A poor man's situational analysis
The major issue of the presidential campaign without a doubt is the GWOT (Global War on Terror) and specifically, the conflict in Iraq. Kerry and his supporters are in the un-enviable position of hoping that we will fail or at least have major setbacks, especially prior to Nov. 2.
However, in the long run, it seems obvious (historically and logically) that as long as America doesn't have a failure of will, we will prevail in Iraq. Thus the struggle for success in Iraq hinges to a large degree on the election. Kerry in his speeches and debates has indicated he does not have the will to perservere. At the first major setback, he will punt. So, Kerry wins, we lose. Bush on the other hand, has clearly expressed the opposite view. Therefore, if Bush wins, we shall prevail. Now, admittedly, the left does not see it that way, and feels that when/if we do lose (if Kerry will have been elected) it will be the fault of other than our will to win, but given the overwhelming resources America can put into play, failure in Iraq is really just a failure of will.
For good or ill, Kerry's campaign has to a great degree crystallized the left's opinions on the Iraq conflict. He calls the current situation a "quagmire", compares it to our loss in Vietnam, and wonders out loud if he might be inheriting a Lebanon-like situation (presumably recalling our Reagan years). This pessimistic outlook is becoming dogma for the left. After putting so much stock in the impossibility of the Iraq situation, what will happen if the prediction of the future is wrong. After all, they are counting on the inability of our remarkable military force to succeed. How long can al-Qaeda generate support with loss ratios larger than 10 or 20 and against an increasingly optimistic domestic background. Time will tell, but my guess is that Kerry is betting on the wrong side. In fact, if you listen to some of the reports posted by soldiers on the ground, via blogs and e-mail, the situation is by no means as bad as we read in the press.
If I am right we might be wise to examine how that will play out in the aftermath. It will almost certainly be much harder for the anti-American sentiments expressed to find traction in the electorate. Those in the "center" and those who aren't strongly for Kerry will find the arguments of the left less credible. The next big move in the GWOT will again pass muster in Congress even though the echoes of 9/11 are fading in the ears of many. In fact GOP domestic goals may also by association find it's stock rising. By betting all their pennies on Kerry's horse, they may lose big in the long run.
However, in the long run, it seems obvious (historically and logically) that as long as America doesn't have a failure of will, we will prevail in Iraq. Thus the struggle for success in Iraq hinges to a large degree on the election. Kerry in his speeches and debates has indicated he does not have the will to perservere. At the first major setback, he will punt. So, Kerry wins, we lose. Bush on the other hand, has clearly expressed the opposite view. Therefore, if Bush wins, we shall prevail. Now, admittedly, the left does not see it that way, and feels that when/if we do lose (if Kerry will have been elected) it will be the fault of other than our will to win, but given the overwhelming resources America can put into play, failure in Iraq is really just a failure of will.
For good or ill, Kerry's campaign has to a great degree crystallized the left's opinions on the Iraq conflict. He calls the current situation a "quagmire", compares it to our loss in Vietnam, and wonders out loud if he might be inheriting a Lebanon-like situation (presumably recalling our Reagan years). This pessimistic outlook is becoming dogma for the left. After putting so much stock in the impossibility of the Iraq situation, what will happen if the prediction of the future is wrong. After all, they are counting on the inability of our remarkable military force to succeed. How long can al-Qaeda generate support with loss ratios larger than 10 or 20 and against an increasingly optimistic domestic background. Time will tell, but my guess is that Kerry is betting on the wrong side. In fact, if you listen to some of the reports posted by soldiers on the ground, via blogs and e-mail, the situation is by no means as bad as we read in the press.
If I am right we might be wise to examine how that will play out in the aftermath. It will almost certainly be much harder for the anti-American sentiments expressed to find traction in the electorate. Those in the "center" and those who aren't strongly for Kerry will find the arguments of the left less credible. The next big move in the GWOT will again pass muster in Congress even though the echoes of 9/11 are fading in the ears of many. In fact GOP domestic goals may also by association find it's stock rising. By betting all their pennies on Kerry's horse, they may lose big in the long run.
posted by Mark at 10/12/2004 09:30:00 PM
<< Home