Giving credit where credit's due: Michael Ware seems to understand, and that's a surprise
Regular readers know that we've handed out licks on Michael Ware in the past, but being intellectually honest bloggers we'd be remiss in not pointing out the intelligent things that he does. Case in point: Allah at Hot Air and Newsbusters picked up the fact that he sees the war in the right frame of mind.
After Phillips talked about how U.S. General David Petraeus is “a straight shooter” who has admitted difficulty in some provinces in Iraq, Ware focused on the fighting northeast of Baghdad:
“Diyala is now the new frontline against al-Qaeda. I mean, to be honest, it’s a tragically bloody affair. The brigade that was there last year lost 19 troops in 12 months. The brigade there now has lost 50 in six months.
“And you listen very carefully to what General Petraeus says, he says ‘This is what we would like to see, a representative government.’ When I was in Diyala province, I interviewed a two-star general on camera for CNN, and he admitted for the first time from anyone in the military that they’re now prepared to accept options other than democracy.
“Now this is what this war was sold to the American public on, yet they’re now saying democracy isn’t mandatory, it’s an option, and that they’re prepared to see a government that can protect itself, give services to its people, and it doesn’t have to be democratic. In fact, the general said, most of our allies in this region are not democratic. So that fundamentally addresses the root cause of why America says it went to war, and now the military is saying, well, we may not get there.”Then, after talking about the difficulty of daily life in Iraq, Chetry asked the pair “would all of us, all the American troops pulling out, help the situation?”
Phillips and Ware both loudly protested: “Oh, no! No. No way!”
Phillips zeroed in on the problems a U.S. withdrawal would cause for the Iraqis: “It would be a disaster. I mean, I had a chance to sit down with the Minister of Defense, to General Petraeus, to Admiral Fallon, head of CENTCOM. I asked them all the question whether Iraqi or U.S. military — there is no way U.S. troops could pull out. It would be a disaster. They’re doing too much training, they’re helping the Iraqis not only with security, but trying to get the government up and running. I mean, this is a country of ‘Let’s Make a Deal,’ there’s so much corruption still. If the U.S. military left — they have rules of engagement, they have an idea, a focus. It would be a disaster.”
Ware agreed, but argued that winning the war was in America’s best interest: “Well, even more than that, if you just wanted to look at it purely in terms of American national interest, if U.S. troops leave now, you’re giving Iraq to Iran, a member of President Bush’s ‘Axis of Evil,’ and al Qaeda. That’s who will own it. And so, coming back now, I’m struck by the nature of the debate on Capitol Hill, how delusional it is. Whether you’re for this war, or against it; whether you’ve supported the way it’s been executed, or not; it doesn’t matter. You’ve broke it, you’ve got to fix it now. You can’t leave, or it’s going to come and blow back on America.”
I sure wish those on Capitol Hill would finally get this. Look, we're not fond of Michael Ware. There are somethings we have taken issue with, and most of it has come in interviews he's had with Hugh Hewitt. He's hung himself with his own words. But the point that he makes is well-founded. We can't afford to leave now. If we do, it'll spell disaster for this nation, and it'll hurt the efforts in Afghanistan. If we withdraw from Iraq, we will be handing the nation over to two factions we can ill afford to embolden. Not only will al Qaeda have a semi-stable foothold int he country, but Iran will flood Iraq with it's fighters, and the body count that will result could rival that of the one that occurred after our withdrawal from Vietnam.
Additionally, it will give our enemies a country that they can launch attacks from. It would also provide them training grounds for future jihadis. Those people would slowly be sent to Afghanistan to engage US, coalition, and NATO forces there, as well as a fledgling Afghani military that is not close enough to prepared yet. The repercussions of withdrawal would not just be a disaster for our nation, basically giving our enemies the green light to come after us, but it'll bring doom to the efforts in afghanistan. And when things start to go south in Afghanistan, will the Congress push for a withdrawal there, too? You bet they will, and our predictions on this will come to fruition.
I do posit this question in closing though. With all the liberal blogs out there hailing Michael Ware's past statements that were less than friendly with regard to the war, will they pick this statement up, and recognize it's authenticity, or will there be a meme spread around that Karl Rove and the other Bush administration "Sith Lords" got to him?
