Hamilton, Madison, and Jay

This blog is devoted to a variety of topics including politics, current events, legal issues, and we even take the time to have some occasional fun. After all, blogging is about having a little fun, right?

Location: Mesa, Arizona, United States

Who are we? We're a married couple who has a passion for politics and current events. That's what this site is about. If you read us, you know what we stand for.

Wednesday, July 11, 2007

The WaPo takes the round-heeled ones to task

Even though they disagree with the war, the editorial board at the WaPo says that the current idea of withdrawal is "wishful thinking" on Congress's part, and that they should let the generals in the field have the time that was agreed upon:

IT SEEMS like just weeks ago, because it was, that Congress approved funding for the war in Iraq and instructed Gen. David H. Petraeus to report back on the war's progress in September. Now, for reasons having more to do with American politics than with Iraqi reality, September isn't soon enough. Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) says he wants a vote in the next week or two "to truly change our Iraq strategy," by which he means starting to withdraw U.S. troops. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.), the leading Democratic candidate for president, urged President Bush on Tuesday "to begin ending the war . . . today." Increasing numbers of Republicans agree. But many of them seem reluctant to confront the likely consequences of a U.S. troop withdrawal.

We agree with Mrs. Clinton that President Bush has been guilty of "wishful thinking" on Iraq. When he was promoting his surge policy at the beginning of this year, we said Iraq's political leadership was unlikely to accept compromises any time soon. It was predictable, therefore, that Mr. Bush's benchmarks would not be met and that within a few months the policy he put forward without popular or congressional support would become even more difficult to sustain.

But his wishful thinking can't excuse, even if it helps explain, the wishful thinking on the other side. Advocates of withdrawal would like to believe that Afghanistan is now a central front in the war on terror but that Iraq is not; believing that doesn't make it so. They would like to minimize the chances of disaster following a U.S. withdrawal: of full-blown civil war, conflicts spreading beyond Iraq's borders, or genocide. They would have us believe that someone or something will ride to the rescue: the United Nations, an Islamic peacekeeping force, an invigorated diplomatic process. They like to say that by withdrawing U.S. troops, they will "end the war."

Conditions in Iraq today are terrible, but they could become "way, way worse," as the U.S. ambassador to Iraq,
Ryan C. Crocker, a career Foreign Service officer, recently told the New York Times. If American men and women were dying in July in a clearly futile cause, it would indeed be immoral to wait until September to order their retreat. But given the risks of withdrawal, the calculus cannot be so simple. The generals who have devised a new strategy believe they are making fitful progress in calming Baghdad, training the Iraqi army and encouraging anti-al-Qaeda coalitions. Before Congress begins managing rotation schedules and ordering withdrawals, it should at least give those generals the months they asked for to see whether their strategy can offer some new hope.

How come the WaPo gets this and Congress doesn't. I mean, the editors aren't in the loop. They're not seeing what Congress sees daily with regard to the war, but they get it. We can't simply pull out; not now, not 120 days from now, not even next year. We don't leave until the job's done, and it's not even close to being finished yet. The full surge is still in it's infancy. Can the boots ont he ground be given the time they need before the cut-and-run Congress decides to wave the white flag?

Ace over at Ace of Spades weighs in with a simple reminder:

A vote for defeat is a vote for Al Qaeda.

And maybe they can't win without moderates, but they won't be winning without Republicans, either.

I'd like to point out that we are taking a verbal beating from some of our Republican friends that are calling us traitors for taking this stand. They keep telling us that we're going to cause a larger loss for the GOP in 2008, and that we may even lose the White House. First off, Marcie and I aren't CAUSING anything. The GOP is doing this. The Congress is doing this. Secondly, if the Chicken Little's out there would sit down and THINK for a moment, they may see the light finally.

The GOP has a big tent. We're proponents of this theory. The problem is that when the adults stepped away from the wheel for a second, the moderate kids took the helm, and steered us away from the original conservative roots. We got Lindsey Graham and Trent Lott steering us down a river laden with pork and amnesty for illegals, threatening their own constituents, and lashing out at anyone who offers the slightest criticism. John McCain took his turn at the wheel, and played the "let's ignore the Constitution" game. Now we've got Voinovich, Collins, Lugar, Domenici, and Alexander pulling their best "cut-and-run liberal" imitations.

It's time the adults step back in and take the helm back before these yo-yos smash our ship against the rocks, and maroon us in the wilderness for years to come. But for that to happen, we can't just cross our fingers and hope someone in the GOP in Congress steps up to save the day. It's up to us. We did it before, and we can do it again. Get on the phones. Get on those e-mails. Make Congress hear us. (The reason you won't see Marcie here today until much later, if at all, is because she's on the phone right now taking a chunk out of some staffer's backside from Senator Lugar's office.) 202-225-3121 It'll take you a bit of time to do this (if you're doing it the way we are, which is to contact EVERY senator), or you can target a few of them. Marcie posted them here yesterday. Hugh has them here. While you're at it, you might want to swing by Hugh's new column today dealing with this subject.

These wobbly folks need to be reminded that their actions will have consequences. If it's necessary to toss them -- and if it's possible to do so int he primaries -- then it will be done.We hd no problem campaigning against Lincoln Chafee in 2006, and he rightfully deserved to be booted. The six GOP senators looking to "change direction in Iraq" can be given the same treatment. You can be wrong on almost anything except national security. That's the only deal-breaker we have in our book, and it's an unforgivable political sin that deserves only one punishment -- removal from office. That's got to be the message these six get. So, get to work. Let's stop this nonsense, and let the troops do what they have to do. At the very least, give them their due time. Don't let them pull the rug out from underneath the soldiers abroad just as they're getting geared up.

Publius II


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home