Now is the time for resolve, not retreat

The DOD Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld issued an EDITORIAL in the Washington Post today. A thorough read will tell you, among other things:

Some have described the situation in Iraq as a tightening noose, noting that "time is not on our side"and that "morale is down." Others have described a "very dangerous" turn of events and are "extremely concerned."

Who are they that have expressed these concerns? In fact, these are the exact words of terrorists discussing Iraq -- Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and his associates -- who are describing their own situation and must be watching with fear the progress that Iraq has made over the past three years.

The Secretary discusses his observations and opinions regarding the situation in Iraq, and shares with us the notion that

"The terrorists seem to recognize that they are losing in Iraq."

He goes on to say that history will bear out the truth of this, and posits that

Fortunately, history is not made up of daily headlines, blogs on Web sites or the latest sensational attack. History is a bigger picture, and it takes some time and perspective to measure accurately.

There has been much exchange here of late regarding Iraq; whether there is a civil war(undeclared or otherwise) and whether we have accomplished anything of value or meaning. The Secretary suggests that while some are wringing their hands, or have declared a civil war in the Iraqi's stead, perhaps we should think about a little truth and reality:

The terrorists are determined to stoke sectarian tension and are attempting to spark a civil war. But despite the many acts of violence and provocation, the vast majority of Iraqis have shown that they want their country to remain whole and free of ethnic conflict. We saw this last month after the attack on the Shiite shrine in Samarra, when leaders of Iraq's various political parties and religious groups condemned the violence and called for calm.

Now, while some among us are convinced this was an unjust war, or was made so because we subsequently disproved our own intelligence regarding WMD (the essential indication that invasion was the only means to address our fundamental concern) the Secretary has an interesting perspective on where we are today:

The rationale for a free and democratic Iraq is as compelling today as it was three years ago. A free and stable Iraq will not attack its neighbors, will not conspire with terrorists, will not pay rewards to the families of suicide bombers and will not seek to kill Americans.

I have no problem staying the course under these auspices regardless of whether they match those under which we found ourselves crossing the Kuwaiti border 3 years ago.

The Secretary gets the last word in this post. Please pay attention to what he says here:

Though there are those who will never be convinced that the cause in Iraq is worth the costs, anyone looking realistically at the world today -- at the terrorist threat we face -- can come to only one conclusion: Now is the time for resolve, not retreat.

Consider that if we retreat now, there is every reason to believe Saddamists and terrorists will fill the vacuum -- and the free world might not have the will to face them again. Turning our backs on postwar Iraq today would be the modern equivalent of handing postwar Germany back to the Nazis. It would be as great a disgrace as if we had asked the liberated nations of Eastern Europe to return to Soviet domination because it was too hard or too tough or we didn't have the patience to work with them as they built free countries.

What we need to understand is that the vast majority of the Iraqi people want the coalition to succeed. They want better futures for themselves and their families. They do not want the extremists to win. And they are risking their lives every day to secure their country.

That is well worth remembering on this anniversary of Operation Iraqi Freedom.