General David Petraeus should certainly take home the gold in any MOY competition. Here's betting that Algore sweeps the mass media awards, though. For what?
Enough on Al Gore. We have a remarkable American soldier to celebrate, not only for his actions in the field, but the halls of Congress. Not since Ollie North induced apoplexy in the likes of Sen. Patrick Leahy has a military man so neutralized open congressional antagonism. MoveOn.org's "General Betrayus" did little to help the anti-war folks cause, especially when they had it printed in the New York Times and didn't even pay the full going rate for it. The NYT continues to plum the depths of the accounting department to ascertain how a political action group managed to receive their public service rate. Answers are expected on or about 21 January 2008.
General Petraeus has demonstrated perhaps the most common trait of the American soldier as well as the least commonly recognized. Improvision and adaptability have long been the hallmarks of the American soldier from revolutionary times through such notables as Sherman and Patton, to Petraeus himself. While serving under General Casey, Petraeus was the good subordinant soldier, but was all the time polishing his views on how geurilla warfare should be conducted. And, for once, there was a valuable lesson from Viet Nam. Like Patton before him, he was disinclined to give any territory taken back to the enemy. The failed policies of his predecessor held no illusions for General Petraeus; he got soldier's asses in the grasses and kept them there.
Petraeus was no doubt helped by the Sunni's growing dissatisfactions with life under al-Qaeda. But Petraeus was the one that made sure that US soldiers and Marines were there to take advantage of shifting allegiences. Moqtada al Sadr also soon figured out the general wasn't going anywhere and was more than willing to engage his militia's.
As late as yesterday morning i've heard from one of the useful idiots on NPR that all of this means little as the government of Iraq is still disfunctional on a national basis. While this may be true and also undesirable, it may not be exactly the most important point of the new reality in Iraq. The truth is that, in all governments-but especially democracies, the local governments are far more important than the federal government. Americans can work up a certain amount of lather over the inefficiencies of the post office, but nothing compared to what they're capable of if their town misses their curb at leaf pick up time. Try changing the local parking plan downtown of a small community. You'll have irregulars atop the hardware store just waiting for a clean shot at the planning commision.
Much the same is proving true in Iraq. The last gentleman from the state of Massachusetts said that, "all politics are local". And by that, Tip O'Neil implied that he'd help build your bridge in Alaska if you would help dig his tunnel in Massachusetts. And the boys in southie wouldn't give a rip about Alaska as long as they got theirs. Petraeus is making sure that US soldiers are there, right along with the Iraqi's they live with, when it comes to negotiating the Iraqi bureaucracy. The US Congress, comfortable in it's arrogance, assured of it's relevance, fails to see the merits of democracy from the bottom up. It's bad enough that they wish to rule their own citizen's lives from Washington, DC; they think they're best qualified to run the Iraqi's as well. Were I in possesion of only a fraction of the oil that Iraq possesses I'd be awful damn sure I'd keep it as far away as possible from the princes of pork in Washington. The smallest tribal sheik will question why the US government needs to subsidize the most productive agricultural industry in the world and cannot seem to figure out how to fund social security. Better off to trust a Marine. Marine's actually do what they say they're going to do. And so do soldiers. If you wonder how, look up Michael Yon's blog. And thank General Petraeus.
It's comforting to see that the National Review is in accord with me on the matter. I expect that we'll be in the minority with our view. But then, i guess Algore is the new Jimmy Carter. Watch for your Time magazine cover's shot of Al's thin side.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q...c5ZWExOTgzZDk=
Connect with Facebook
