Democratic Solution: RUN
According to Robert Byrd and David Obey, Bush has only two choices- he can cave in and bring the troops home (what Byrd and Obey call “reaching across party lines to establish common ground on a strategy for ending US involvement in Iraq’s Civil War”) or he can continue on in the vein of Churchill, Roosevelt, Lincoln, and other great political leaders in the time of crisis and demand victory (what Byrd and Obey call “continue to divide the country by clinging to his failed policy.”) See how cleverly the avoide using the word victory? It’s not winning in Iraq to them, it’s “ending US involvement.”
Bush actually has a third choice- which is the one he’s pursuing. He’s ramming down the throats of defeatist Democrats the surge and there is not a thing they can do about it.
It is interesting that they twice mention “dividing the country.” The country is already divided- and it will stay divided. This will not change. Most conservatives do not want to be united with a group of people who start something and don’t finish it. Most conservatives do not want to be united with a group of people that stand for government at the expense of liberty. Most conservatives do not want to be united with a group of people that believe in any abortion, at any time, and for any reason. They want to defeat these kinds of people and remove them from power. Liberals feel the same way about conservatives.
“Unite the country” rather than divide it sure sounds nice- but that’s all it does is sound nice. It’s not possible. Bush was naïve for believing otherwise at the beginning of his first campaign and Byrd and Obey are now. But I think Bush has learned that you can’t reason with Democrats- you just have to ignore them when you can and fight them when you must.
April 18th, 2007 at 3:36 am
Let’s see: “ramming down the throats” — doesn’t that language better describe the actions of a monarch than a democratically elected president?
You have it exactly backwards. This isn’t Bush’s inability to “reason with democrats.” He has refused to acknowledge the fact that the majority of Americans are opposed to his Iraq policies and want to start bringing our troops home. He has refused to work with the Congress the American people elected in order to bring about change — something he promised to do after he acknowledged that the republicans received a “thumpin’.”
Victory? Inasmuch as we are not at war with the nation of Iraq nor attempting to force their surrender, that word seems to be a rhetorical device. It seems to be as delusional as Bush’s apparent notion that he is king rather than president of the United States.
April 18th, 2007 at 8:59 pm
To be clear “Doug” let’s get one thing straight…Americans are NOT against the war per se. They are against the way it has been handled…to which I would agree. Americans ARE for winning the war in Iraq. Look at any poll (except for left leaning sites) and you can see that Americans are for winning the war in Iraq and getting the hell out. When you ask a poll question do you think we should get out of Iraq every poll will say yes. Hell I think we should pull out. But only when we’re done. BUT the one question nobody likes bringing up are the polls that ask should we win the war in Iraq and THEN get out and overwhelmingly it is win the war and get out. I, like so many other Americans, are frustrated by the lack of progress that is being made. If Democrats AND Republicans would focus their energy towards winning this damn conflict together we wouldn’t be in half the mess we are in. I’m tired of hearing both sides fight about this. If Democrats want to help the troops then get the funding for them. If they want to help the troops get the money over there to get better armour, get better tanks, get better anything that will help them win quickly and get the hell out!!! Bush isn’t acting like a King. Democrats and Republicans overwhelmingly supported going into Iraq. They had the same information as the President. To say otherwise is lying. There has been NOTHING proven that shows otherwise. So here we are…we are in this fight and we sure as hell need to finish it quickly and get out!!! I hear Democrats saying we need to go to Darfur to help them. I agree. But let’s say Americans were not in Iraq and this so called “civil war” you are claiming was going on….the Democrats would be saying we should go in and help protect the people. Well, WE SHOULD!!! We should do whatever it takes to help the Iraqi people. No one deserves to live in fear which has been going on for decades in Iraq. We at least are trying to offer some hope to those people over there. It’s tough. No doubt about that. The Civil War was tough. The Iraqi’s are scared to death of what is happening. Us leaving is going to make it all the worse. So think about all those families and kids who will be slaughtered once we leave IF we leave early. We’re not slaughtering those people over there…they are doing it to each other and we have a duty and responsibility to stop it. I wish we would go into Darfur. It’s terrible to hear about such genocide!!! It’s terrible in ANY country!!! Eric
April 18th, 2007 at 11:02 pm
By all means, Eric, let’s get this thing straight. So please point out these polls that show Americans are for “winning the war in Iraq and getting the hell out.” (And to be fair, please don’t include a poll of Bush’s cabinet — agreed?)
You say: “BUT the one question nobody likes bringing up are the polls that ask should we win the war in Iraq and THEN get out and overwhelmingly it is win the war and get out.”
No, from what I see in the latest polls it is more like “let’s set deadlines and get the hell out.”
A CBS News poll this month concerning the question of what we should do in Iraq now shows that 27% say we should decrease the number of troops and 33% say we should “remove all” — again that is in response to “what should we do now,” not “what should we do after we’ve won.” That same polls shows that 57% say we should set a timetable for withdrawal “sometime in 2008,” while only 38% say we should not.
Also earlier this month a USA Today/Gallup Poll showed that only 38% feel we should stay in Iraq until the “situation gets better,” while 57% want us to “stick to a timetable.” That directly contradicts what you say.
Last month a Pew Research Center poll showed support of the bill calling for a 2008 pullout at 59% to 33%. Again, the opposite of what you said.
But the poll Bush should most be paying attention to is the one that took place last November which put the Democrats back in the majority in Congress (and caused him to pull the rug out from under Rumsfeld). This was a clear message from the people about Iraq.
In short, I stand by my point that President Bush is going directly against the wishes of the majority of Americans. I also stand by my point that “ramming” policies down people’s throats is the action of a king or dictator, not the leader of a democracy. And finally I stand by what I said about “winning in Iraq” being rhetoric — there is no clear definition of what it would mean to win.