The Enemy Won't Defeat Us But Despair Will

"When I come to Washington, I feel despair," he said. "When I'm in Iraq with my commanders, when I talk to my soldiers and Iraqi leadership, they are not despairing."

Those were the words spoken by General John Abizaid during testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee this week.

Those are sobering words which all of us should remember as we look into our mirrors.

If the commanders, the soldiers and the Iraqi leadership are not despairing, who are we to give in to despair and defeat? Remember three years ago, before the invasion, the forecasts of KIA in the tens of thousands? Realistically, with just over three thousand dead and three years later, we should be gratefully thanking the Almighty. But with so little faith and confidence in ourselves we swallow the poison presented nightly by a MSM which refused to wear American flag lapel pins and derided those competitors who dared to display "old glory" during the nightly news casts in those uncertain hours before Baghdad fell. After a steady diet of defeat and failure from the opposition party and it's propaganda arm, its no wonder that we despair. Perhaps too, our institutions have forgotten the importance of maintaining public morale when America's finest are dying on foreign soil. Granted, baby boomers were taught that propaganda is bad, but during WWII and throughout the cold war, the US government actively and vigorously engaged in morale boosting campaigns. Admittedly, that is harder to do in a satellite and cable era when the viewer choices are not limited to three broadcast networks but there is good news to be heard and seen.

Unfortunately, in a disinformation era, many of us are left not knowing what to believe.

But, to despair, is to admit defeat at the hands of nothing more than an Islamist rabble who must resort to an "irregular warfare" in order to break the will of both the Iraqi and American publics. Here is some good news about how the military is learning and adapting in Iraq.

Yes, we are caught between Iraq and a hard place as Abizaid acknowledged;

He confirmed reports that police in Anbar province -- where 40 U.S. troops were killed last month --have not been paid for three months.

"People in Sunni areas are not being paid in order to advance the sectarian agenda," he said.

But the two key centers in the province, Ramadi and Falluja, are in good shape, he said.

Despite such issues, the addition of more American forces would simply impede Iraqis from taking responsibility for their own future, Abizaid said.

Asked again whether more troops are needed, the general responded, "We do need more troops and the more troops we need are Iraqis."

And yes, we can argue the point with "the Man" who must surely know better than any civilians.

McCain asked whether the general really believes U.S. troop strength is sufficient to accomplish his aims.

The general acknowledged the military could send 20,000 more troops to help stabilize Baghdad, but said he is not prepared to recommend such a commitment.

Such a move would achieve only "a temporary effect," he said, and further strain an already stretched military.

"The ability to sustain that commitment is simply not something that we have right now, with the size of the Army and the Marine Corps," he said.

Abizaid also responded to questions from McCain and Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson of Florida about the situation in Anbar province, considered one of the most dangerous parts of Iraq and an area where al Qaeda in Iraq is active.

"Al-Anbar province is not under control," Abizaid told McCain.

"Al-Anbar province is critical, but more critical than al-Anbar province is Baghdad. Baghdad's the main military effort," Abizaid told Nelson. "That's where our military resources will go."

"There will be some hard things on the horizon," Abizaid told the senators. "We'll have to do something in al-Anbar province. We'll have to commit forces to deal with the Mehdi Army.

"Each of those things will be battles in and of themselves that we can win if we set the right political and military conditions. And I sincerely believe we can do that."

John McCain is convinced that more troops are needed and given the admission that we have four to six months before we lose control, maybe this
argument by Frederick W. Kagan and William Kristol for a heavier footprint will carry the day. Maybe Abizaid is simply unwilling to make that call. Maybe that is a decision that must be made by the Nation.

---

There is little time left for a debate. Now is the time for decisions and if there is a silver lining in the result of the off-year Congressional elections, it may be that the Democratic party will be forced to decide whether they wish history to record them as the "cut and run" party or as an integral factor in the defeat of a virulent and worldwide threat to the freedom of mankind. Almost from the beginning of Operation Iraqi Freedom, the minority party embittered by BDS and aided by the MSM has opposed the war and all things "Republican." George Bush's exhortations to stay the course have long been ridiculed for political gain but now that the Democrats have secured both houses of Congress, politics must be put aside as the mission is debated on it's merits by men and women acting in the best interests of the country. Its doubtful that the American public will tolerate partisan politics as the deciding factor in the decision to stay or leave Iraq and Afghanistan. The hard core of the "cut and run" crowd will remain committed to that policy but, with a slim majority in both Houses, it will be the measured and rational men and women of Congress who will decide whether we will "stay the course" or withdraw in ignominy. In either case, the decision will be made by a Congress which will be held to account for the consequences of their decision.

---

This was Frederick Kagan's May 29th Plan for Victory in Iraq

Here is a very interesting development in an Islamist stronghold.