Liberals stole their ponies, too

I was wondering when this would start gathering steam in the wingnutosphere.

The trouble with the argument that it was somehow "PC Rules of Engagement" that have made VICTORY in Iraq so darned allusive is that while these idiots argue that it's such liberal softiness as more focus on nation building, security, and cultural awareness that is tying our troops' hands there, the commander on the field is complaining that the military is being asked to solve problems that require non-military solutions.

General Abizaid is credited with coining the phrase, “the long war,” to describe the challenge of combating terrorism, especially radical Islamic terrorism. He still uses, but no longer favors, the label, according to his aides, because too many people focused only on “war” and a military solution.

He says the United States government is inadequately organized for the new type of threat, and that success in the counterterrorism mission, in Afghanistan, Iraq and beyond, requires all of the government to go to war, and not just the military.

“I think our structures for 21st-century security challenges need to adapt to this type of an enemy,” he said. “The 21st century really requires that we figure out how to get economic, diplomatic, political and military elements of power synchronized and coordinated against specific problems wherever they exist.”

Why, that sounds like a liberal position, doesn't it? One many of us have been advocating for five years. And one the current commander in chief will never adopt because, as you know, “We’re not winning. We’re not losing.”