Saruman has found a Wormtongue

Former Marine General and Pompous Windbag Anthony Zinni has convinced author Tom Clancy to join him in his quest to topple the Evil Donald Rumsfeld. Clancy reportedly now believes the war was a mistake, and blames it on (who else) the Defense Department. Instapundit and others are concerned, and the Great Professor rhetorically asks if Bush can "afford to lose the Clancy fan vote".

Actually, Clancy is the one who should be worried. His fan base is made up mostly of men who have served in the military and who are far more patriotic than the general population (like myself and El-ahrairah). That includes many men who are currently on the ground in Iraq and who are far better informed about what is going on there than either Clancy or Zinni. The real question should be, "Can Clancy afford to associate with the anti-war crowd?" The answer is a resounding "NO".

And Clancy really should beware of hitching himself to Zinni, who clearly has a personal axe to grind. As the American Thinker points out, some of Zinni's statements about prominent Administration "neocons" have an uncomfortable whiff of anti-Semitism about them. Zinni believes toppling Saddam was not worth the price and that we are destined to fail. His fatalism contrasts starkly with the improving conditions in Iraq. Zinni's criticism is somewhat akin to a retired general taking Eisenhower to task for the high casualties of "Operation Overlord" just a few weeks before V-E day.

In my opinion, Clancy has spent far too much time with Pentagon insiders. He is so enamored with intrigue and the trappings of power that he has lost perspective of what is really important. I know this Clancy reader isn't going to buy his new book, and it's doubtful I'll buy any others. I have only a limited amount of spending money; I'm not going to waste it on pessimistic, politically-motivated screeds.