|
|
Tags for This Article:
War -Antiwar (1860) Republicans-GOP (1252) Iraq Exit Strategy (767) Iran War (602) Bush Iraq Surge (554) Congress 110th (536) Democratic Policy (230) Congress War Funding (181)
|
Add to My Group
(From Huffington Post) It is often said that politics is the art of the possible. Yet, the current torrent of rage over last week's compromise on Iraq funding ironically blames the Democrats for seizing the possible at the expense of the impossible in a classic example of making the perfect the enemy of the good. In their fury, anti-war critics mistakenly equate a tactical retreat with total capitulation and fail to recognize the substantial progress Democrats have made in their five months in power. The starting point for any assessment of this compromise should be June 22, 2006 when the Senate rejected a resolution on troop withdrawal in what was the only vote on Iraq policy in either house that year. In fact, except for attacking Democrats for wanting to "cut and run," the Republican Congress was essentially silent on Iraq last year. In contrast, there have been at least the 14 votes on Iraq (including the passage and subsequent veto of the Iraq Accountability Act setting a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq) during the first five months of the Democratic Congress. With each vote, Congressional Republicans are forced to choose between defending the President and their own political viability; which may explain why they have abandoned their "stay the course" rhetoric and are now marching to the White House warning the President that time is running out. As Sun Tzu explains in the Art of War, to achieve victory a general must choose his battles carefully. "One defends when his strength is inadequate; he attacks when it is abundant." While they may have public opinion on their side in seeking a timetable, the reality is that, since they are 68 votes shy of a veto-proof majority in the House and 15 votes in the Senate, the Democrats simply lack the ability to impose a timetable for withdrawal at this time. Although the compromise's lack of a timetable may be a tactical retreat, it is far from a blank check for the President as critics contend since, as Senate Majority Leader Reid noted, it begins "the process of holding this President and the Iraqis accountable." Specifically, in exchange for an additional four months of funding for Iraq operations the compromise requires the President to report on 18 separate benchmarks for the Iraqi government and redeploy U.S. troops should the Iraqi government conclude our presence is no longer desired, prohibits torture of detainees, and contains substantial increases in funding for Katrina relief and homeland security plus the first increase in the minimum wage in ten years. By requiring the Bush administration to report on progress on key benchmarks, Democrats have framed the debate for the next round of Iraq funding in September. Coincidentally, this is about the time when both General Petraeus indicated that the surge's effectiveness could be assessed and leading Republicans have set as a deadline for improvement in Iraq before seeking a "Plan B." Absent some dramatic reversal of conditions in Iraq, Democrats will be in a much stronger position to impose conditions for withdrawal at that time since Republican defections will be certain to increase as the debate shifts to "Plan B". What supporters of the compromise and their critics each fail to recognize is the extent to which each side is right. Anti-war critics must remember that by denouncing Democrats as "cowards" or even "evil," they are falling victim to the same myopia which bought into Ralph Nader's claim in 2000 that there was no difference between Al Gore and George Bush that helped "elect" Bush in the first place. In this case, I seriously doubt that the 7.3 million working Americans who will now have an additional $4,368 per year to spend on necessities view their benefactors as either "cowards" or "evil." In addition, if anti-war critics are to be relevant in this debate they must deal in the realm of the possible and recognize what Edmund Burke noted over two centuries ago - "[a]ll government, indeed every human benefit and enjoyment, every virtue, and every prudent act, is founded on compromise and barter." While some anti-war critics have responded to the compromise by embracing Rep. Kucinich as a moral giant amongst Democratic dwarves, the fact is that even if every Democrat followed Kucinich's lead they would still lack the votes to impose a timetable for withdrawal. Anti-war critics must recognize that it is patience and compromise, not ideological purity, which ultimately will win the additional votes