I fully respect the anger and frustration many Americans feel with this Administration. I share much of it. But on balance, I think Congress’s time is much better spent ending the war in Iraq, conducting the oversight that was absent for the last six years, and advancing progressive legislation.
Damn him for making sense.. especially on oversight. Except that i am still not aboard the full withdrawal train (and as I have argued elsewhere, neither are any of the major Democratic candidates).
Hmm. maybe impeachment would derail full withdrawal as an issue… just kidding.
BTW kudos to Tom Hawk/Wince for substantially changing my perspective on the issue. And he managed to do it without accusing me of BDS. Thanks.
{ 25 comments }
The question that has me puzzled is how the Democratic Congressional leadership will be able to stop short of complete immediate withdrawal given the rhetoric that’s been coming out lately. It’s hard for me to see, for example, how one can simultaneously point to polls that show some large proportion of the American people supporting withdrawal as corroborative evidence for your position but not be willing to go as far as the polls suggest people are willing to go.
I recognize that comparisons to historical parallels are flawed, but similar things were said as we removed our forces from Viet Nam—we’d leave a force of, perhaps, 50,000. We didn’t.
Dave,
It doesn’t matter, they’ll never get the votes and they know it, which is why they feel free to behave so irresponsibly (and keep their irrational base happy).
A lot of this is driven by the ’08 election. After the primaries, the rhetoric will magically shift to “we must fight these Al Qaeda that Bush has brought to Iraq!” Nothing else is politically palatable to the middle. The DKos/DU/HuffPo crowd will scream betrayal, but they do that all the time anyway.
Assuming AQI still an issue by then, of course. We’re hitting every AQ sanctuary simultaneously right now.
We’re closer than ever to being able to withdraw without major problems, or at least the problems are becoming increasingly manageable as the ISF become more effective. The Maliki gov’t could probably survive a major ’08 withdrawal, though it might not be pretty.
Dave, I dont see how rhetoric has any binding effect whatsoever. The public is simply not single issue enough; witness the conservative movement, which is still dallying with Rudy Giuliani because he has the best shot at winning, even though he is prochoice. Pissing off the true believers in act whihle assuaging them in rhetoric is standard OP on both sides of the fence.
I dont buy ANY comparisons to Vietname, either. By either side.
The overwhelming position of most people is to end the war. That isnt the same as utter and total withdrawal. And thats why none of the Dem candidates will push for that; they recognize thatthey can end the war and satisfy the vast majority of public opinion, without having to push for the extreme case.
Aziz,
You are welcome. Accusations of BDS are almost always counterproductive.
Yours,
Wince
P.S. Accusations of BDS are almost always unethical and immoral as well.
The overwhelming position of most people is to end the war.
Actually, a majority want to wait to hear what Petraeus says in Sept.
Aziz, do you remember “Read my lips: no new taxes”. Rhetoric may not be binding but it is on the record and can put one in the position of having to unsell the position that’s been articulated.
Feingold does realize that the American people are more frusterated with Congreess than they are with the President, right?
Of course, however, I’m listening to Dennis Miller and he points that we’re a republic and not subject to mob rule for a reason. The Founders knew well the dangers of a pure democracy so they puts walls in place to keep mob rule to a minimum.
As the saying goes: A person is smart; people are dumb.
Aziz, Ali and others that attack the Administration with poll numbers would be wise to remember that the mob has a bad habit of turning on their own.
“Actually, a majority want to wait to hear what Petraeus says in Sept. ”
Oi, how many times have we done this dance? The public will always answer in survey that they want to be reasonable and wait for the next update on things before acting. But we’ve been having updates on things for years now (and we’re pretty much already been promised that right around the time Petraeus updates, another big way more important update will be announced, soon to come): how many more Friedman’s are we going to have until we formulate a policy already? When does the stalling end?
When does the stalling end?
When the Iraqis can secure their own country. That’s always been the goal.
Everyone wants the troops to come home as soon as possible.
In reference to this you might want to check out the relevant posts by Iraqis cited in CotL, above. The Iraqis patently do not believe Malikis claims. Or else they believe that “securing the country” by the Iraqi military as it’s presently constituted translates to genocide of Sunni Arabs.
