The difference between Democrats and Republicans has never seemed so stark. Yesterday John Kerry called for the removal of US troops from Iraq. By May 15th this year if Iraq can’t form a unity government; by the end of the year if they can:
Half of the service members listed on the Vietnam Memorial Wall died after America’s leaders knew our strategy would not work. It was immoral then and it would be immoral now to engage in the same delusion. We want democracy in Iraq, but Iraqis must want it as much as we do. Our valiant soldiers can’t bring democracy to Iraq if Iraq’s leaders are unwilling themselves to make the compromises that democracy requires.
As our generals have said, the war cannot be won militarily. It must be won politically. No American soldier should be sacrificed because Iraqi politicians refuse to resolve their ethnic and political differences.
This is what is called learning from ones mistakes, and Iraq (pardon the expression) has been the mother of all mistakes for the United States. Kerry, who was squishy on Iraq for far too long at least now has admitted that it’s time to end this travesty, and close the chapter on the American occupation of Iraq. We can do nothing more there that can be helpful, and our continued presence as an occupier will only cause additional harm to both the Iraqi people and our own troops.
The Republicans, under George Bush, however, are nothing if not consistent: consistently wrongheaded, that is. You see, Bush and Co. are dead set on attacking Iran. Take a look at this:
(Continued below the fold . . . )
‘Two B-2s could take out Iran’s nuclear assets’
By Khalid Hasan
WASHINGTON: Iran’s nuclear weapons ambitions will be history by the time US President George W Bush leaves office, said a report published here.
Veteran foreign correspondent Arnaud de Borchgrave, writing for the United Press International, quotes a “prominent neo-con” with good White House and Department of Defence contacts, as the source of the assertion. Asked what would the US do if sanctions did not make Iran turn away from its nuclear target, the source replied, “B-2s. Two of them could do the job in a single strike against multiple targets.” […]
According to de Borchgrave, “This is also the British assessment of Bush’s intentions against Iran, a power whose president has vowed to wipe Israel off the map. Today (April 3, 2006), senior British officials met with defence and intelligence chiefs to assess the consequences of air strikes against Iran – as well as European and global repercussions…”
[Link to Arnoud de Borchgrave’s original story quoted above]
Many of you know I’m not exactly thrilled with the quality of the leadership in the Democratic Party. But at least this much is certain: had Kerry been elected as President in 2004 we would at least had a grown up in the White House, one who understands the difference between determined and decisive leadership and the stubborn refusal to acknowledge reality when it bites you in the ass.
Bush is poised to make the single greatest error in US military and foreign policy history. That would be beating his own record after Iraq, true, but Iran would be far worse. More terrorism, a more violent and destabilized Middle East, oil prices through the upper stratosphere and the possible collapse of the global economy. And that’s the most promising scenario.
And the truly sad part is that Rove will have the Republicans campaigning on this foolishly dangerous war plan this Fall. It will be 2002 all over again, only the letter following I-R-A will be changed. Somehow we have to get a Democratic majority in the House of Representatives to either impeach these monsters, or forestall any authorization for the use of military force.
Even then, that may not be enough, if Bush decides to exercise his Commander-in-Chief powers unilaterally, as he has done with the illegal spying programs conducted by the NSA. But it’s the best chance we have to prevent a catastrophe of monumental proportions for America and the world.
