It Took The Colonial Forces Six Years to Beat the Britts!

The leftist media and the left wing of the Congress of the United States keeps reminding the public how long it is taking to win in Iraq. The un-patriots like Senator Reid and Congressman Murtha have gone so far as to say the war is already lost.
Of course the war is a tragic way to lose the lives of our young people in uniform, but The cause is noble and even the sceptics are beginning to see the progress made by the new military leadership of General Petraeus and the additional 25,000 troops inserted in operation "break al Qaeda's back".

History is a boring thing to any people, but it tells us many things that are applicable to today.

In 1773 the Colonists in the New America grew tired of the "taxation without representation" so they dumped a ship load of tea into Boston Harbor. Many historians claim this was the beginning of the Revolutionary war for OUR Independence.

Most history books, if you can still find them, will show that the Revolutionary war began at Lexington on the 19th of April 1775, and was continued two months later at Bunker Hill. The colonists were soundly defeated in both battles. In fact if it were not for the help of the French Naval Forces, the colonists probably would have lost the war. Most of the land battles were won by the superior trained and disciplined British forces.

But we did win in six years, and by that time had the Declaration of Independence ratified by all the colonies. Virgina, the home of Thomas Jefferson, the writer of The Declaration of Independence, was the first to ratify it in and declare their independence from England, even though the war was raging on.

Then Americans proceeded to give themselves a Constitution which they hoped would hold them together more effectively than the Congress which carried them through the war.Then they held a Convention for that purpose at Philadelphia during the summer of 1787. The difficulty was to find terms of union between the three great states—Virginia, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts—and the smaller ones, which included New York. The great states would not allow equal power to the others; the small ones would not allow themselves to be swamped by mere numbers. Therefore one chamber was given to population, and the other, the Senate, to the states on equal terms. Every citizen was made subject to the federal government as well as to that of his own state. The powers of the states were limited. The powers of the federal government were actually enumerated, and thus the states and the union were a check on each other. That principle of division was the most efficacious restraint on democracy that has been devised; for the temper of the Constitutional Convention was as conservative as the Declaration of Independence was revolutionary.

The Federal Constitution did not deal with the question of religious liberty. The rules for the election of the president and for that of the vice–president proved a failure. Slavery was deplored, was denounced, and was retained. The absence of a definition of State Rights led to the most sanguinary civil war of modern times. Weighed in the scales of Liberalism the instrument, as it stood, was a monstrous fraud. And yet, by the development of the principle of Federalism, it has produced a community more powerful, more prosperous, more intelligent, and more free than any other which the world has seen.

What has this got to do with Iraq? We are trying to help establish a freely elected constitutional based society in a country that was ruled by a tyrant dictator for years. It took us six years to establish OUR REPUBLIC, and it will take many years to assist Iraqis in forming their new country. How long? Until the job is done!