Two War on Terrorism Must-Reads The predictable response, and one that I've received, from the anti-war, anti-Bush crowd to statements from Democrat congressman from Georgia Jim Marshall that things in Iraq aren't as bad as they are being made to seem is to point to Marshall's Vietnam comparison. Well, in an interview with Brit Hume, Marshall modifies that somewhat, limiting the comparison simply to the similarity that they are both guerrilla-type wars that domestic public opinion can affect. I don't imagine that this applies to many people who read this blog regularly, but if you are among the naysayers, I think you should give some real hard, soul-searching thought to what Marshall says here:
The ability to call on our leaders to explain their actions is absolutely crucial to our nation. However, in a situation such as that which we currently face in Iraq, it isn't "chilling dissent" to suggest that we really can transform morbid perception of loss into an actual loss. Some people seem to have difficulty with this, but we really do have to trust our leaders to some extent, and all of the carping, while emotionally satisfying in its way, can and does have an effect. And for those who need reasons to switch from unanswerable skepticism of our President toward some acceptance of what we face, check out bookmark Richard Miniter's compilation of some of the evidence of cooperation between Iraq and al Qaeda. There are those out there who would refuse to accept any evidence, right down to signed confessions delivered with a treasure map to an underground stadium full of WMDs. ("How convenient," they would say.) For those who feel themselves drifting: remember, first, what the evidence and history actually are and, second, the possible outcome of a change of direction in our national policy.
Posted by Justin Katz @ 10:09 PM EST |