The situation is extremely fractious right now. I’ve read posts from Sunni Arab bloggers in which they say pretty clearly that any participation by Iraqi Kurds in the military is, effectively, foreign occupation.
So are accusations of True Believer. Still waiting for Aziz to retract those.
when did I accuse you of that Martin?
I’m inclined to agree with that assessment, TallDave, except that I think that, with the temperature as high as it is now, it does more harm than your comment would tend to suggest.
Not to threadjack, but isn’t God the copyright holder for the Bible?
Michael,
He does but he loans it out. Kinda like a franchise.
Aziz, you used the term in a general sense, with no specific targets that I could identify. And it’s every bit as offensive as BDS.
I am sorry Martin that you took personal offense from a general statement that I made with no specific target that you could identify.
Do you think I have BDS?
I have DDS – not dentistry – Democrat Derangement Syndrome. I believe that Democrats are out to get me. And they’ll tell me it’s for my own good, and wonder why I don’t like it.
Yours,
Wince, from Kansas
Can someone explain something to me? It is not immediately apparent to me to what Feingold was referring when he mentioned “the oversight that was absent for the last six years.”
Oversight of the Federal Budget? Of alleged violations of civil rights? Congressional ethics violations?
I mean, he isn’t dumb enough to talk about oversight of the war, is he? That would be pretty foolish, considering that Congress doesn’t have an “oversight” role in conducting war.
Review: Congress holds the authority to declare war. In other words, they are the gatekeeper for initiating hostilities. However, the President -by virtue of his position as Commander in Chief- holds the authority to conduct the war. One may “declare” peace by treaty. In other words, the Senate controls the termination of hostilities via their authority to approve treaties.
Mind you, this doesn’t mean that the President shouldn’t consult with both parties and their leaders in order to maintain a healthy consensus about war direction.
“Well, yeah, the Constitution is worth it if you can succeed.” -Nancy Pelosi, 6/29/07.”
I found this among the Kos commenter’s. Many people in that thread do not like the attitude of Kos.
FBI: Iraqis Being Smuggled Across the Rio Grande
Share July 17, 2007 3:11 PM
Brian Ross Reports:
The FBI is investigating an alleged human smuggling operation based in Chaparral, N.M., that agents say is bringing “Iraqis and other Middle Eastern” individuals across the Rio Grande from Mexico
I believe we have more to worry about than impeachment. The above is on ABC news today. The war in Iraq and this soil are extremely important.
I am fully aware of how people don’t care of Brian Ross so, do some checking elsewhere. It is scarey along our border and visa’s the enemy can get because law enforcement must obey the CIC and Michael Chertoff. Boy, what a dud.
“Actually, a majority want to wait to hear what Petraeus says in Sept.”
I most certainly agree with that statement.
Sorry, I’m not politically correct with respect to the BDS term. In my opinion, if the shoe fits… And frankly, I think that’s being generous. If not some kind of affliction, there is but one way to explain it.
Also, I believe the actual term used in the earlier thred was “water carrier”.
Sorry, I’m not politically correct with respect to the BDS term. In my opinion, if the shoe fits… And frankly, I think that’s being generous. If not some kind of affliction, there is but one way to explain it.
Nonsense.
There are lots of ways to explain it that don’t involve insulting terms. I doubt you have tried to explain it. Most of the ways have to do with human nature. In this case Aziz was accused of BDS. But what had really happened was that he had not LTWASTTAI, err, Lived Through Watergate And Survived To Tell About It. All he needed was:
1. More information. There are NO humans with all information. Vaguely remembering the Watergate hearings from my childhood was enough for me to Google what I needed.
2. To apply the correct information to the given problem. This is difficult at best. It is so easy to get wrong.
sherard, you need to think long and hard about the process of making mistakes when involved in complex matters where you are working with imperfect information.
It’s ginormously hard. So let’s stop beating each other up when we disagree about it.
And yes, “water carrier” is just as unethical and immoral a term as BDS.
BTW, I was serious. I really do think Democrats are out to get me – and they believe it’s for my own good.
I wish they would cut it out. More federalism. More local power.
Yours,
Wince
Comments on this entry are closed.