RSS 2.0
“Petraeus or Betray Us”
The last two editorials from Investor’s Business Daily–home of the best editorial cartoons on the web–have hit it out of the park.Â
From yesterday’s editorial entitled Hearts and Minds:
The cut-and-run Democrats have long argued that our presence in Iraq has merely stirred things up and given al-Qaida an effective recruiting tool. Well, we’ve certainly stirred things up — and thanks to the success of our surgin’ general, David Petraeus, we have a bevy of new Iraqi recruits. Except they’ve got al-Qaida in their cross hairs.
On Saturday, members of the 1st Cavalry Division based near Taji brokered a formal agreement between Sunni and Shiite tribal leaders to join forces against al-Qaida and other jihadists. The Sunni and Shiite agreed to use members of more than 25 local tribes to protect the area around Taji, just 12 miles north of Baghdad.
The deal is just the latest example of the progress Democrats claim isn’t happening in Iraq — a series of deals with various tribes and militia groups that at one point were part of the insurgency. But it’s the first involving both Sunni and Shiite sheiks together.
. . . Last October, al-Qaida in Iraq declared Baqouba to be the capital of the Islamic State in Iraq, and claimed to control both Anbar and Diyala provinces, of which Baqouba is the capital. But that was before Operation Arrowhead Ripper. Of the 1,000 al-Qaida who were thought to have been in Baqouba, those who haven’t been killed or captured have fled.
And we’re not doing it alone. Despite mainstream media reports, Iraqis are fighting and dying for their freedom in ever greater numbers. Progress is being made. But as even New York Times reporter John Burns notes: “The most likely outcome of an American withdrawal any time soon would be cataclysmic violence.”
The choice for Democrats is Petraeus or betray us.
“Petraeus or betray us”–only Jesse Jackson or Johnny Cochran could have come up with that line. Excellent.
The “Surgin’ General?” Outstanding.
And from today’s editorial Victory in ‘09:
Defense Secretary Robert Gates has been briefed on a detailed plan to establish “sustainable security” throughout Iraq by the summer of 2009, the New York Times reported this week. U.S. forces commander Gen. David Petraeus and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker reportedly developed the strategy, which aims first at securing Baghdad by the middle of next year, then achieving nationwide stability by mid-2009.
Petraeus’ plan seems inspired by the remarkable success in Anbar province — which until less than a year ago was written off as hopeless — where the U.S. military has formed an anti-al-Qaida alliance with Sunni chiefs. Violence is down in Anbar, while recruitment to the security forces among the population is up.
. . . The new plan will employ a Force Strategic Engagement Cell, which, following the Anbar model, would identify and engage sectarian groups that can be persuaded to renounce violent action. The strategy also, wisely, differs from the thinking of Petraeus’ predecessor as top commander in Iraq, Gen. George Casey, in its lesser expectations of political progress.
So our forces and our strategists in Iraq now know what works, with just one possible missing ingredient in their recipe for victory: time. Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch, commanding U.S. forces south of Baghdad, recently made it clear it will take him a year to establish security there. Lt. Gen. Ray Odierno, our second-ranking commander in Iraq, says it will be November — not September — before a proper assessment of the troop surge can be made.
. . . Winning the war in Iraq is absolutely necessary. Losing means a new terrorist base in the Middle East that’s sure to commit wholesale genocide against the Iraqis and plot to slaughter Americans in our own homeland.
The mid-September “deadline” has been rendered irrelevant. Senators and congressmen now have a duty to rally the country toward a victory over terrorism in ‘09.
The rally has already begun. General Petraeus and our troops have led the way. Now its time for the rest of us to rally to them.
And since we mentioned Michael Ramirez’s excellent IBD editorial cartoons:
