What Might Have Been
Victor Davis Hanson is an interesting individual. I first came across him when I heard his name mentioned in Dr. Peikoff's lecture America vs. The Americans. Dr. Peikoff referenced his outstanding book, The Soul of Battle
, which I wholeheartedly recommend. Since then I've been following his essays on National Review, sometimes with interest and other times without. His understanding of war and of how it should be fought is quite good, however, and I have been impressed by his ability to see Bush's critical errors in Iraq, especially the refusal to shoot looters and the retreat from Fallujah.
His latest article, The Power of Will
, tosses out an idea that I found fascinating:
Had we secured Iraq by June 2003, the sputtering Kerry candidacy would by now have been faulting Bush for not going into Iran.
This is an interesting what if; would this really be the case? If Bush had been principled and defeated the terrorists and established order in Iraq (both of which were 100% possible to have accomplished), would such a striking victory
have made it impossible for an anti-war liberal to have won the Democratic primary? Would it have been so powerful that it would have destroyed any vestiges of appeasement as a practical policy?
I tend to think so. If Bush had lived up to his words following Sept. 11, we would probably now be in a position where the only viable president was one who was strong
on defense and foreign policy. And if I'm right, that is exactly
why Bush has got to go. He has done more for the policy of appeasement than John Kerry or Howard Dean could ever do; because of his default, he has given it the appearance
of respectability and practicality, which it could never have gotten by itself.
POSTED BY THE GENERAL AT 1:02 AM