WHAT IS AN, "EXIT STRATEGY ?" - THE SUNDAY COMMENTARY

The left has changed its tone a little and have now latched on to a different catch phrase of the week concerning Iraq. They discovered both in lack of popularity and a rather decisive, "NO,"vote in the House that the last catch phrase, "immediate pull out, " would not work. So now they have latched on to, " exit strategy." This phrase has been floated around by the left from time to time over the last several months and never had much momentum but since the vote in the House against John Murtha's pull out resolution and the mass migration from members of his party to distance themselves, (members I might add who supported it whole heartedly before its unpopularity was revealed), from Murtha the Dems have reached back for the, "exit strategy, " rhetoric and this time it seems to be catching on a bit, well at least with the media. Now what exactly do they mean when referring to, "exit strategy ?" One would think that it refers to a strategy that would lead the United States presence in Iraq to decrease and the Iraqis taking more of the responsibility and burden of governing and protecting their country. Now from all indications that is EXACTLY what is happening. But the left would have you believe otherwise and beneath the surface of the call for an, "exit strategy, " lay their true intent. This campaign is just another attempt to attack the war effort, the President and try to Vietnam-ize the War on Terror in Iraq by pulling out before the mission is complete, the defeatist attitude. From the beginning the Bush administration has had clear goals that are necessary to accomplish BEFORE we began any reduction of troops and presence in Iraq. First we had to take out Saddam Hussein, mission completed. Then to rebuild the country after 35 years of his brutal regime. This initails establishing a government, mission accomplished. Writing and ratifying a Constitution, mission accomplished. Organizing and holding FREE elections, mission accomplished. Defeating the terrorist insurgents, mission in process. Last but not least insuring that Iraq has a well trained and fully capable military of its own to protect herself from hostile neighbors and terrorist insurgents within, mission in process. This sounds like an, "exit strategy, " to me.

Let's put this into a little historical perspective. From the day that Allied forces set foot on the shores of Normandy in WWII the, "big three," had two goals in mind as an, "exit strategy, " from the European Theatre. First, defeat Nazi Germany and second, how to rebuild after the defeat. Even while the, "big three, " The United States, Great Britain and The USSR, were meeting in Tehran and Yalta to establish the areas of Europe that each would have influence over during the rebuilding, Hitler was still in power in Germany and the Allied forces were still fighting with the final outcome of the war as yet uncertain. When hostilities ended in April of 1945 with the defeat of Nazi Germany, loyalist to Hitler continued an, "insurgency," for a good while after his defeat yet in the midst of this fighting the process of rebuilding Europe began and after many years proved successful. There are some who suggest that The Cold War was a result of the Marshall Plan. WRONG ! The Cold War was a result of communist influence and The USSR's attempt to take over Europe and Asia to expand their communist empire. Even after the troops left the streets of Europe the United States has had a military presence in the form of bases throughout the continent to help insure that Europe would be protected. A complete pull out has NEVER occurred and WWII ended 60 YEARS AGO ! The most valuable lesson that the world learned from the WWI, which also ended in a German defeat, was NOT to pull out BEFORE the defeated are back on their feet. WWII was the direct result of allowing Germany to flounder after the total defeat of WWI which gave rise to the Nazi's and Hitler. The Marshall Plan, named after then Secretary of State and former General George Marshall resulted in the rebuilding of Germany and Europe after WWII and this rebuilding policy has been the rule ever since. After rebuilding a military presence in the form of bases exists for protection and strategic placement of our forces around the world. Iraq is no different. Once Saddam Hussein was defeated it became our responsibility in the mold of the Marshall Plan to fight the terrorist insurgency and assist Iraq in the process of rebuilding until they have the capability to protect and fully govern themselves. If we were to pull out now as the left suggests through their rhetoric, then the Mullahs of Iran, Al Qaeda, Hezbollah of Syria and Sunnis loyal to Hussein would plunge Iraq into anarchy and use the country as a center of operations for a global terror network while enslaving the citizens of the nation and educating their young in the ways of homicidal bombers and radical Islam. The ONLY buffer that prevents this are the brave men and women of the United States military and our coalition partners along with the policy of training Iraqi forces and building a government that is emerging into a Middle East Democracy. The left would have Iraq take the path of Vietnam and Europe after WWI. Their defeatist attitude at the expense of our military heroes, all in an attempt to undermine the Bush administration in a time of war and gain power in Washington, is as much an act of sedition, (the aid and comfort of the enemy), through their rhetoric and defeatism, as taking up arms against the United States is an act of treason. The only difference is that instead of using bullets to demoralize our fighting forces and bring down the nation, they use the words of non-support and political destruction!


Ken Taylor