Captive to partisan passion

Good description, and it could apply to just about any topic in the culture and in politics today. Over at First Things, Fr. Richard John Neuhaus deftly weaves it into a wise analysis of the Iraq war options and the president’s address.

One can agree with his statement: “The challenge playing out across the broader Middle East is more than a military conflict. It is the decisive ideological struggle of our time.” Certainly, it is linked inextricably to the decisive ideological struggle of our time, which is the multi-faceted challenge posed by Islamic Jihadism.

I extracted that line from the president’s address the other day as a critical reality that we have to understand.

And one can agree with this: “Honorable people have different views and they will voice their criticisms. It is fair to hold our views up to scrutiny. And all involved have a responsibility to explain how the path they propose would be more likely to succeed.”

But they don’t, for the most part. There is a glut of criticism and a dearth of responsible and reasoned proposals for viable alternatives. Heck, there’s a dearth of plain good ideas for any other solution.

For the record, I have no path to propose.

I’m with Neuhaus on that. But…

I confess to being haunted by the recent observation of Bernard Lewis that the retreat of the United States from Iraq will establish throughout the world the perception that “America is harmless as an enemy and treacherous as an ally.” Such an outcome cannot be good for America and cannot be good for the world.

We’re already seriously suspect by our allies for the serial intelligence leaks in our mainstream media, mostly The New York Times. How much confidence can the western world have in working with us when vital anti-terrorist programs are blown on the front page of the Times repeatedly?

Neuhaus notes their intractable behavior.

The New York Times editorial the next day held no surprises: “President Bush told Americans last night that failure in Iraq would be a disaster. The disaster is Mr. Bush’s war, and he has already failed. . . . Without a real plan to bring [the war] to a close, there is no point in talking about jobs programs and military offensives. There is nothing ahead but even greater disaster in Iraq.”

The editors do not say that they fear the policy will fail. With an air of supreme confidence they predict, as they have been predicting all along, that the U.S. will fail in Iraq. The editors have a steep stake in the vindication of their predictions. The editors want the U.S. to fail. This is vile.

Yes, it is. And so is blowing the cover of US intelligence efforts to track and stop terrorists.

Those less captive to partisan passion know that this is not “Mr. Bush’s war” but America’s war. All the mistakes notwithstanding, it was initiated for justifiable ends. I believe we are morally obliged to pray that it will be concluded in a manner that will benefit the people of Iraq and the greater Middle East and will not bring discredit upon America and its necessary role in the world. I earnestly wish I could be more confident of how that prayer will be answered.

Politicians and journalists need to be that earnest, and we all need to make that prayer.