The Fraud at Fleetcenter
by
Patrick
J. Buchanan
by
Patrick J. Buchanan
By
morning of the day John Kerry accepted his nomination, it was clear
the Kerry Party at the FleetCenter was perpetrating a fraud on the
delegates and on the nation. And many in the Big Media were going
along.
Consider.
Among the more than 4,000 delegates, two passions were predominant:
detestation of Bush and hostility to his Iraq war. Delegates were
as united in their desire to get out of Iraq as they were to get
out of Vietnam at the McGovern convention of 1972.
Yet,
in primetime speeches, George W. Bush's name had barely even been
mentioned. And, on the Iraq war, Sen. John Edwards, the vice presidential
nominee, declared, "We will win this war because of the strength
and the courage of our people."
"We
will win this war," Edwards said. Kerry has said he would be willing
to send additional U.S. troops.
But
what if Kerry and Edwards win in November and it becomes clear that
for America to win in Iraq will require more than the 140,000 troops
already there? Will Kerry, who would then be leading a nation that
already believes this war was a mistake, and a party that believes
it was an unnecessary and unwise if not unjust and immoral
war, be able to unite their party and the country behind the commitment
of thousands more of America's young?
Would
Howard Dean and Teddy Kennedy, both of whom opposed the war, back
a Kerry war policy? Would the black leaders of the party like Jesse
Jackson, Al Sharpton and Charlie Rangel, who want the troops home
now, support sending more troops to fight to win this war? Would
President Carter support more U.S. ground forces?
These
are not academic questions. There is a 50-50 chance Kerry and Edwards
will win, and America will face that situation in January. For it
appears today that if we are not willing to commit additional U.S.
forces, for a longer time than previously thought, we cannot win
the war.
The
day Edwards declared the United States will "win" this war, a suicide
bomber in Baquba killed 68 Iraqi police recruits and wounded 58
in one of the deadliest attacks since the war began. Nor was that
the sole incident on Edwards' big day.
As
The Associated Press reported, "Elsewhere U.S. and other forces
were caught in fierce gun battles ... including a fight with militants
who are thought to have entered from neighboring Iran." In that
battle, 42 died on both sides, 10 Iraqi security police were wounded
and 40 enemy were captured. A Polish major would not say whether
the captured enemy combatants were Iranians.
The
AP story continues: "Nearly 1,000 Iraqi civilians and security personnel
have been killed or wounded in guerrilla attacks since the U.S.-led
coalition handed power to an Iraqi government, a senior U.S. official
told Reuters news agency."
In
The American Conservative for Aug. 30, foreign policy scholar Andrew
Bacevich writes: "History suggests that one precondition for defeating
guerrillas is overwhelming numerical superiority, with a ratio of
10:1 traditionally cited as the minimum requirement. Even counting
the fledgling Iraqi army, allied contingents (some of dubious quality)
and the modern-day mercenaries known as private contractors, counterinsurgent
forces available in Iraq today fall well short of that 10:1 standard."
A
year ago, U.S. Gen. John Abizaid estimated there were 5,000 insurgents.
Since then, U.S. forces have killed and captured thousands. Yet
official estimates of enemy strength are now at 20,000, and the
incidence of attacks on U.S. troops and our Iraqi allies is continuously
rising.
"How
many U.S. troops," asks Bacevich, "do we actually need to pacify
Iraq, a landmass the size of California, with long, open borders
and an increasingly alienated population of 25 million? A quarter
of a million soldiers almost twice the number currently deployed
would not be too many."
While
he admonishes America's generals not to replicate the moral failure
of Vietnam refusing to tell civilian superiors what was needed
to win Bacevich suggests it is also a time for truth for the
White House: "Either the Bush administration needs to get serious
about winning the war that it so recklessly sought in Iraq, or it
needs to cut its losses."
Kerry
and Edwards, too, need to tell us how much blood and treasure they
are willing to expend on a democratic Iraq, how many more troops
will be needed and for how long, and what are the chances of victory.
And we need to be told before November.
We
need to be given a cold, hard, honest assessment of what we hope
to gain there, and what it will cost this nation, so we can decide
whether or not we wish to pay that price. We need an honest election.
Last week's fraud at the FleetCenter failed the test.
August
2, 2004
Patrick
J. Buchanan [send
him mail], former presidential candidate and White House aide,
is editor of The American
Conservative and the author of eight books, including A
Republic Not An Empire and the upcoming Where
the Right Went Wrong.
Copyright
© 2004 Creators Syndicate
Patrick
J. Buchanan Archives
|