One of the unfortunate side-effects of Bush’s style of politics is that his opponents need to defend themselves against accusations that they are soft on national defense. And one of the saddest elements of our current political environment is that there is no way to prove that you are tough on national defense unless you are willing to spend more than the other guy.

I could argue otherwise, but I wouldn’t believe myself. Not really. So, it with a bit of sorrow that I have to analyze the Democrat’s Plan for dealing with national security issues.

The Dems had to water down their plan in order to get unanimity from the caucus. So, for example, there is no explict call for a timetable to leave Iraq, but rather a call to:

Ensure 2006 is a year of significant transition to full Iraqi sovereignty, with the Iraqis assuming primary responsibility for securing and governing their country and with the responsible redeployment of U.S. forces.

That is no more connected to current reality than anything that comes out of the Pentagon or the White House. But, the rest of the document is substantially better.

The Dems seek to:

Rebuild a state-of-the-art military by making the needed investments in equipment and manpower so that we can project power to protect America wherever and whenever necessary.

Guarantee that our troops have the protective gear, equipment, and training they need and are never sent to war without accurate intelligence and a strategy for success.

Enact a GI Bill of Rights for the 21st Century that guarantees our troops — active, reserve, and retired — our veterans, and their families receive the pay, health care, mental health services, and other benefits they have earned and deserve.

Strengthen the National Guard, in partnership with the nation’s Governors, to ensure it is fully manned, equipped and available to meet missions at home and abroad.

Despite the bellicosity inherent in the talk about “project[ing] power”, the real emphasis is on doing right by our troops by giving them the training, equipment, post-service opportunities and benefits they deserve.

The Dems also promise to “Eliminate Osama Bin Laden, destroy terrorist networks like al Qaeda, finish the job in Afghanistan and end the threat posed by the Taliban.”

That sounds easy to do on paper. In reality, it is a difficult job. It has only become more difficult through the leadership of Bush, and the Dems will not make too much progress as long as Bush and/or Cheney are in charge.

This is especially true because the Dems endorse the permawar on terror:

Eliminate terrorist breeding grounds by combating the economic, social, and political conditions that allow extremism to thrive; lead international efforts to uphold and defend human rights; and renew longstanding alliances that have advanced our national security objectives.

Secure by 2010 loose nuclear materials that terrorists could use to build nuclear weapons or “dirty bombs.”

Redouble efforts to stop nuclear weapons development in Iran and North Korea.

I don’t think a political party can gain a majority in America right now without talking tough on Iran, North Korea, loose nukes, and terrorist training camps. The Dems do have the right idea on how to minimize the dangers that these things pose. We need to repair our alliances, which requires ending our torture and rendition programs, reengaging the international community on a host of issues, abiding by international treaties, and obviously, (and this the Dems are still having trouble with) throwing out the President, his staff, and his enablers. Only a united and cooperative (and unthreatened!!) international community can effectively combat the threat of WMD and minimize the threat of terrorism.

Lastly, the Dems make a very good political decision, by hitting Republicans where it hurts. Oil and ports:

Achieve energy independence for America by 2020 by eliminating reliance on oil from the Middle East and other unstable regions of the world.

Increase production of alternate fuels from America’s heartland including bio-fuels, geothermal, clean coal, fuel cells, solar and wind; promote hybrid and flex fuel vehicle technology and manufacturing; enhance energy efficiency and conservation incentives.

Immediately implement the recommendations of the independent, bipartisan 9/11 Commission including securing national borders, ports, airports and mass transit systems.

Screen 100% of containers and cargo bound for the U.S. in ships or airplanes at the point of origin and safeguard America’s nuclear and chemical plants, and food and water supplies.

Prevent outsourcing of critical components of our national security infrastructure — such as ports, airports and mass transit — to foreign interests that put America at risk.

Provide firefighters, emergency medical workers, police officers, and other workers on the front lines with the training, staffing, equipment and cutting-edge technology they need.

Protect America from biological terrorism and pandemics, including the Avian flu, by investing in the public health infrastructure and training public health workers.

The Dems have put together a pretty tight, coherent, and politically sound package. It still is fighting this battle on the President’s terms and with his language. There is not a lot of self-reflection on the future direction of American Imperial designs throughout Central Asia.

But, the country is still not quite ready to question that. Maybe once the truth starts to come out about the extent of BushCo’s crimes, we will see a shift in the public’s mood. After all, Bush’s hubris is our hubris too. Iraq will eventually teach us all a lesson about the best way to secure peace at home and to safeguard our liberties. And Permawar ain’t it.

The Dems will come to that conclusion eventually. But it will take some doing, some new blood, and a hearty meal of humble pie before it becomes a political winner to question the Empire. For now, I’ll settle for ending the worst practices of our government, having aggressive investigations that lead to impeachments and resignations and indictments, and a return to multilateralism.

Work on those issues, because the bigger issues will eventually take care of themselves.

0 0 votes
Article Rating