needed to extricate our troops from this disaster. At the same time, Democrats must recognize the extent to which they are still judged for their pusillanimous record over the past six years, as a search of leading newspapers yields 94 articles over the past three years in which "Democrats" and "backbone" were used in the same sentence. With approximately two-thirds of Americans supporting linking Iraq funding to meeting certain benchmarks, anti-war critics are justified in expecting bold action from the Democrats -- particularly against a President with such dismal approval ratings. While courage and leadership alone will not make the impossible suddenly possible, the fact remains that the impossible can never be achieved without it. Biden said during a meeting with Des Moines Register reporters and editors on Tuesday that he voted for the funding bill largely because it contained funding for new armored vehicles that will better resist roadside bombs. He said 70 percent of U.S. deaths and casualties are caused by these explosive devices, and the new vehicles could reduce that by two-thirds. "I find it absolutely unconscionable that I would delay, to make a point, a week to two to a month, the construction of these vehicles," he said. Biden said, "I knew the right political move. I didn't have any doubt about the right political vote, but there are some things worth losing elections over, for gosh sakes. I could not remotely, in good conscience," vote to delay production of the vehicles. www.bennetkelley.com Bennet Kelley (bennetkelley.com) is an award-winning columnist, political analyst, publisher of BushLies.net and founder of the Internet Law Center. He also was the co-founder and former national co-chair of the Saxophone Club (the Democratic National Committee's young professional fundraising and outreach arm during the Clinton era.)
Adrian Kuzminski is a local activist in upstate New York, and Research Scholar in Philosophy at Hartwick College.
The perfect the enemy of the good? This is a sad apologia for an almost total rout of the Dem leadership by Bush and Co. on the war. The pernicious phrase 'making the perfect the enemy of the good' is invoked here to tar the antiwar movement once again, as if supporting international law and the constitution was some kind of call for perfection. If you mother is killed and the perpetrator is allowed to go free, your insistence that justice be done is not a matter of calling for the perfect; it is a matter of simple, elementary human rights. It's easy to sit in front of a computer and pontificate about war critics going too far, heaven forbid. Calling for an end to a war of aggression and torture and gross violations of the Constitution by this administration is no more than a call to return to civilized behavior. If we are supposed to compromise about this, we're lost. Where's the outrage here? Edmund Burke's conservatism, by the way, was about preserving habits and customs which survived the test of time, things like habeas corpus. It's the Bush administration which is radical and destructive here. It's the Bush administration which seeks an outrageous perfection, one of unaccountable power. Why this piece is the lead article on OpEd News is beyond me. by
Kuzminski (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 73 comments)
on Saturday, June 2, 2007 at 7:23:21 AM
For the most part, I agree by
John R Moffett (80 articles, 14 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 601 comments)
on Saturday, June 2, 2007 at 8:40:20 AM
War is Peace "Tactical retreat"? Is that what we voted for? Maybe I'm just not educated enough to understand all the nuances involved with politics, war and governance. I'm just a simple person that can't quite understand how adding more troops to a conflict that I view as a crime against all known charters and treaties as a blatant crime of aggression and is costing us our fortune, honor and the lives of the best we have. Perhaps I'm not just smart enough to grasp how with a vast majority of the people behind them and with a president with a popularity no higher than fresh-cut grass why a congress denied the will of their constituents and instead of putting pressure to end this crime against humanity and place those responsible for all the destruction, war-profiteering and the murder of nearly one-million people on trial and instead did just the opposite. Yeah, maybe we're as Kissinger once said, that this is too important to leave up to the people to decide. Or maybe this is just more apologist, vacillating, bullshit we're suppose to believe and that we're to think black is white and up is down and as long as they keep dangling that carrot in front of our faces we'll be lead into the peace we seek just as soon as we win this war. I realize the forces we face are powerful. But if we've reached the point where a majority of the people wishes are trumped by a war machine and corporations that have no place in our Constitution then we're also way past the point when we should have shed the shackles of this repressive government and no amount of explanation given can change that. When the State takes over the corporations that's Communism. When the corporations take over the State that's Fascism. by
