Reid says war in Iraq is ‘lost’; right goes berserk

April 20, 2007

I’ve never been able to predict what will make the right apoplectic. For example, this seems to have sent conservatives into quite a tizzy.

A top Democratic lawmaker declared on Thursday that the war in Iraq “is lost,” pointing to the sustained bloodshed there even as President George W. Bush urged patience with his strategy.

“This war is lost, and this surge is not accomplishing anything, as is shown by the extreme violence in Iraq this week,” Senate Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid told reporters, referring to the US-led security push in Baghdad.

In the same interview, Reid added, “I know I was the odd guy out at the White House, but I told him at least what he needed to hear … I believe the war at this stage can only be won diplomatically, politically and economically.”

Now, some have suggested there’s a bit of a contradiction here — if the war is lost then it can’t be won “diplomatically, politically and economically.” Either the war is over or it’s not. That’s fair enough, but I think Reid’s point was that it’s not too early to label the existing war policy a failure. Bush’s efforts, with the war in its fifth year, have come up short. The president’s way lost; now it’s time to try and win another way. This appears to be what Reid was trying to say.

Given the right’s reaction, you’d think Reid had joined the Osama bin Laden Fan Club.

This one was probably the most unhinged response, at least among lawmakers.

Longshot GOP presidential candidate Tom Tancredo said Thursday that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid should be held responsible for the deaths of all American soldiers in Iraq from now on after Reid said the war there is “lost.”

Tancredo, a congressman representing the Denver suburbs, said Reid should introduce legislation to force President Bush to bring troops home, “because if (Reid) truly believes what he says, then every life lost from this day on sits solely on his lap for doing nothing to back up his words.”

As for the blogs, the reaction from the right has been over-the-top rage. Some have called Reid a “traitor.” Others prefer “coward.” One noted that al Qaeda has said the war in Iraq is lost, which means Reid and the terrorists are using similar rhetoric. (Given that the Republican National Committee paid good money to broadcast jihadist recruitment videos on national television, I’m unmoved by the argument.)

What’s more, as Greg Sargent noted, what Reid said was fairly mainstream.

USA Today poll, March 5: Which comes closer to your view about the war in Iraq?

Definitely win: 11%.
Probably win: 17%.
Can win, but don’t think will win: 20%
Do not think it can win: 46%

CNN poll, March 13: Do you think the U.S. can win or cannot win the war in Iraq?

Can win: 46%
Cannot win: 46%

Washington Post/ABC News poll, April 16: Will U.S. win or lose the war?

Lose: 51%
Win: 35%

Rasmussen poll, April 16: Thirty-three percent (33%) of American voters believe that history will ultimately judge the U.S. mission in Iraq a success. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 50% of Likely Voters believe the mission will be deemed a failure.

I don’t think I’ll ever really understand the far-right worldview. They find the strangest things to get excited about.

Update: Apparently, Retired Gen. Tony McPeak, who served on the Joint Chiefs of Staff during the Gulf War, expressed a similar sentiment, as did Retired Gen. Wiliam Odom, head of Army intelligence and director of the National Security Agency under Ronald Reagan. No word on whether Michelle Malkin believes Gens. McPeak and Odom are “treacherous.”

This is just like the same nonsense when they went crazy over Obama saying troops had died in vain, but then kept quiet when McCain said the same thing. It’s because they simply can’t accept reality and they have contorted themselves into so many contradictions, they can’t see straight anymore. It’s like Jon Stewart showed the other night when Dubya claimed that a delay in war funding would extend troops’ tours of duty the day BEFORE Robert Gates announced that tours of duty were being extended anyway.

  • I think members of the Dem base – out here, out of the Beltway – should try to get word to Reid, thanking him for finally speaking the truth. And, to give him support.

  • When you see the world in such stark, manichean terms, anything or any one that challenges your world view must not only be challenged, but destroyed. It brings the world back into order.

  • Hey, it’s good to hear someone in power come right out and say it. Simply put:

    1) There is nothing to “win”.
    2) We invaded and are occupying a country that did not attack us.
    3) The reasons we were given for the invasion were false.

    This situation hasn’t changed in 4 years. Those points still stand. It’s dangerous for any empire to be in that position. Sacrificing lives to save the collective egos of a bunch of psychopaths is insane.

  • The right goes beserk? Oh well. I guess “beserker” isn’t an adjective.