Publius II
After Phillips talked about how U.S. General David Petraeus is “a straight shooter” who has admitted difficulty in some provinces in Iraq, Ware focused on the fighting northeast of Baghdad:
“Diyala is now the new frontline against al-Qaeda. I mean, to be honest, it’s a tragically bloody affair. The brigade that was there last year lost 19 troops in 12 months. The brigade there now has lost 50 in six months.
“And you listen very carefully to what General Petraeus says, he says ‘This is what we would like to see, a representative government.’ When I was in Diyala province, I interviewed a two-star general on camera for CNN, and he admitted for the first time from anyone in the military that they’re now prepared to accept options other than democracy.
“Now this is what this war was sold to the American public on, yet they’re now saying democracy isn’t mandatory, it’s an option, and that they’re prepared to see a government that can protect itself, give services to its people, and it doesn’t have to be democratic. In fact, the general said, most of our allies in this region are not democratic. So that fundamentally addresses the root cause of why America says it went to war, and now the military is saying, well, we may not get there.”Then, after talking about the difficulty of daily life in Iraq, Chetry asked the pair “would all of us, all the American troops pulling out, help the situation?”
Phillips and Ware both loudly protested: “Oh, no! No. No way!”
Phillips zeroed in on the problems a U.S. withdrawal would cause for the Iraqis: “It would be a disaster. I mean, I had a chance to sit down with the Minister of Defense, to General Petraeus, to Admiral Fallon, head of CENTCOM. I asked them all the question whether Iraqi or U.S. military — there is no way U.S. troops could pull out. It would be a disaster. They’re doing too much training, they’re helping the Iraqis not only with security, but trying to get the government up and running. I mean, this is a country of ‘Let’s Make a Deal,’ there’s so much corruption still. If the U.S. military left — they have rules of engagement, they have an idea, a focus. It would be a disaster.”
Ware agreed, but argued that winning the war was in America’s best interest: “Well, even more than that, if you just wanted to look at it purely in terms of American national interest, if U.S. troops leave now, you’re giving Iraq to Iran, a member of President Bush’s ‘Axis of Evil,’ and al Qaeda. That’s who will own it. And so, coming back now, I’m struck by the nature of the debate on Capitol Hill, how delusional it is. Whether you’re for this war, or against it; whether you’ve supported the way it’s been executed, or not; it doesn’t matter. You’ve broke it, you’ve got to fix it now. You can’t leave, or it’s going to come and blow back on America.”
I sure wish those on Capitol Hill would finally get this. Look, we're not fond of Michael Ware. There are somethings we have taken issue with, and most of it has come in interviews he's had with Hugh Hewitt. He's hung himself with his own words. But the point that he makes is well-founded. We can't afford to leave now. If we do, it'll spell disaster for this nation, and it'll hurt the efforts in Afghanistan. If we withdraw from Iraq, we will be handing the nation over to two factions we can ill afford to embolden. Not only will al Qaeda have a semi-stable foothold int he country, but Iran will flood Iraq with it's fighters, and the body count that will result could rival that of the one that occurred after our withdrawal from Vietnam.
Additionally, it will give our enemies a country that they can launch attacks from. It would also provide them training grounds for future jihadis. Those people would slowly be sent to Afghanistan to engage US, coalition, and NATO forces there, as well as a fledgling Afghani military that is not close enough to prepared yet. The repercussions of withdrawal would not just be a disaster for our nation, basically giving our enemies the green light to come after us, but it'll bring doom to the efforts in afghanistan. And when things start to go south in Afghanistan, will the Congress push for a withdrawal there, too? You bet they will, and our predictions on this will come to fruition.
I do posit this question in closing though. With all the liberal blogs out there hailing Michael Ware's past statements that were less than friendly with regard to the war, will they pick this statement up, and recognize it's authenticity, or will there be a meme spread around that Karl Rove and the other Bush administration "Sith Lords" got to him?
Publius II
posted by Syd And Vaughn | 12:50 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home