Mr M (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 9 diaries, 1256 comments)
on Saturday, June 2, 2007 at 8:44:57 AM
Yes, and... I would encourage everyone who is mad... no incensed… about the war to actually do something about it. If you're not doing anything active, you can't really complain. by
John R Moffett (80 articles, 14 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 601 comments)
on Saturday, June 2, 2007 at 9:23:44 AM
Mr. Moffett ... It would seem I would give political-junkies that would take the time to be in forums like this the benefit of the doubt that they also would be of like mind and participate in all, if not some of what you encourage. Everyone in here is probably doing most all they can for the cause. But like Ms. Sheehan we have our humane limitations. But I don't fault you for raging at the dying of the light. by
Mr M (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 9 diaries, 1256 comments)
on Saturday, June 2, 2007 at 11:58:24 AM
Now that you mention it Joe Biden has been to Iraq at least 7 times during the war, Senator Max Baucus lost a nephew in the war and Senator Jim Webb's son is serving there now. All three supported the compromise. Where would be in September 2007? Or stated differently, do you think Mohammed Ali should have gone toe-to-toe with George Foreman in the famous "Rumble in the Jungle" instead of using the rope-a-dope to wear Foreman out? Ali (who was the underdog against the powerful Foreman) stayed in the fight but waited for the right moment to unleash. The Democrats have adopted a similar approach and it is only a matter of time before Republicans hit the canvas. by
Bennet Kelley (12 articles, 1 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 4 comments)
on Saturday, June 2, 2007 at 11:28:41 AM
Reasoned, but ... Reasoned until you used the boxing analogy. And one more thing. Anyone paying any attention knows we've run out of time and like titanic plates releasing pressure built over millions of years snaps and transforms all life on Earth is an instant is the precipice we find ourselves. Maybe, and that's a very weak "maybe", if we had started doing something about Global Warming, population explosion and pollution at the same time as the Industrial Revolution got started we could have forestalled the inevitable. But we haven't and all the mini-steps taken really don't mean shit to a tree. WE RUN OUT OF TIME. And after we've annihilated ourselves and we're ground-up into magma and spit out again to the surface of the Earth and are fortunate to try to get it right the next time one can only hope we do it right the next time. by
Mr M (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 9 diaries, 1256 comments)
on Saturday, June 2, 2007 at 2:17:53 PM
A one-eyed man in a world of the blind is king, but a rational man in a world of the irrational is a fool.
The lesser of two evils is actually one and the same. Americans are trapped in a corrupt political system where our choices are apparently limited to choosing between the lesser of two evils, but our choices are actuality limited to choosing between the two heads of one snake. And that snake is the Military Industrial Congressional Complex. The owners of the Military Industrial Congressional Complex are our de facto rulers, and they have been since World War II. The politicians we elect don’t determine or make national policy, they merely carry out instructions issued by their masters, the owners of the Military Industrial Congressional Complex. Actually the MICC should be called the Military Industrial Congressional Media Complex because the Monopoly Media is the propaganda arm of the MICC. This diabolical union of interlocking conglomerate corporations is owned by the richest one or two per cent of our population. These richest one or two per cent of our population define and determine our “National Interests,” which amazingly always seems to coincide with their own self-interest. That’s what we call “Democracy” here in America. . by
rabblerowzer (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 227 comments)
on Saturday, June 2, 2007 at 9:19:03 AM