    Some have called Reid a “traitor.” Others prefer “coward.”

    All are still parroting the same tired talking points we’ve heard for the past zillion years. This is one of the many tedious things about the fRighties. I wish someone would replace their current programing:

    If
    Democrat speaks,
    Then
    Shout Traitor!
    Or
    Shout Coward!
    And
    Praise President Bush.

    With something like this:

    If
    Rain falls
    Then
    Strip naked
    And
    Cavort in the rain.
    Or
    Quack like a duck.

  • It’s rough being a mindless shill for the wealthy elite. It’s harder being right all the time and to have all these godless, lib’rul, commies, traitors, smartasses, mongrelizers, and cowards out there who keep disobeying and challenging the truth. I mean if you’re a member of the right-wing it means you’re right, —right? 😉

  • You know when teenagers pull this kind of Tom Tancredo passive/ agrressive behavior where they blame everyone else for not stopping them from injuring themselves, it’s called a cry for help. Our only choice is to heed Tom’s admonition and make sure he doesn’t get the power to cause more harm.

  • Is it inherent in the make-up of right wingers to not to understand nuances?

    The war will not be won militarily. In fact, here in the 21st century, boots on ground can’t conquer a populace; all war now is waged in the heart and minds of the combatants and their supporters (see Israel-Lebanon conflict of 2006).

  • It was General Odom who said called Bush’s policy “the president’s relentless pursuit of failure”. Bush has owned every decision on the war up to now, look how well that has worked out.

  • “Is it inherent in the make-up of right wingers to not to understand nuances?” – slip kid no more

    No, but they got rhythm

    “Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran”

  • I do wish, though, that our folks would be a bit more careful with their language. This isn’t a win/lose argument. It is more of an effective/ineffective argument. As many of us have posted here in the past, the military has pretty much done what and all they can do in Iraq. The effectiveness of the military in Iraq has gone past its sell by date. Time to bring the troops home. Reid could have phrased this much better by saying that “the military has accomplished all it is ever going to accomplish and did so many many months ago. The only thing the surge is accomplishing is more grief for families here inthe US.” The problems facing Iraq at this point can only be solved diplomatically…”

  • “Win/Lose” is the talking point of the right/President Bush. It should not be adopted by those who actually think.

  • 1) The wingnuts need to step up to the plate and actively encourage their readers to enlist, and do so themselves whenever possible, if this really is an “existential war”.

    Yellow elephants with full diapers do not get to lecture anyone about cowardice.

    2) We need to reframe this whole “Iraq War” thing. It’s not a war anymore. The war ended when Saddam’s army evaporated. It’s now an occupation. Say it out loud: “The Iraq Occupation”. It sounds awkward, but the word “occupation” is far more accurate than the word “war”. Where are the enemy? How do we know when it’s over? When the Iraqi government can handle Iraq’s security? We could be there fifty years to meet that metric. You don’t win an occupation. You continue it or you end it.

  • I just figured it out… You know what we all need? More optimistic rugs.

    Bush told the story about how his first presidential decision was to pick a rug for the Oval Office, a task he quickly cast to his wife. He told her to make sure the rug reflected optimism “because you can’t make decisions unless you’re optimistic that the decisions you make will lead to a better tomorrow.”

    Later, when he talked about his hope for succeeding in Iraq, Bush said, “Remember the rug?”

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070419/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_musings

  • That’s a fair point, bubba. But “ineffective” probably isn’t strong enough at this point to get the messae across. I think Reid is right to be blunt, although he should be very ready for the arrows that are going to come his way now.

  • I agree, bubba. The irony is that the “war” was “won” when they unfurled the infamous and fatuous “mission accomplished” banner. Everything since has been “losing” the “peace.” The occupation is a failure and needs to be ended sooner than later.

  • My favorite part of the Nation article is right at the end, from Tony McPeak. He sums up better than anyone what the Administration has done to our country:

    “This is a dark chapter in our history. Whatever else happens, our country’s international standing has been frittered away by people who don’t have the foggiest understanding of how the hell the world works. America has been conducting an experiment for the past six years, trying to validate the proposition that it really doesn’t make any difference who you elect president. Now we know the result of that experiment [laughs]. If a guy is stupid, it makes a big difference.”

  • Senator Harry Reid is to Marshall Pétain as the Democratic Party is to the Vichy Regime. Capitulators never prosper!

    • Comments are closed.