My favorite Repugnican talking point lately has been, “don’t criticize the war effort, it emboldens the enemy and endangers our troops.” As if reporting about daily car bombings, mass loss of civilian life, and the steady 2.1/day trickle of American casualties is what makes it so and our enemies are watching CNN for the latest on Iraq, rather than looking out their own windows.

The theory, I suppose, is that if we didn’t see that terrible stuff on our TV screens, we’d all think Iraq was going just fine. Then public support for this endeavor would remain high, and the enemy would realize our resolve is firm and there’s no chance of a withdrawal of troops because we can’t stand the sight of American blood.

But because we see the carnage dragging on and on, our support wanes and the enemy learns that the more he kills, the more likely we are to leave. Our troops are in danger because low poll numbers mean more attacks.

There’s two reasons why this theory is garbage.

#1) If you want to fight a long, protracted war with shifting rationale and no exit strategy, and you don’t want that war’s failings to be seen by the public, then it’s time to fire up the flux capacitor in the DeLorean and time-travel back to 1850. For today we live in a globally-connected, satellite-fed, 24/7 news world.

George W. can wish all he wants for the days when news of a horrific battle took three months to arrive home by Pony Express. But like he wished for the existence of Saddam’s WMD’s, it just ain’t so.

You have to plan your battles and your wars for politics, setting, and the enemy you’ve chosen. If your cause is not moral and just enough to survive the scrutiny of internet and cable news, you’d better plan a different war. The harsh climate of instantaneous bad news is as much a concern for the 21st century warrior as the harsh climate of the Russian Front was for warriors of the previous millennium. It’s something you should plan for.

#2) The whole exercise of warfare is to kill as many of your enemy as you can. If we had a magic “bad news blackout” wand we could wave right now, insurgents would still be blowing up car bombs to kill lined-up Iraqi police and setting off IED’s to kill our troops. Their goal is to kill people and drive us from their homes.

You cannot outlast an insurgency in its own home. They will keep killing us until we leave. They are not aiming for lower poll numbers, they are aiming for our troops.

Now, if poll numbers drop, perhaps we do get skittish, we pull out our troops after only a couple of thousand dead. Or if Bush could wave that magic blackout wand, we stay longer and eventually pull our troops out after tens of thousands dead.

But to say criticism of the war and broadcast of bad news is what is harming the troops seems very strange coming from the crowd that always says, “guns don’t kill people; people kill people.” Good news, bad news, or no news at all, some mother’s son is going to shoot some other mother’s son in Iraq today.

If your war is just, if your motives are moral, if your actions are transparent, no bad news, no casualty report, no extended period of time will deter the American public and American military.

But when you deceive the American people; when you cede the moral high ground through torture, fraud, graft and suspension of habeas corpus; and when your rationale for war, definition of the enemy, and timetables and exit strategies are as shifting and incohate as the Arabian sands, you Mr. Bush are the one to blame for sinking public opinion. People who believe that sinking public opinion is putting our soldiers in danger should be pointing their finger at you, Mr. President, not me, other anti-war protestors, or the news networks.