Why don't you just skip all the pretense and start cheer leading for the Bush administration?

In their increasingly ill-disguised attempts at electioneering the media and a disturbingly large part of the left in general are engaging in an act of sabotage. By emphasising only the negative, by engaging in poor reportage, by barely venturing outside Baghdad and interviewing only those with an obvious connection to the previous regime, they, consciously or no, are undermining our efforts.

I've said this before but obviously need to say it again, more clearly this time: I now could care less who did or did not get us involved in Iraq. I now could care less what reasons they had doing it. We. Are. There. When we've succeeded I'll be interested, but not now. While the press in particular and the left in general have been emphasising the negative in an effort to score political points (or, even worse, engaging in simple careerism) the Bush administration has been the only force even attempting to implement some form of progressive policy in Iraq.

So far the only plan I've heard from the dems, if you can even call it that, sounds to me like: "first, toss Bush out, then, toss the Republicans out of congress, then, raise taxes, balance the budget, enact universal health care, take a look at a whole raft of social issues (welfare reform, minority rights, business and market regulation, etc.), re-shuffle the supreme court. After that's all done, but not before, we'll be able to actually focus on Iraq."

If the dems could come up with a real plan that doesn't involve putting political scores first and action last, I'd listen. If the media spent as much time examining what works and doesn't work all over Iraq with as much energy as they expended on Laci Peterson, I'd listen. If anyone on the left could come up with a critique that didn't include "quagmire" in it, I'd listen.

They're not. You're not. And until you all get off your high horse and stop bemoaning the fact that Bush is not Clinton, Gore, or McCain, you're wasting my time and in my opinion risking the failure of our mission. A mission we paid for in blood. If we screw up Iraq due to a simple failure of nerve those people will have died in vain.

Just because you oppose Bush doesn't automatically make you anti-American, far from it. Just because you think we shouldn't have gotten involved in Iraq, or got involved the wrong way or for the wrong reasons doesn't make you a traitor.

However, criticising policies simply because you dislike who's proposing them, emphasising body counts as a way of advancing an agenda, or continually whining about "shoulda-coulda-woulda" without proposing any valid alternatives of your own makes you worse. It puts you in the same gunner's chair that Jane Fonda sat in thirty years ago.

Stop pissing and moaning and start coming up with alternatives, because I'm all ears. Until then please feel free to a cup of "sit-down-and-shut-the-hell-up."

If that makes me a Bush cheerleader, so be it.

Scott's right about one thing. We are there and now we can't just leave. The problem here is something else that Scott harps about all of the time. The US Form of Government is set up so that if we get a wacko/total incompetent then we can get rid of him in four years.

By focusing on the good things that happen in Iraq and not the bad things (AKA the body count, the total lack of planning that went into winning the peace. Take it back a step, the total lack of planning that went into this whole operation) If all we decided to focus on were the Marines building roads, the children running out into the streets to cheer the American Liberators then the press goes the other way and becomes a tool for the Administration (ALA the Fox News Channel).

What is more important to most Americans?? How many Billions of Dollars we are spending re-building the Iraqi electrical grid or how many Billions we spend rebuilding our own?? Do you think that how many miles of Road’s we laid in Iraq today is more important or more news worthy to the majority of Americans than how many of our soldiers we buried?? Most News organization’s today are business and they will report the things that make people watch their program or buy their paper.

Could we use some more balanced reporting?? Sure. But think of this. The Bush administration now at least has to start to level with the American Public ($87 Billion Dollars, No telling when we will leave). Do you think the Administration would have volunteered to tell the public this on there own?? Do you think we would even be talking to the UN if the press hadn’t been focusing on the negative?? How are we to get the wacko out of office if we don’t start reporting these things until next December?? (This is about the time we would have started to get this info from the Administration if they had been left to their own time table)

If the press wasn't concentrating on the negative then the administration would just keep on spending our wealth and the lives of our soldiers for nothing. This is how Vietnam got so out of control. In the early 60’s the press focused on some of the good things we did there not the bad things. Look what happened.

You state “the Bush administration has been the only force even attempting to implement some form of progressive policy in Iraq.” The only policy that I have seen from the Administration is the one called COVER YOUR OWN ASS. “He did it”, “No She Did it”, “It’s Saddam Loyalist’s”, “No, No, It’s Al Quieda” Ad infinitum. The only thing you can count on with this administration’s policy is that they don’t have one.

Now we come to the Crux of it. What to do? This is a hard one. It’s kind of like saying “Martha the horse is out of the Barn, I’ve closed the door, but now what??” The logical time for this question was before, not after we invaded. What are we doing in Bosnia/Serbia?? This is the BARE minimum that we will have to do for Iraq (And how long have we been there?? And we aren’t doing that mission alone.) We can’t even begin to understand the task that we have taken on (Because we are still trying to keep them from killing us.) It gets a lot more complicated after we finally manage to secure the country.

A democracy is a form of Government “For the People, By the People and Of the People” What happens when the “People” decide they want to setup a theocratic state?? What happens if the majority decides that it’s time to settle some old scores?? What do we do then?? If the majority of Iraqi people want and vote for a Constitution that outlaws any religion other than the brand of Islam that the Sunni practice, do we tell them NO YOU CAN’T HAVE THAT?? Is that setting up a Democratic government?? Is that letting the Iraqi’s decide how they want to govern themselves??

The problem with forcing a Constitution on somebody, with forcing Democracy down somebody’s throat is that unless you are willing to sit on them until the older generation dies or a better educated younger generation is ready to take power IT WILL NOT WORK. We were in Japan for seven years and didn’t get it right, Heck occupation of Germany lasted (In one form or another) for over 40 years and we can’t say for sure we got that right. And both of those countries internal problems PALE by comparison to what we have in Iraq. We didn’t have to worry about a Japanese or German Civil war the moment our back was turned.

Maybe let the Arabs (Who understand this situation a lot better than we do) have a major say in what’s going on. Maybe come at this with a TRUE coalition with Full UN Backing. I don’t know. I do know that what we’re doing isn’t working and if nothing is done to reign in this administration and make them see that Just because YOU want something to happen doesn’t mean it’s going to happen. That just because you Say it's SO doesn't make it that way(Even if you’re the President of the US) then we will truly have spent our blood and our money in vain.

Sometimes my sons amaze me in ways that I still don't understand. I agree with Jeff and I think he makes very valid points. Scott you are beginning to sound like a broken record. Step back and take a really hard look at the Bushies. Just because you hate the Left..........

The comparison to Jane Fonda during Vietnam was totally and completely uncalled for.

Scott sounds like a broken record because he's just repeating the AM radio talking points.

Scott, if there was a pro-American rally, however small, Foxnews would be running it 24 seven.

If there was good news, however trivial, it would be on the Front page of the Washington Times.

We. Are. There.
We. Will. Lose. The 60 million vietnamese never ran out of guerilla's, and the 185 million Arabs won't either.

I was convinced before the war started. Obviously it will take 10 years and 50,000 dead Americans to convince you.

Here's your cup, hope it's tasty.