Summer Soldiers
In the December 23, 1776 issue of The Crisis, Thomas Paine famously wrote:
THESE are the times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly: it is dearness only that gives every thing its value. Heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its goods; and it would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as FREEDOM should not be highly rated.In the January issue of Commentary, Norman Podhoretz observes:
But Paine did not limit his anguished derision to former supporters of the American War of Independence whose courage was failing because things had not been going as well on the battlefield as they had expected or hoped. In a less famous passage, he also let loose on another group:’Tis surprising to see how rapidly a panic will sometimes run through a country. . . . Yet panics, in some cases, have their uses . . . . [T]heir peculiar advantage is, that they are the touchstones of sincerity and hypocrisy, and bring things and men to light, which might otherwise have lain for ever undiscovered.Thus, he explained, “Many a disguised Tory has lately shown his head,” emboldened by the circumstances of the moment to reveal an opposition to the break with Britain that it had previously seemed prudent to conceal.
The similarities to our situation today are uncanny. We, too, are in the midst of a rapidly spreading panic. We, too, have our sunshine patriots and summer soldiers, in the form of people who initially supported the invasion of Iraq—and the Bush Doctrine from which it followed—but who are now abandoning what they have decided is a sinking ship. And we, too, are seeing formerly disguised opponents of the war coming more and more out into the open, and in ever greater numbers.
Yet in spite of these similarities, there is also a very curious difference between the American panic of 1776-7 and the American panic of 2005-6. To put it in the simplest and starkest terms: in that early stage of the Revolutionary War, there was sound reason to fear that the British would succeed in routing Washington’s forces. In Iraq today, however, and in the Middle East as a whole, a successful outcome is staring us in the face. Clearly, then, the panic over Iraq—which expresses itself in increasingly frenzied calls for the withdrawal of our forces—cannot have been caused by the prospect of defeat. On the contrary, my twofold guess is that the real fear behind it is not that we are losing but that we are winning, and that what has catalyzed this fear into a genuine panic is the realization that the chances of pulling off the proverbial feat of snatching an American defeat from the jaws of victory are rapidly running out.
Comments on "Summer Soldiers"
I'm sorry - can you describe the characteristics of this victory in Iraq? You know, the one that's staring us in the face?
And then somehow reconcile it with the facts on the ground?
In response to anonymous, I'd suggest you read Joseph Lieberman's recent op ed piece. Lieberman well explains that the situation in Iraq is confined, in terms of the violent opposition, to a few localities. Military leaders have been saying that for over a year, but it is widely ingored. The Insurgency is limited to a few areas.
It is true we may not win, but if we leave now, we will leave the country to descend into anarchy. It would be a shameful repeat of 1975, when we abandoned South Vietnam, when the application of US air power would have lead to a Communist defeat. That's lead to 30 years of Communist repression there, and it too the US ten years or more to get over it. Proving you are weak, and abandoning a situation you have created, is not in your best interest.
Of course, if one were to rely upon the New York Times, one would have no idea what we're talking about.
You know: Haliburton; Election of 2000; quagmire; failure in Afghanistan; lied about WMDs; lied about being able to fly airplanes; lied about whether he shaves his legs.
You know, that New York Times.
Scoreboard. Scoreboard. Scoreboard.
Yeah, it's obviously NOT a quagmire.
quag·mire n.
1. Land with a soft muddy surface.
2. A difficult or precarious situation; a predicament.
Of course! It's been easy, and not dangerous at all.
I'm aware the most vicious fighting is in approximately 4 of Iraq's 18 provinces. But it is indeed most vicious - it's terrorism, stupid. And they happen to be where the groups most opposed to US occupation live. It's a good thing that the coalition has had enough support to be able to isolate these pockets of resistance (as David Brooks of the NYT suggested months ago) and prevent them from gaining tactical support by securing the borders. Well done, guys!
Sincerely,
Feeling pretty sarcastic
Yaay! Come visit.
There are strange things done, in the midnight sun . . . .
I don't know what that means and I will not respond to it.
I am the walrus.