Who's Really in Denial?
KRISTOL, WILLIAM
EDITORIAL Who's Really in Denial? 'Americans face the choice between two parties with two different attitudes on this war on terror." —George W. Bush, September28, 2006 President Bush is right....
...To that end, Bush should do more...
...Bush and the Republicans know we are in a serious war...
...Who knows...
...The Democrats, as Bush has put it, "offer nothing but criticism and obstruction, and endless second-guessing...
...But at least he's staying and fighting...
...The legislation had nothing to do with Iraq...
...It's not the Bush administration that is in a "State of Denial" (as the new Bob Woodward book has it...
...The country would be better off if there were bipartisan agreement on what is at stake in the struggle against jihadist Islam...
...It was a "pure" war-on-terror vote...
...But despite areas of consensus, there is still a fundamental difference between the parties...
...Consider developments over the last week...
...More than would otherwise have been created if Saddam were still in power...
...To read the sections of the NIE subsequently released is to despair about the quality of our intelligence agencies...
...The center of the party wants withdrawal on a vaguer timetable...
...It's the Democrats...
...Democrats hyped last Sunday's news stories breathlessly reporting on one judgment from April's National Intelligence Estimate (NIE)—that the war in Iraq has created more terrorists...
...Last week was a good start...
...That's why last week's votes in Congress on the detainees legislation were so significant...
...And no wonder focus groups—according to the Democratic polling firm of Greenberg Quinlan Rosner—show that "attacks on Democrats for opposing any effort to stop terrorists . . . were highly effective...
...The party of FDR and the party of Harry Truman has become the party of cut-and-run...
...The left wing of the party continues to insist on withdrawal now...
...And the great majority of Republicans are standing with him...
...Three-quarters of the Democrats in the House and Senate stood with the New York Times and the American Civil Liberties Union for more rights for al Qaeda detainees, and against legislation supported by the Bush administration (as well as by John McCain and Joe Lieberman...
...The Democratic pollsters recommended countering the attacks forcefully...
...to carry on the fight...
...The Bush administration and the congressional leadership have given cause for grievance...
...He should send substantially more troops and insist on a change of strategy to allow a real counterinsurgency and prevent civil war...
...Republicans are viewed by a 12-point margin as the party that would be more likely to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons...
...So there really is a profound difference between the parties, as Democrats are happy to acknowledge, since they think Iraq is a winning issue for them...
...And the parties split...
...What is the Democratic response to these latter judgments...
...Bush, on other hand, understands that the only acceptable exit strategy is victory...
...Some Democrats in competitive races—such as Rep...
...Invite him to the Oval Office more often...
...The NIE seems not even to have contemplated how many terrorists might have been created by our backing down, by Saddam's remaining in power to sponsor and inspire terror...
...There are votes, in black and white in the Congressional Record, ready to be used in campaign ads...
...The Democratic talking point is this: We're against Bush on Iraq, but we are as resolute as Bush in the real war on terror (understood by them to exclude Iraq...
...It would be nice if he weren't...
...In any case, the NIE also made the obvious points that, going forward, "perceived jihadist success [in Iraq] would inspire more fighters to continue the struggle elsewhere," while jihadist failure in Iraq would inspire "fewer fighters...
...Except that they're not...
...But with sand in the diplomatic hourglass running out, voters can fairly be asked: Would Bush have more help in denying Ahmadinejad nuclear weapons from a Congress controlled by Republicans or by Democrats (whose main suggestion has been to cozy up to Iran without insisting that it verifiably suspend its nuclear program...
...Silence...
...We have been critical of the Bush administration's lassitude in attending to this task...
...Harold Ford, running for the Senate in Tennessee— supported the legislation...
...But how...
...No wonder voters think the country will be safer from terrorism if the GOP retains control of Congress...
...Off-year elections—especially when one party controls the presidency and Congress—are usually dominated by the expression of grievances stemming from that party's performance...
...But the choice is so stark this November that grievances should be put aside—if Republicans have the nerve to continue to clarify the choice over the next month...
...The most important front in the confrontation with terror-sponsoring, WMD-seeking Islamic jihadism in the next two years may well be Iran...
...But that's another story...
...If, as Woodward reports, he's been bolstered in that view by Henry Kissinger, then good for Henry...
...But it remains the case that a vote for Democrats is a vote for congressional leaders committed to kinder and gentler treatment of terrorists...
...William Kristol...
Vol. 12 • October 2006 • No. 4
