Stab in the Back?
By Via Digby and Blogenlust, this gem from Hinderaker:
Much as he and his fellow left-wingers can encourage our terrorist enemy, and they do, they don’t have the power to bring about America’s defeat. Notwithstanding endless hectoring from Rich and his fellows on the fringe, there is only one man whose views about Iraq will really matter for the next three and a half years. His name is George W. Bush, and he isn’t going to cut and run. Nor can Rich and his ilk significantly impede the efforts of America’s armed forces.
In the medium and long term, what happens in Iraq is up to the Iraqis. It is certainly possible that they might forfeit what the Bush administration and America’s armed forces have given them: a chance at freedom and the opportunity to live in peace with their neighbors. But if the Iraqis fail, it won’t be because liberals stampeded the United States into abandoning them.
Really?
Can we have that in writing?
Cause it seems like, sometimes, the point of this whole nonsense was to be able to blame the left for losing the war. Has it occured to anyone else that having another “stab in the back” narrative to use against the left might be the real lost justification for invading Iraq, since none of the others really make any sense? But, apparently, I was wrong. And I’m glad to be wrong.
According to Hinderaker, the left doesn’t have the power to bring about failure in Iraq. Only George Bush really matters, and maybe some Iraqis, too. I can’t express how relieved that makes me feel. Assrocket thinks that the disaster of Iraq belongs to George Bush. That’s GREAT. Frankly, I couldn’t agree more. It’s the most insightful thing that Hinderaker has ever written. . .