The Liberal Mindset, by Jim Clonts, examines the apparent lack of urgency with which address the GWoT.
Why does the modern liberal fail to recognize, or worse, discount the threat of Islamic-Fascism? My first instinct was to assume their words and actions were purely political, intended to weaken the Bush Administration. Bush-hating is an essential and popular element of modern liberalism; however, I'm beginning to believe it runs much deeper than this. When Senator Joe Lieberman, a very liberal Democrat, is ostracized by his party for his stand on the war in Iraq, I begin to sense it's not just political. They do not recognize the threat militant Islam represents. Listening to a Democratic stump speech one would think the United States poses a far greater threat to world peace. Some Democratic members of Congress have gone so far as to voice this opinion. This is not partisan politics. They seem to really believe this.
Why do they believe this? Their view is a manifestation of their arrogance, which has been fostered from living in the most secure, wealthiest, and powerful republic in the history of man. It is easy to feel secure in America. We live in a very liberal society, one in which our system of government does not prevent or punish free expression. We do not worry about secret police whisking away a family member in the dark of night for comments critical of the government. When our military deploys our high-technology weapons against an enemy, the results are spectacularly disproportionate.
Americans have not had to worry about national survival since Grant squared off against Lee. Our vast military power and unbridled capitalist economy has created, in the mind of the modern liberal, the notion that we are an all-powerful bully, undeserving of our might, our wealth and our role in the world. They assume the power of our nation has given the militant Islamists justified reason to hate us. America is the oppressor, and the terrorist a victim simply fighting back the only way he knows how. The victim mentality of the liberal has been extended to those who wish destruction upon us.
Democratic Defeatism, by Frank Gaffney, looks at the effect that antiwar rhetoric has on the war effort.
There is a certain irony here. Arguably, whatever mistakes Don Rumsfeld might have made -- or were made by others on his watch -- that are contributing to the present violence in Iraq pale by comparison with the effect Democratic defeatism is having on the so-called "insurgents."
Think about it: Our Islamofascist enemies and their allies are convinced that they can defeat us politically. The means by which they seek to do that is by producing a steady stream of bloodletting and mayhem. The results are then incessantly beamed into American living rooms by mainstream media transparently hostile to President Bush and his Iraq campaign.
Then, Democratic critics (and, in fairness, a few Republican politicians -- like Sen. Chuck Hagel -- who have figured out that it is more fun, or at least more conducive to favorable press reviews, to talk and occasionally vote like an anti-Bush Democrat) seize upon the suicide bombings in Iraq as proof that success there is impossible. Therefore, they solemnly intone, we should stop wasting lives and treasure trying to achieve it.
It is hard to imagine a greater incentive to more attacks against Iraqi civilians, security personnel, government officials and their families -- and, yes, against our own and other Coalition forces. Call it the "cycle of violence."