Senator Harry Reid is the Majority Leader in the US Senate. So, his statement this week is pretty damn shocking for any Democrat to make, but apparently one Democrat had to say it/lie first as part of their bid to win back the White House in 2008 and he eagerly took up the task:
"This war is lost, and this surge is not accomplishing anything, as is shown by the extreme violence in Iraq this week," Senate Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid told reporters, referring to the U.S.-led security push in Baghdad. - Globe and Mail
This now clears the way for the Democrat Presidential hopefuls to come out strongly against sticking it out in Iraq, such as Barak Obama and Hillary Clinton, who have based their Presidential bid on Failure in Iraq. An Iraq mission that is going well around election time will spell doom for any Cut-and-Run candidate.
The definition of treason, according to Wikipedia, "is the crime of disloyalty to one's nation." The campaign in Iraq is both military and political in nature. Now Senator Reid is an experienced politician and every experienced politician knows that you NEVER, EVER, declare defeat before its over. In this case, Senator 'Benedict' Reid is declaring the war lost in order to force an end to the mission in order to benefit his political party at the expense of the country. That is disloyalty. (To be clear, he has made a treason statement. Whether he is guilty of treason is a question for someone else to answer.)
Of course, the war is nowhere near lost.
Being a member of Congress, Senator Reid has access to confidential information concerning the situation in Iraq. This gives Senator Reid access to information not available to the rest of us, who unfortunately have to rely on biased reporters to tell the story that fits their agenda.
The Senator's statement that "this war is lost" means one of two things; Either he has neglected his responsibility to review this information, instead obtaining his opinion from the evening news and his anti-war constituents, or if he has reviewed the information available to Congress, he has either just released secret information to the public or more likely is lying about the present situation as presented to congress for political gain. It is hard to say which possibility is worse, but either way, the Senator is wrong.
The thought that the US might be 'losing' in Iraq as idiotic. After all, we have taken and held Iraq for over four years. The only way that those who continue to fight against us can win is if we pull out of the country, leaving it mostly undefended. The attacks against the US, the Iraqi Government and the people of Iraq take no possession of any land. There is no government that is fighting against the US in Iraq. (Except maybe Iran) Most of the attacks no longer even target the US. Instead, terrorists are simply killing for no reason, other than to instill fear in the local population and provide useful idiots, like Senator Reid, with the ammunition they need to further their own agenda. In exchange, these terrorists expect to be rewarded with a withdrawal of American troops.
Senator Lieberman's statement on Reid's comment seems to confirm that Senator Reid is misrepresenting the situation in Iraq.
WASHINGTON - Senator Joe Lieberman (ID-CT) today made the following statement in response to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's comment that the Iraq War is "lost:""This week witnessed horrific terrorist attacks by Islamist extremists in Iraq, killing hundreds of innocent civilians and leading Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to declare that the war is 'lost.'With all due respect, I strongly disagree. Senator Reid's statement is not based on military facts on the ground in Iraq and does not advance our cause there.Al Qaeda's strategy for victory in Iraq is clear. They are trying to murder as many innocent civilians as possible in an effort to reignite sectarian fighting and drive us to retreat from Iraq.The question now before us is whether we respond to these terrorist attacks by running away as Al Qaeda hopes - abandoning the future of Iraq, the Middle East, and ultimately our own security to the very same people responsible for this week's atrocities - or whether we stand united to fight them.This is exactly the wrong time to conclude that we have lost the war in Iraq, or that our new strategy has failed. Instead, we should provide General Petraeus and his troops with the time and the resources to succeed. We should not surrender in the face of barbarism." - Senator Lieberman
One of the most damaging moves to our Military the US has made in the War on Terror (or whatever the Democrats decide to call it) was President Clinton's arbitrary withdrawal from Somalia. The message sent to terrorists was that the US would quit a fight if they could manage enough havoc to make the mission look like a mess on the evening news. They are trying to repeat their success in Iraq. This is seen by the number of attacks in Baghdad. The attacks take place there, not because it is the Capital, but because that is where the TV cameras and reporters are. But what about the rest of the country? Haven't heard much, have you?
Iraq causes problems for Democrats in the 2008 Presidential Elections. To this point, they have put all their eggs into the failure basket. So, they need to ensure that Iraq is wound up prior to the next Presidential election simply because the electorate will not trust the Democrats to handle Iraq correctly, even if their intent is to withdraw. This can be seen already with how the left disapproves of how the Democrat-Controlled Congress has dealt with Iraq so far.
Maybe the Senator should spend some more time dealing with his own scandals including; Accepting donations from clients of convicted felon Jack Abramoff, using received political donations for personal use, adding Congressional pork projects that would effect the price of land that he owns and a shady land deal.
Senator Reid needs to clarify how he came to this conclusion.
Setting The Record Straight: Sen. Reid's Inconsistent And Conflicting Statements - White House