the Soviet empire was the re-election of a conservative Republican president--who called things by their real names--and "stayed the course."

Posted by: Shawn on December 6, 2005 10:57 PM

Amazon.com Widgets

Now Available!
The Deplorable Gourmet
A Horde-sourced Cookbook
[All profits go to charity]

Top Headlines

Funniest thing I've read about the Virginia mess. Back when they were hustling the referendum through the assembly both Senators, Warner and Kaine, advised them to go slow and play by the rules. Louise Lucas said she respected them but didn't need advice from the "cuck chair" in the corner. The gerrymandering was overturned and Louise is heading for the big house. Edward G. Robinson voice "where's your cuck now?"
Posted by: Smell the Glove

I posted his post on twitter and it's gotten 25K views so far. Thanks, Smell the Glove

Chris
@chriswithans

"Ahhhhh ahh I put my career on the line for Louise Lucas and Jay Jones thinking they'd vault me into presidential contention and we ended up costing Democrats 20 House seats and unleashing a Reverse Dobbs ahhhhh ahhh"

Forgotten 80s Mystery Click That Sums Up the Democrat Communist Party Today
Something is wrong as I hold you near
Somebody else holds your heart, yeah
You turn to me with your icy tears
And then it's raining, feels like it's raining

TJM wonders about world building in stories, mostly The Hunger Games

"It's f**king f**ked."
-- reportedly a genuine comment offered by a "senior Labour source"
Correction: I wrote that Labour is losing 88% (now 87%) of the seats it is "defending." I think that's wrong. The right way to say it is the seats they are contesting -- that is, they don't necessarily already hold these seats, but they have put up a candidate to run for the seat. It's still very bad but not as bad as losing 87% of the seats they already held.

Basil the Great
@BasilTheGreat

🚨ED MILIBAND [a Minister in Starmer's government] SAYS KEIR STARMER WILL RESIGN AS PRIME MINISTER

He has reportedly reassured Labour MP's that Starmer will be resigning following the disastrous results tonight

It's over

"The end of the two party system in the UK" as first the Fake Conservatives and now Labour chooses political suicide rather than simply STOPPING THE INVASION
Incidentally, the only reason this didn't already happen in the US is because of the Very Bad Orange Man (who is right on 85% of all policy calls and extremely, existentially right on 15% of them)

No political party that is NOT also a doomsday religious cult would EVER choose a cataclysmic loss -- and possible extinction as a party -- to support a toxically unpopular favoritism of NON-CITIZEN ILLEGAL MIGRANTS over actual citizen voters.

Only a cult does this.

Now they've lost 84%.

Annunziata Rees-Mogg
@zatzi
If this continues Labour loses 2,148 seats tonight.

That is much worse than the worst case predictions I’ve seen.

Cataclysmic

Update: They've now lost 88% of the seats they're defending. As I mentioned earlier, I think I heard that London will not bail them out, as many of those Labour seats will probably flip to "Muslim Independent" or Green. Detroit's 5am vote will not save them.

Yup, Labour is losing 80% of its seats...

The British Patriot
@TheBritLad

🚨 BREAKING: Labour have lost 80% of all seats contested as of 2:25 AM.<
br> If this continues, Keir Starmer will be out of office next week.

Reform has surged and projected to pick up between 1700-2100 seats.

Wow, up to 1700-2100 seats. It's not incredible that this is happening. It's incredible that the Davos crowd is so absolutely determined to privilege Muslim "migrants" over the actual native population who elects them, no matter how loudly the natives scream that they want to be prioritized, that they will gladly self-extinguish as a party rather than simply representing the interests of their own voters. Astonishing.
Remember, when they call other people "cultists" -- they are the ones so imprisoned in their social reinforcement and discipline bubbles that they will choose political death rather than dare upset the Karen Enforcement Officers of their cult.
Update: Now they've lost 83% of the seats they were defending.

(((Dan Hodges)))
@DPJHodges

Reform are basically wiping Labour out in the North. It's not a defeat. It's not even a rout. Labour are simply ceasing to exist.

Nick Lowles
@lowles_nick

Tonight’s results are calamitous for Labour. Not just for Keir Starmer's leadership, but for the very future of the party

STARMERGEDDON: In early returns, Reform gains 135 seats, Labour loses 90, the Fake Conservatives lose 36 (and I didn't even know they could fall any further), the Lib Dems lose 4, and the Greens gain 6. Note that the only other party gaining seats is the Greens and they're only gaining a handful of seats.
Update: Reform now up 145, Labour down 98.
Labour projected to lose Wales -- where they've ruled for 27 years.
Fulton County Georgia just discovered 400 boxes of ballots for Labour
Update: REF +156, LAB -107, CON -45
Brutal: In four out of five council seats where Labour is defending, they've lost. 80%.
I'm sure it's not this simple, but Reform is straight taking Labour's and the "Conservatives'" seats. They've lost almost exactly what Reform gained. If understand this right (and warning, I probably don't), all of London's council seats are up for election, and Labour might lose hugely there, as their old voters abandon them for Reform, Muslim Indenpendents, and the Greens.
REF +190, LAB -134, CON -56.

Updates on the Labour collapse in council elections -- which wags are calling #Starmergeddon -- from Beege Welborne. There are about 5000 seats up for grabs, Labour is expected to lose 1,800, Reform will probably gain 1,580, up from... zero. So this would be more than that.
People claim that while Labour has adopted the Sharia Agenda to appeal to the million Muslims it allowed to migrate to the country, those voters are ditching Labour to vote for the Muslim Independent Party or the Greens. Delicious. This shadenfreude is going straight to my thighs.
Oh, and if Starmer loses about as badly as expected, Labour will toss him out of a window Braveheart style and replace him. He will announce he is resigning to spend more time with his Gay Ukrainian Male Prostitutes.

Media bias and senationalism are as old as, well, the media:

That was written by Denny O'Neill and illustrated by, get this, Frank Miller. Editor to the Stars Jim Shooter was in charge at the time.
I always thought the gag was original to the comic book, but in fact the "Threat or Menace" headline was a satirical joke about media bias and sensationalism for a long while. The Harvard Lampoon used it in a parody of Life magazine: "Flying Saucers: Threat or Menace?"

Hamas is Humiliating Trump's 'Board of Peace'
[Hat Tip: TC] [CBD]

Tucker Carlson is pretty sure Trump is a wizard

Ted Turner Dies At 87 [CBD]

Podcast: Starting a new season, CBD and Sefton discuss their personal journeys to conservative principles, is Nick Shirley the beginning of a trend?, Iran trying to reignite the war, the Left attacks itself, even on "Best Guitarist" lists, and more!

TJM definitively ranks the films of Billy Wilder, like Some Like It Hot

TJM talks about Billy Wilder