August 01, 2006
Avoiding defeat in Iraq is now a bad thing according to democrats
You have to chuckle at Democratic efforts to find just the right words to make cut and run sound noble. Sadly, they are not satisfied with just looking for a tough sounding synonym for surrender; they are also testing out negative phrases for trying to achieve victory. After all, if you can't make failure look good you must try to make success appear as a failure. We see it every day as the rich are labeled greedy and the poor are somehow the victims of the rich. So now we get this.
"Instead, we learned of your plans to redeploy an additional 5,000 U.S. troops into an urban war zone in Baghdad. Far from implementing a comprehensive 'Strategy for Victory,' as you promised months ago, your administration's strategy appears to be one of trying to avoid defeat."Lets suppose for a moment the war on terror is unwinable in the short term because of the need for generational change in attitudes among Muslims about the slaughter of innocents, a concept that seems perfectly acceptable according to Islamic law as taught by many Muslims today. Why is it a bad thing to "avoid defeat" as opposed to "accept defeat" which the democrats obviously seem to embrace. As I understand it war is all about avoiding defeat until you can achieve victory. Am I missing something?
Posted by Sid at August 1, 2006 12:36 PM | Middle East
