Dead Soldiers September 23, 2004 -- IMAGINE if, in the presidential election
of 1944, the candidate opposing FDR had insisted that we were losing the
Second World War and that, if elected, he would begin to withdraw American
troops from Europe and the Pacific.
We would have called it treason. And we would have been right.
In WWII, broadcasts from Tokyo Rose in Japan and from Axis Sally in Germany
warned our troops that their lives were being squandered in vain, that they
were dying for big business and "the Jew" Roosevelt.
Today, we have a presidential candidate, the conscienceless Sen. John Kerry,
doing the work of the enemy propagandists of yesteryear.
Is there nothing Kerry won't say to win the election? Is there no position
he won't change? Doesn't he care anything for the sacrifices of our troops
in Iraq?
And if he does care about our soldiers and Marines, why is he broadcasting
remarks that insist — against all hard evidence — that the terrorists are
winning?
Has he seen the situation with his own eyes? I'll gladly tell him how to get
there. I'll even be his guide. And he can smell what remains of Saddam's
mass graves — with new ones still being discovered. He can taste the joy of
freedom among the Kurds. He can see the bustling commerce throughout the
country — despite the violence that alone makes headlines.
Above all, he could see the magnificent performance of our troops, their
dedication and professionalism. And their humanity, their goodness.
But Kerry doesn't want to see those things. He's reverting to form. Just as
he lied about our troops three decades ago, encouraging our enemies of the
day and worsening the suffering of our POWs in North Vietnam, today he's
pandering to a new enemy.
Imagine the encouragement the terrorists, insurgents and global extremists
draw from Kerry's declarations of defeat, from his insistence that our
efforts in Iraq and in the War on Terror have failed.
As he always does, Kerry slips in qualifiers. Of course, Iraq's important.
And he'll fight terror, too. It's just that the Bush administration doesn't
know how to do anything. A Kerry presidency would let us withdraw our
troops, collect more allies, succeed where others have "failed" and win the
hearts and minds of the whole, wide world.
Earlier this week, Kerry made a much-ballyhooed speech offering four
generalizations about how he would fix Iraq. But there was no detail, not a
single nut or a lonely bolt. And the current administration is already doing
most of what Kerry suggested.
As for involving the French and Germans, the truth is that they'd do more
harm than good. These are the corrupt cynics who made billions from the U.N.
Oil-for-Food program while the Iraqi people suffered. The French kiss up to
every dictator willing to wink in their direction. The German military
barely exists — it's just an employment agency for uniformed bureaucrats —
and the French military's sole competence lies in slaughtering unarmed black
Africans.
As for the United Nations, any day now we'll see a huge banner hanging from
its Manhattan headquarters: Dictators For Kerry.
Even if I detested everything about President Bush, I'd vote for him just to
rub it in the faces of the Germans, the French and all of the tyrants
rooting for the Iraqi people to slip back into despotism. We Americans
choose our own presidents, and we don't take orders from Europeans or from
any of Kerry's other Swiss boarding-school pals.
I think it's great that Kerry speaks fluent French. I wish he'd go to France
where he could speak it all the time.
In an election year, our engagement in Iraq is a legitimate topic for sober
debate. But Kerry isn't serious. All he does is to declare defeat. He
certainly doesn't want to be al Qaeda's candidate, but he's made himself
into their man through his irresponsibility.
If Kerry were insisting, without caveats, that we're going to stay the
course and win, while backing up his criticisms with convincing details of
how he would improve our efforts, that would be fine. But his mad claims of
disaster and his inability to maintain a firm position unquestionably give
aid and comfort to the enemy.
The terrorists and their allies already intended to increase the level of
violence in Iraq before November. But Kerry's pandering has encouraged them
to pull out all the stops. I wish it were otherwise, that our election
process had more integrity, but the truth is that every roadside blast and
car bomb in Iraq is meant to support John Kerry.
Meanwhile, Kerry has assembled the most despicable cast of has-beens and
failed officials in campaign history. He's represented by the likes of Jamie
Rubin — a Clintonite who so loved America that he moved to London, returning
to our shores only to tell real Americans how we need to vote.
Putting Rubin on the talk-show circuit demonstrates how badly the Democratic
elite is out of touch with the country it claims to represent. With his
permanent sneer and his condescending snicker, Rubin represents nearly all
that working Americans — and our troops — despise about today's Dems.
In 1944, the Democrats had FDR. In 2004, they've got the stretch-limo
version of Mike Dukakis.
There was a wartime election in 1864, too. The Democratic Party's candidate,
former Gen. George McClellan, ran on a platform that declared President
Abraham Lincoln's policy a failure. The price of McClellan's rhetoric was a
prolonged war and tens of thousands of dead Americans.
In 1864, the citizens of the North were steadfast. They rejected the
Democratic Party's warnings of defeat and saved the Union. In 2004, the
American people, North and South, East and West, need to reject the cynical
lies of John F. Kerry and vote to support our troops and save Iraq.
Ralph Peters is a retired Army officer and the author of "Beyond Baghdad:
Postmodern War and Peace." |
