We're Winning

Still think the war on terrorism is hopeless or lost? It's just not so. The Washington Post disagrees, in a front-page piece headlined "Insurgent Alliance Is Fraying In Fallujah; Locals, Fearing Invasion, Turn Against Foreign Arabs." (Also from today's WaPo, this article details recent progress in democratizing the Arab world.) Stratfor says so as well:

American and Iraqi troops are on the offensive against Sunni Arab and terrorist gangs. Over a year of effort in building up an intelligence network among the population had paid off. Even in the Sunni Arab areas, many people are fed up with the lawlessness and violence created where the gangs operate.

(via Instapundit) And blogger Arthur Chrenkoff provides vast detail of specific progress in Iraq in Monday's Opinion Journal.

It's been even better in Afghanistan. Last weekend,

the Afghan people took another step toward lasting peace and prosperity while dealing a blow to terrorism. Afghan women and men turned out in massive numbers to participate in the first direct presidential election in the country's history.

Despite widespread skepticism by U.S. media, international observers called the election "free and fair," and the losers declined to protest the outcome. A "success story," says Scott Norvell on TechCentral:

There were no car bombs raining body parts all over the polling stations. There were no last-minute assassinations. There were no drive-by shootings. The best they could come up with for "news" was grumbling from hopelessly trailing opposition candidates about washable ink and threats of a boycott. The media's disappointment was palpable.

Turnout was described as "massive." Men in turbans and baggy sharwals lined up in orderly fashion to cast their ballots, many of them with uncharacteristically chipper looks on their faces. One guy I saw at a mosque in central Kabul actually had mist in his eyes.

Yet John Kerry seemingly is indifferent. According to the Senator, terrorism is merely a "nuisance." Kerry wants America to "get back to the place we were."

I remember where we were. Before Bush adopted preemption and regime change, Americans were in terror's bulls eye. Afghans were yoked to brutal Taliban rule. And Iraqis were being planted in mass graves, such as the one unearthed today containing hundreds of bodies:

The victims are believed to be Kurds killed in 1987-88, their bodies bulldozed into the graves after being summarily shot dead.

One trench contains only women and children while another contains only men. The body of one woman was found still clutching a baby. The infant had been shot in the back of the head and the woman in the face.

Why would anyone--American, Afghan, Iraqi--want to "go back to [that] place"? If they could speak, what would the 3000 innocents murdered September 11th say?

President Bush understands that opposing middle-East terrorism better protects the innocent, Americans included:

A marvelous thing is happening in Afghanistan. Freedom is powerful. Think about a society in which young girls couldn't go to school and their mothers were whipped in the public square. And today, they're holding a presidential election.

The first person to vote in the presidential election, three years after the Taliban ruled that country with such barbarism, was a 19-year-old woman, an Afghan refugee, who fled her homeland during the civil war. Here's what she said: "I cannot explain my feelings, just how happy I am. I would never have thought I would be able to vote in this election." She's voting in this election because the United States of America believes that freedom is the Almighty God's gift to each man and woman in this world.

Hugh Hewitt lists Kerry's semiotics (his words, sounds and body language) as: "French, failure, weak, defeat, effete, elite." Neither America, nor the world, can afford such a leader in wartime. Especially when we're winning.