The Fog of Anti-War

Criticism of our war effort is a right of all Americans. Informed criticism of the war is necessary to help us fight the war better and win. Unfortunately, most criticism is not done for the purpose of helping us win but for getting us to lose. And yes, that ill-informed dissent that does nothing to aid our victory has an effect on the course of the war.

This post addresses the amazing ignorance of military matters that so many war critics display:

True to Clausewitzian thought, the answer lies in the political realm. Opposition to President Bush has become downright religious for some Americans—activists whose greatest fear is that victory in Iraq would be tantamount to justifying the whole invasion and occupation.

Thus leftist pundits erect pyramids of anti-war rhetoric, built on falsehoods, misconception, and doubt—constructs that serve as pillars of justification for a hasty retreat. None of it is built on sound military judgment or expertise, which should be a requisite for respected war punditry, but like Ronnie said, "they know so much that isn't so." And, there's nothing left-o'-center bloggers love more than to show off that knowledge.

One would think that their lack of knowledge would give them pause in offering their opinions about the war. But the only war they are really fighting is the war for the White House so criticisms of the war our president leads us in don't have to be right or even based on anything even closely resembling knowledge about the war or war in general.

But as I concede, freedom of speech does not require any minimum knowledge.

But it sure does make such criticism hard to take without access to plentiful and inexpensive alcoholic beverages.