Sunday, August 28, 2005

Clark's Third Way on Iraq

Wes Clark has a smart and succinct op/ed in the Washington Post outlining a strategy for Iraq. It's a refreshingly intelligent approach, and a nice alternative to the false dichotomy of "stay the course" versus "out now".

Read the article at:

Not able to link on your link
Great article by Wes Clark. Democrats need to do two things. First, they must get Bush to lay out his plan to remove troops from Iraq. Phrases like "stay the course" & "we will leave when we are no longer needed" are too vague. Second & more inportantly, Democrats must confront Cindy Sheenen & the anti-war segment of their party who say get out now. Leaving Iraq now is not an opinion. The longer Sheenen hangs around, the worse it will look for Democrats especially for the elections in 2006 & 2008.
Democrats couldn't possibly look worse than they already do, and tackling Cindy Sheehan will only help to hasten their demise. A substantial part of the Democratic Party is anti-war. The party turned it's back on us in 2004. Expect us to do the same to you in the future, unless you begin to look like an opposition party. As it stands, Democrats look like lily-livered pandering weenies, who don't stand for anything, and who regularly kiss right wing heinie.

Leaving Iraq is the only option. There will be no peace there until we do. The US spends more $$ on the military than all other countries combined, and we can't win this war? We can't even account for all the money being "spent" there - lining the pockets of Halliburton. It's a disaster - and that disaster is affecting our national infrastructure. Look at the mess in New Orleans.
You're right, Susan. We do need to get out. But if we get out in such a way that lets Iraq collapse into civil war, and worse if it spread into regional war, then it'll be worse for us 3, 5, 10 years or more down the road.

Clark's "change the course" proposal is a way we can get out without making things worse than they already are. And believe me, as bad as it is, it could be much worse. We're talking potential genocide.

Perhaps as importantly, Clark knows damn well Bush won't take his advice, altho I believe Clark sincerely wishes he would. So will most likely happen is that the situation in Iraq will continue to denerate, Bush will have to bring the troops home (probably just in time for the 06 midterms), and then the Repubs will blame the Democrats for losing the war, as we were blamed for Vietnam. Clark is trying to preempt those charges by proposing a plan that at least has a chance of succeeding. And he knows what he's talking about, because he knows what we had to do to stop the killing in the Balkans. It may be too late for Iraq, and even Clark says as much in his WaPo op/ed when he concludes:

"Resolve isn't enough to mend a flawed approach -- or to save the lives of our troops. If the administration won't adopt a winning strategy, then the American people will be justified in demanding that it bring our troops home."

Please, read Clark's editorial before you judge. If anyone has trouble with the link above, it's reprinted at Clark's website at:
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?