Monday, September 10, 2007

General "Betray-Us"?

Continuing in the vein of righteous indignation that Jenber mined yesterday, the Weekly Standard notes this morning that has upped Dirty Harry's smear-mongering ante:

Tomorrow–as General David Petraeus provides his Iraq assessment to Congress–the antiwar group is running a full-page advertisement in the New York Times under the headline: “General Petraeus or General Betray us? Cooking the books for the White House.”

Let’s be clear: is suggesting that General Petraeus has ‘betrayed’ his country. This is disgusting. To attack as a traitor an American general commanding forces in war because his ‘on the ground’ experience does not align with’s political objectives is utterly shameful. It shows contempt for America’s military leadership, as well as for the troops who have confidence in him, as our fellow soldiers in Iraq certainly do.

General Petraeus has served this country for over thirty-five years with honor, distinction, and integrity. And this is not just about General Petraeus. After all, if General Petraeus is “cooking the books,” then the entire military chain of command in Baghdad, and all the staff, military and civilian, who have been working with General Petraeus are complicit, since Petraeus did not write his report in isolation. They are all, apparently, ‘betray[ing] us.’ has been working closely with the Democratic congressional leadership –as an article in today’s Sunday New York Times Magazine makes clear. And consider this comment by a Democratic senator from Friday’s Politico: “‘No one wants to call [Petraeus] a liar on national TV,’ noted one Democratic senator, who spoke on the condition on anonymity. ‘The expectation is that the outside groups will do this for us.’
Such courageous "peace"-warriors Donks are, huh? Something tells me that will end up being a distinction without a difference.

The WS does well to note that this isn't just a betrayal OF General Petraeus but yet another left-wing slander of the military. What interests me, though, is how they have redefined "treason" to mean failure to conform to the Left's...well, treasonous agenda, by reporting the actual facts on the ground in Iraq rather than telling the libs what their itching ears want to hear. General Petraeus doing his appointed duty by going before Congress and telling the truth is, indeed, considered a "betrayal" by the nutters because that isn't what they think he was sent to Iraq to do. He was supposed to fail; he was supposed to confirm for all time that there's no such thing as a military solution to any foreign policy problem; he was supposed to do the job (i.e. take a dive) for al Qaeda and the Iranian mullahgarchy as penance for George W. Bush's "sins" and prove once and for all that America cannot, and must not, EVER defend its national security and strategic national interests anywhere in the world at any time for any reason - even to prevent more mass-casualty terrorist attacks in the homeland. Since, you know, Bush staged 9/11 in the first place to justify a neoNazi dictatorship, and all that.

The Fifth Columnists aren't getting what they want, what they've lusted after for half a decade, and they're throwing a temper tantrum.

You know it's outrageous when the usually mild-mannered Ed Morrissey gets in high moral dudgeon:

It’s drearily predictable. It’s also absolutely despicable. It’s character assassination of the lowest order....they have thrown the worst insult possible for a man of honor and integrity — traitor.

Demeaning the military in this fashion damages the nation and gives comfort to our enemies. I question MoveOn’s patriotism and their timing. They apparently have become so invested in defeat for their own political purposes that they’re willing to sabotage our war efforts to get it, and to besmirch the character of people who have done more for our nation in a single day than MoveOn has in its entire, miserable existence. Shame on them, shame on the politicians who engage them, and shame on the people who support them.
Ed's a great read when he's pissed, isn't he? Makes me wish he'd blow his stack more often.

Of course, moveon has no "patriotism" to question. Nor does becoming so stridently candid about their Ameriphobia, especially with the anniversary of 9/11 and the accompanying reminders of what was done to us six years ago in such close proximity, make any sense politically. General Petraeus' testimony will come off much as that of Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice Samuel Alito did in their SCOTUS confirmation hearings a couple of years back. The Donks will try to squash Petrateus and it'll backfire on them, Wile E. Coyote-like. moveon's ad isn't the vanguard of a slick, unstoppable PR offensive, but the raging throes of an anti-war movement that has suffered a sudden and precipitous loss of mojo when it was least expecting it.

I italicized the sentence in the backquote above more for the word "timing," though. Context is everything if current events are to be understood, and on Saturday the Admiral connected precisely those dots:

The terrorists arrested in Germany had a deadline for their attack on Ramstein Air Base and the Frankfurt airport, given to them by their al-Qaeda masters: September 15th. Why that date, rather than the more obvious 9/11 anniversary? AQ has more current politics in mind....

Congress set a deadline on September 15th as well - the due date for a progress report on the Iraq War from President Bush....AQ wanted to replicate the Tet offensive, only not in Iraq but in Europe. A devastating attack before Bush delivered his report would tend to discredit the forward strategy pursued by the Administration since the 9/11 attacks....

His video message was timed to deliver that purpose. His announcement would have immediately preceded the attacks in Germany and Denmark, emphasizing AQ's ability to strike anywhere in the world. And it probably would have had the effect Osama intended, had it worked; there is little doubt that war critics would have redoubled their effort to discredit the forward strategy and force Bush to pull out of Iraq.

As it is, the "war critics" are redoubling those efforts anyway; they're just not doing so with any fresh momentum behind it, but rather against a stiff and growing headwind. And that helps explain the recklessness of their burgeoning persecution of General Petraeus that will begin tomorrow.

Not to stake another claim at prophethood or anything, but a week ago I said:
I wouldn't go so far as to even jokingly suggest that Donk leaders have a direct communications line to an unspecified cave somewhere in northwestern Pakistan, but I don't think it far-fetched at all to speculate that they're perhaps spreading out their prayer rugs in secret and begging bin Laden's demon god for an Iraqi "Tet" to pull their cherished defeat from the jaws of burgeoning victory.
Looks like they're "prayers" aren't being answered. And their despicable reaction will be a....well, Godsend for the forces of truth, justice, and the American way.