The logical projections of the two parties' visions for the War in Iraq and the War on Terror have not been stated by the principals themselves. For the Republicans, in all honesty on present facts, this is the make-or-break campaign of the entire War on Terror. Merely stating the truism that defeat in Iraq would embolden the terrorist movement and provide a launching ground for attacks elsewhere cinches the argument from their perspective. Regardless of that war's genesis as a colossal mistake, has it now transformed into a truly do-or-die situation, as the Republicans are quick to believe, apparently even now? Are we not to expect more of the same in Iraq short of another true strongman taking the helm? That is, can we honestly expect the jihadists to EVER concede that battle, and the sectarians ever to give up their rancor? Despite all the talk about victory (and exactly what would that be?), the firm reality seems to be that without the advent of authoritarian rule or a bloody and costly purgation and catharsis, the situation in Iraq will persist as a nightmare.
All this focus on Iraq by the Republicans may lose the forest for the trees in the overall struggle against radical Islam. Largely, as in any insurgency or guerilla war, the object is to literally win hearts and minds, thereby bleeding away the antagonist's source of support and even justification. On that front the Bush Administration has a piss-poor record, not only in Iraq, obviously, but across the whole Muslim world.
Tired like of wasted lives, the Democrats toy with the idea of a strategic defeat in this one battle, but don't call it that. Perhaps afraid to speak bluntly for fear of the political fallout (even good ideas don't "sell" in the political arena if the ground has not been prepared and the time is not right), the Democrats do not cast their withdrawal proposals against the backdrop of a carefully articulated plan (campaign) to win the overall war through every means possible, an all-out offensive in diplomatic, political, social, religious, cultural and military terms to win what is, as much as anything, an ideological conflict. Democrats don't paint us a picture of what happens if we leave Iraq according to their timetable. Will there be a bloodbath? Will the "free" Iraqis inevitably lose the struggle in short order? Does either of those consequences matter? Importantly, are they foregone conclusions? Indeed, does any of that matter in the overall war? Is there a way to win without Iraq? Isn't Iraqi strife inevitable no matter what we do?
I wonder whether Iraq could be any worse off in the wake of a US withdrawal. As I say, things are nightmarish now. And importantly, in supposedly democratic Iraq, a large majority of citizens themselves call for our withdrawal. Even though the government is slow to react to that popular will, it may stand as a lighthouse to guide us out of this mess.