Well put Indeed the one reason we're not seeing the prosecution of obvious crimes against the Constitution, Bill of Rights and virtually every other common-sense law passed by reasonable thinking people before those ruthless and wealthy enough, you need to two to Tango, gained control of the distribution of life sustaining resources and 90% of the message, we, and the world, became basically screwed. I don't see any good coming from any of this. The last World War obviously taught us nothing. The last 20 to 30-odd thousand years obviously didn't either. The MICMC, as you put it, will like the last group of thugs that almost bombed civilization back to the Stone-Age, before being brought to justice, will unleash another "Scorched Earth Doom's Day" policy. Only this time they have the nasty little toys, at their willing, quivering fingertips to finish the job. It's got to the point that I hope there are such things as UFOs and somehow they have been keeping tabs, and like Ray Bradbury's "Childhoods End", intervenes in what seems to me a self-fulfilling prophecy of our species to have the stupidity to trump intelligence in a race to an extinction both foreseen and therefore preventable, made inevitable. by
Mr M (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 9 diaries, 1256 comments)
on Saturday, June 2, 2007 at 11:45:16 AM
"[I]t is only a matter of time... before Republicans hit the canvas." I certainly hope you're right. by
Daniel Geery (26 articles, 58 quicklinks, 121 diaries, 681 comments)
on Saturday, June 2, 2007 at 11:59:57 AM
You Have a Way of. . . . . . cutting through the crap, Daniel. With this comment and the one above, you do what almost nobody in America does -- ask members of the military and prospective parents of members of the military to accept some personal responsibility for their actions or lack thereof. Helping your child to find other options than enlisting or if he or she is already in the service, refusing to pull the trigger. by
Russ Wellen (58 articles, 1029 quicklinks, 66 diaries, 335 comments)
on Sunday, June 3, 2007 at 2:32:08 AM
Bingo rabblerowzer! 3TU but as Moffett pointed out lack of courage is not limited to congress. by
HL Bumpkin (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 53 comments)
on Saturday, June 2, 2007 at 12:03:24 PM
Republocrats is a better name for the one party system we currently have, that operates the 2 fake wings, the Dems and the Reps, in cooperation with the MSM (6 megacorps own almost all the outlets) and most of corporate America and the elite investor class. They think they're superior and entitled, even obligated, to lie to the People, whose rights governments are instituted to protect, because we can't handle the truth about world affairs. Actually, it's them that can't handle the truth, which is why they lie and run like cockroaches when light is shed on their parasitic, criminal activities. After the Iraq War and 9/11 lies, the People are waking up to this infection of our government, press and economy, and we are using the new technologies like the internet to level the playing field, against the will of the ruling elite, who are not needed, let alone fit, to rule. by
Better World Order (4 articles, 408 quicklinks, 26 diaries, 875 comments)
on Saturday, June 2, 2007 at 12:08:37 PM
and one more thing the author/shill said that Nader helped Bush win; Gore won; the Supreme Court stopped the recount and the left wing of the Republocrats rolled over and certified the election. Screw Gore anyway- he's the criminal that helped ram NAFTA thru Congress, which has resulted in massive net wage decreases/job losses on both sides of the border, and is responsible for the increase in immigration. by
Better World Order (4 articles, 408 quicklinks, 26 diaries, 875 comments)
on Saturday, June 2, 2007 at 12:13:16 PM
Richard Mynick is a US citizen who, despite the best efforts of the corporate media, noticed something disturbing about how the 2000 election was decided, & felt it augured poorly for democracy.
Contemptible BS from a Dem Party apologist No lie -- up to and including "War is Peace" -- is beneath the shamelessness of Dem Party hacks like Mr Kelley. His thoroughly dishonest piece here is a lie from start to finishing, including the outrageous assertions that Nader cost Gore the '00 election, & that "the reality is that...the Democrats simply lack the ability to impose a timetable for withdrawal at this time."
by
Richard Mynick (2 articles, 3 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 1121 comments)
on Saturday, June 2, 2007 at 1:26:59 PM
Practical idealist -- committed to restoring government of, by, and for the people, and re-establishing our core American values of justice, equality and community.
