They're falling thick and fast, my friends. As the military news from Iraq continues to improve and public opinion shifts, the Democrats are in trouble and scrambling for cover.
Apparently Senator Clinton was just a little ahead of the pack.
The latest to chronicle this change is the WAPO, writing on how the Democrats have been forced to `refocus' on Iraq because of the military progress there.
Apparently the number three ranking Democrat in the House, Majority Whip James Clyburn (d-SC) had it exactly right...good News in Iraq `would be a problem' for his party, and what they will try to do about it remains to be seen.
Speaking of which...has anyone heard from Senator Harry `the war is lost' Reid lately?
The latest statements I have read about from Harry Reid that he made over the last couple of days are as follows, to roughly paraphrase, the US should wtihdraw from Iraq because of a lack of political process by the Iraqi government in resolving the issues that are keeping the Shias, the Sunnis, and the Kurds apart. Also, he has accused the Bush Administration of misleading us into Iraq.
ReplyDeleteAs for the lack of political process, this is true enough. While there has been some success on the military front, the political process has been slow. Frankly, the Shia and the Sunnis don't want a reconciliation. This criticism is a valid one, however, if we withdraw fron Iraq, we will be unable to engage Al Qaeda in Iraq effectively. What Senator Reid and his cohorts have failed to explain to the American people is if we begin withdrawing from Iraq now, Al Qaeda will likely take over the Sunni areas of central Iraq and Iraq will likely take over Southern Iraq. They have failed to explain how concedeing ground to mortal enemies who pose a greater security risk to Aemrica than Nazi Germany or Imprial Japan ever did or likely ever could have will serve Aemrican national security interests. In other words, how does allowing terrorist and the states who support them to have more oil rich territory in to set up bases and plan and coordinate tax on American interests help our national security.
As for the notion that Bush mislead us into Iraq, this is untrue and to utter this slander is destructive on many levels. This serves to undermine American national security and provides adi and comfort to the enemy. Perhaps as importantly this slander against the President makes it less likely that we will be able to build alliances in the future when it may be needed. If I'm a foreign leader and I hear an American Senator making statements like that, I would be forced to wonder if the Aemrican governemnet will betray me if the going gets tough. Things like that have allot to do with why many around the world do not like us.
The best way for President Bush to counter this would be to drop the goal of bringing democracy to Iraq. Their public speeches should focus on the dangers of Iran and Al Qaeda, how both are active in Iraq, and how we are going to defeat both of them.
None of this is meant to imply that I'm defending the actions of this President. He seems to me to be the worst Presient in US history.
While I want him impeached, the people who would gain control of the White House want us to lose in Iraq. There is something disconcerting about this.
While I dislike Republicans, there is something down right creepy about a major political party who actually wants America to lose. There are valid reasons to have opposed the invasion of Iraq and there are valid reasons to oppose our contiuned involvement there, however, to actually want us to lose is downright evil.