Well, TBH, if Obama gets elected, wouldn't it be true that the Democrats have succeeded?
From America's previous military history, we know America's military is extremely good. Even in those wars that America won say, Vietnam the military has performed admirably, and inflicted terrible casualties upon the enemy. The bravery and the professionalism of the American soldiers, Marines, sailors and airmen had never been put into question in any major conflict.
However, America's society does not lend itself well to prolonged conflict. Almost always the process is the same first America gets itself into a prolonged conflict somewhere, and first there is enthusiasm, and then the media and after them, the general public begin gnawing away at the process.
What will happen in Iraq, should America stay, will be approximately as follows:
America will stay, and America will continue to kick Islamist butt for the duration. Slowly but surely, progress will likely be made. However, the media will continue to eat away at the public support of the war. Then, eventually, after some sob story or another another 'burning girl' picture or one more Haditha 'scandal', or another Tet Offensive-like event the public's patience will break, and America will fold from Iraq on the least opportune moment. Hundreds of billions of dollars and thousands of lives will be pissed away, and the leftoids will gain enormous political capital for it.
In fact, unless a sweeping cultural change occurs of a kind that currently cannot be predicted any prolonged counter-insurgency effort overseas is in danger of ending up like this.
I don't see how this can be avoided.
Now, since America will fold from Iraq under the media pressure eventually, why not do it now and avoid wasting 500 billion dollars more?
Furthermore, as I already pointed out, America can afford to have a policy of engagement, rather than invasion.
You're not going to be automatically seen as cowards if you negotiate with your enemies. And if some country is stupid enough to think that America is weak because it negotiated with nation X or entity Y, and attacks America on that rationale, the US Navy, Air Force, Marines and Army are going to squash them like a bug.
Because it ain't Belgium or Poland. It's America.
I see this as a mis-reading of history.
A few counter-examples:
WWII: Years of heavy combat & the years-long occupation of Germany and Japan, as well as the decades we have had American troops stationed in W Europe and Japan.
Korean War: Years of battle & stationing of tens of thousands of American troops in S Korea for decades.
Balkans: It has been 13 years since we have had our troops in that cauldron of *expletive deleted*it.
No great outcry by America about the above commitments, even the 60+ year commitments. Clinton promised our boys would be out of Yugoslavia in a year. Thirteen years ago. Where are the constant media reports excoriating our boys' treatment of the locals? Where is ANSWER and the drum circles calling for us to get outta the Balkans and let them sort it out? Where are the congresscritters raging about flawed intel and being lied to?
There are reasons why we don't see the media and their post/anti-American allies going apeshiite over the above commitments, while tearing into the current conflict.
