A Little Deep Thought About The War On Terror

Over at VodkaPundit, Stephen Green analyzes the War on Terror, provides some historical perspective, and tells us where he believes this war will ultimately be won. This is the type of analysis we need, and the concluding paragraphs really nail the mainstream media (MSM) to the wall...

It's fair to ask if the Iraq Campaign was a necessary component to the Terror War. It isn't fair to compare Iraq to Vietnam, when the two wars have nothing, zero, nada in common. It's fair to ask if our soldier are dying in vain, or because of stupid policy, or because of inferior equipment. It's not fair to run headlines like "Battle Deaths Continue to Mount." No shit, Sherlock? A real story would be, "Battle Deaths Decline as Fallen Soldiers Miraculously Resurrected." It's fair to question Bush's policies. It's not fair to act as a conduit for enemy propaganda. It's fair to ask if Iraq is draining resources from our efforts in Afghanistan. It's not fair to complain that Afghanistan isn't perfect yet. It's fair to complain about indecencies at Abu Ghraib. It's not fair to virtually ignore atrocities committed by the other side everywhere else in Iraq.

But our media, aware of their power but ignorant as to its uses, would rather play "gotcha" than provide critical perspective.

Germany lost WWI because they couldn't match our manpower. They lost again in 1945, because they couldn't match Allied productive might. We could very well lose this war, because our leadership has so far failed to recognize the power of the media. We might also lose because our enemies are oftentimes more media-savvy than we are. We could lose also because our mainstream media seems to find terrorists less unattractive than having a conservative Texan in the White House.

There is no "fixing" the American mainstream media, unless change comes organically. When I wrote last year that we can't win this war by giving up our freedoms, I wasn't kidding – without a free press, we're doomed.

But I do mean to serve notice to the MSM.

When a nation loses a war, it looks to punish the people it believes are to blame. After Vietnam, neither Washington nor our Armed Forces were ever the same again. But if we lose this Terror War, our media will be seen as largely to blame. They'll suffer blame for their ignorance and for their petulance. They'll suffer blame for seeing al Jazeera as comrades closer than the privates and NCOs and officers fighting to protect the First Amendment. They'll suffer blame for putting their hatred of a Republican President before their love of country. Whether that assessment is fair or not, it is how the public will see things.

Then the public would demand changes. And they'd probably get them, courtesy of a government looking for scapegoats, real or imagined. Should that day come, we'd lose our free press, and we'd lose our freedoms. We'd lose our country.

I don't mean to imply that the MSM needs to hop on board the bandwagon and cheerlead for any President along any military campaign, no matter how foolhardy – far from it. In case you hadn't noticed, I used a good portion of this essay to complain about Washington, and that's something the media can do a whole lot more effectively than one small blogger. Criticism isn't just necessary, it's a necessary good. But the MSM needs to relearn constructive criticism, and they need to remember which country defends their rights, and which group of people would gleefully slit their throats.

Today, the arm of decision is the media, and it's impossible to predict what new power will someday eclipse it. But if our media companies lose their First Amendment freedoms in a populist spasm of government power, they'll have only themselves to blame.

The media have the power. They wield the arm of decision. Even if only for our own sakes, let's hope they learn to use it with more wisdom and foresight than they have these last four years.

Green is essentially right on so many counts that's it's disturbing. I can't and won't argue that the Administration has done a great job fighting the Iraq War. But I also think that the criticism it has received from many quarters comes from those who would rather wound the President's political interests than assist us in winning in Iraq. Destructive criticism seems to be the order of the day as much as constructive criticism, particularly from the left.

I am disappointed with the President in a number of ways, and I'm a more faithful follower than most. As a supporter of the war and this President, I need to do a better job providing constructive criticism and expressing frustration that we are not doing the best job we can to support the fighting men and women who can (and will) win the War in Iraq.

To be fair, a large part of the problem is that folks who support this war have to spend so much time dealing with the idiots from the left, who stand arrayed to do nothing more than celebrate American defeats, and the elected representatives who try to portray their views as reasonable. One can and should criticize the GOP regarding the war, because President Bush is a Republican and the war has not been managed as well as it should -- and those who support the GOP owe it to the country to kick ass when our own leaders don't do the job. But take a look at the other party, and ask yourself whether we can really trust people who choose as their leaders people like Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi, Tom Daschle, Harry Reid, John Edwards and John Kerry. We live in a profoundly serious time, where the decisions we make and the leaders we choose need to be true leaders, capable of great vision and strength. To be fair, the other party does have some people who might fit the description -- Joe Lieberman, perhaps Bill Richardson, perhaps Phil Bredersen, perhaps Ed Rendell. Hell, next to the first set of choices above, I'm ready to think Hillary Clinton would be a good choice.

People may believe that President Bush is unworthy as well, and I'd concede that the President's execution of the Iraq War has given ammunition to his opponents. But fundamentally, he put forth a strong vision with which I agree. In his essay, Green criticized neocons for being too naive, but the vision articulated by the President is the right one, and the right challenge for our country. We just need to stand up and fight for it -- particularly those of us who believe in it, and believe it's important to our future as a nation. And we need to support those who are willing to articulate and support this point of view. I despise John McCain's willingness to tear the First Amendment to shreds in support of some obscure standard of fair play in politics, but I admire his steadfast support for the war. The same is true for many others, including to this point Senator Clinton (whether I believe this is real or simply posturing is another matter entirely).

And part of fighting that battle is fighting the folks at home who want to udnermine the war effort. No, it's not all the Democrats, although the recent showboating effort to shut down the Senate was done for little more than fundraising. Our intelligence organs need to be fixed, but does anyone believe that's what's actually taking place? No, we're engaged in another round of playing the blame game, which is fine and healthy for a democracy... but it should not be included in any serious examination of whether and how we fight this war.

But circling back to Green's original point, the media will play a crucial role in the war. I am more convinced now that the only true comparison between Iraq and Vietnam lies int he media's fervent wish that Iraq would turn into Vietnam and restore the media's power to impact and determine American foreign policy. But there are two crucial differences, one which they realize and one which they don't understand.

The first difference is the obvious one -- the media is no longer a left-wing monolith of opinion, and the places where it is (network television, major newspapers) are suffering from competition that is able to effectively counter their defeatism to a growing and significant extent. The old stuff doesn't draw the same ratings it once did.

The second difference is the more important one. WE CANNOT AFFORD TO LOSE THIS WAR. Maybe the media doesn't realize this, or maybe they don't care. I hope it's the former, and think it is, because there's plenty of people who don't get it. But whatever it is, we need to hold the media, and our other elite institutions, to account now, the same as our leaders. We need them on our side -- criticizing, yes, but not simply because they disagree.

It's a subtle difference compared to keeping your mouth shut regarding troop movements, but it's an important one nonetheless. Someone who wants to pull out of Iraq right now may be worthy of news coverage, but the worthy journalist needs to get them to explain how in the world the pullout makes us safer, rather than simply saving the tough questions for the Pentagon and the President.

Let's hope the MSM takes the lesson to heart. We all have our parts to do, and we all need to do them better. In the end, I don't believe these violent fascist murdering psycopathic bastards can defeat us, because freedom will always have more appeal than totalitarian ideology. But while they can't beat us, we can beat ourselves. The question is whether we will push through to victory, or accede to defeat. We know what the right choice is, for our future.

Let's go win.