Charles Krauthammer's new article talks about Lieberman's loss, the momentum it may create for Democrats in November and the long term effects of that direction:
"...But for the Democratic Party it will be an expensive and short-lived indulgence. The Iraq war will end, as will the Bush presidency. But the larger conflict that defines our times -- war on Islamic radicalism, more politely known as the war on terrorism -- will continue, as the just-foiled London airliner plot unmistakably reminds us. And the reflexive antiwar sentiments underlying Ned Lamont's victory in Connecticut will prove disastrous for the Democrats in the long run -- the long run beginning as early as November '08...." (Read the whole Article)
While I was reading this I kept thinking of a line from "Hero" (an aesthetically beautiful Jet Li movie):
"There are heroes in every war from both sides."
As much as it may be a "pleasing statement", I don't believe that. I don't believe there are heroes in the anti-war movement...I believe they are on the wrong side of history and their message (if it prevails) would cost more lives than it would save (as appeasement always does). There are also no heroes on the side of radical Islamic terrorism. There is no heroism in terror and a sick guerilla warfare that relies on using civilians as shields.
The only heroes in this 'Global War on terror' are the men and women on the front lines -the ones fighting to stop people that have stated their goals to kill infidels and crush the West. The Warriors that complete this task even when they are unappreciated, when they stop getting email and packages, when they watch CNN and it looks like the entire country is against them. They are the heroes.