Democrat Tsunami and radical changes in Iraq?
Dr. E's analysis
It's almost been one month and one week since the Democrat Tsunami washed away the Republican kings of the Hill. Next month, Capitol Hill will change hands, from U.S. Rep. Dennis Hastert (R-IL) to U.S. Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and U.S. Sen. Bill Frist (R-TN) to U.S. Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV).
The media have been awashed for years of radical changes in Iraq, perhaps an immediate withdrawal said Pelosi and U.S. Rep. John Murtha (D-PA). Since the Democrats are in the congressional drivers' seat, they have to be verbally responsible--if they want to keep their leadership in both the Senate and the House. With leadership comes responsibility, hence their will be little talk about immediately withdrawal.
In fact, U.S. Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI) has virtually echoed President Bush's call to let the generals on the field dictate decisions including a 12-18 month phased redeployment. Come 2008, the Bush doctrine and his War on Terror, much as the Dems want to throw it overboard will, in fact, dominate the debate.
If the Democrat leaders such as Pelosi, Murtha, with the vocal assistance of U.S. Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) and U.S. Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA), were really committed to immediately withdrawing U.S. troops, their first order of business must be to, with one voice, defund the war effort in Iraq. Are you going to hear such clarion calls from congressional leaders?
Conclusion: With some tactical changes, all in all, little will change in Iraq during the next 12-18 months militarily and monetarily. Democrats don't want to be responsible for radical changes that lead to military losses, Iraqi anarchy and God forbid, a terrorist attack in CONUS (continental United States), esp. with the political tidal wave of the 2008 presidential and congressional elections fast approaching.
With responsbility comes political moderation and electoral consideration.
What do you think?
3 comments:
Well written article.
Political Responsibility
The flip-side of remaining inactive or reluctent to change will have consequences for Republicans and Democrats alike. If Democrats choose to keep rotating troops through Iraq striding along with current Bush activity, they lose credibility for those Americans who desire progress and, most of all, change in Iraq.
Who can trust in leadership who, when give the chance to change the methodolgy and pragmatics in Iraq, decide to steer away from changing anything and hide behind an already beaten-down Bush?
How can any cognizent voter then turn over the control and direction of the United States future to a party that seems content to have a scapegoat and that considers the popularity of the majority more important than the security of that majority?
And if Democrats keep backing Bush policy, why not elect another Republican with the same agenda as Bush to presidency in 2008? So far, the Democrats don't seem to have a problem following the Republican lead. They seem more interested in the title of a seat rather than the opportunity toward the embetterment of American that said title should provide.
Unfortunately, the people of this great nation will never hear the clarion call of Democratic cowardice in the news media. And once again, the Republicans will attempt to distance themselves from the Bush "regime" in the 2008 election instead of sounding the truth aloud for the public ear and aligning themselves with the strength and consistency that Bush has maintained up until now in his presidency.
If the Democrats are wise, they will enact some plan to appease the American palette so that they can flout with pomp and prestige a 2008 presidential candidate to the American people. But wise voters will look to the policies and activities of the Democrats during these next two years and decide if it is safe to entrust the nation to an untested and unreliable Democratic party or turn back to practical leaders that have back-bone and will not stop short of what is best and possible in Iraq.
Rex, thanks for the positive feedback.
Brandon, I appreciate your interest and insight, esp. your last statement "But wise voters will look to the policies and activities of the Democrats during these next two years and decide if it is safe to entrust the nation to an untested and unreliable Democratic party or turn back to practical leaders that have back-bone and will not stop short of what is best and possible in Iraq."
This is an important question. Leadership with political backbone, moral values and real commitment to national security will, I believe, have the electoral edge.
Dr. E
Post a Comment