Insanity is doing same, expecting different results John Moffett asks why peace activists aren't out marching in the streets to protest this latest cowardly cave in by Congress. He says the peace movement is lazy, and that in order for Democrats to take a stronger stand, they need to see larger and more visible support for ending the war. Well Democrats saw the vote results in 2006 and they know it was a demand to end the war, they've seen the repeated polls, call-ins, letters, petitions, they've seen countless marches and demonstrations (don't forget the huge protests before the war began). We are hoarse from shouting our demands. How long does it take for us to see that our words aren't sufficient to motivate them to act. The only thing they care about is our votes (which they think we are afraid to withhold), and our campaign contributions. If the Democrats want to redeem themselves, they need to put Bush on notice NOW, that there will be NO Iraq funding legislation offered in September, period! (no votes to compromise on, nothing to veto). They should tell Bush there is plenty of money in the pipeline now for an orderly phased withdrawal and they'd better begin it. In addition, they should commence serious hearings NOW, with subpoena power, to investigate and expose all the countless illegal activities of Bush-Cheney, and follow this with IMPEACHMENT - thus demonstrating to the country that the Democrats are the Party that stands for the rule of law and defenders of the Constitution and democracy. But will they do these things? No. Because they have instead demonstrated to us that they are just the other leg, along with the Republicans, of the same corporatist pair of trousers. Instead of more peace marches, perhaps peace activists should shift their time, energy, and money toward promoting and supporting anti-war challengers to all the spineless Democratic incumbents in the coming Primaries. And when we call and write the Democratic leadership, perhaps we should give them a new message: tell them they have lost our votes and our money. Tell them we will NOT be voting for Democrats in 2008! - unless they cut the war funding, relinquish the permanent bases, bring the troops home, and commence with Impeachment proceedings! Send them a voided check too, telling them this is what they would have received from us if they had demonstrated some spine. by
my2cents (0 articles, 5 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 30 comments)
on Saturday, June 2, 2007 at 1:53:26 PM
Agreed, but... But waiting for the next election IS the lazy thing to do. More will be killed or maimed. by
John R Moffett (80 articles, 14 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 601 comments)
on Saturday, June 2, 2007 at 2:45:03 PM
Shouldn't our votes be enough? Not to be naive, in a prefect world, shouldn't our votes be enough to dictate policy that our representatives are suppose to follow? Why do we, at this stage in our evolution, have to demonstrate or overthrow our government to affect change? One of the things that I blame the war-opposition movement on is not forming "general strikes". General strikes, unlike demonstrations require little effort and can have a direct and immediate impact. Combined with the Internet and networking of the anti-war sites millions of people could focus their energy on a cause. Get 3 million people to stop buying gas at Exxon, and watch how fast policy changes. Boycott GE products and we'd have the troops home by October Fest. But I see, like in the past, co-ordinate efforts by the Fascist State to keep these kinds of efforts from happening. But that is still no excuse. We have the power to effect change, we have the will, we just need a co-ordinated effort. by
Mr M (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 9 diaries, 1256 comments)
on Saturday, June 2, 2007 at 2:49:58 PM
That Nader comment topped it all Long live war, warmongers, their defenders and coherts. (not) These videos were made for guys like Kelly so they can be proud of the military industrial congressional complex; youtube code : 6vS-Db9yT3c parts 2 & 3 can be found there as well. Boom ! War is fun, he he , he he. What a butthead. by
Tony Forest (4 articles, 14 quicklinks, 131 diaries, 1216 comments)
on Saturday, June 2, 2007 at 1:57:34 PM
this is sophistry The truth is that a significant majority are against the war -- and everyone knows that, Democrats and DLC included. What the Democrats are practicing is not politics, but obstructionism. Perhaps if one is raising a toddler one needs to constantly tell the kid not to not to throw his applesauce on the cat, but unless we are to think that Congress is composed of people with the mentallity of a two year old then it becomes obvious they voted to fund the war because they want to fund the war -- to listen to the corporate fascists and other war-mongers who support them instead of the people. Nothing is possible unless one decides to do it. "But Mommy, I don't know how not to throw apple sauce on the cat. I didn't do it -- the apple sauce went through the air onto the cat. Ellie told me to throw it on the cat so I had to. The cat likes apples sauce on her." On and on and on... the Democrats -- all the politicans -- need a lomg timeout! Let's get real! by
Blue Pilgrim (0 articles, 3 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 998 comments)
on Saturday, June 2, 2007 at 1:58:45 PM
You know it! And fiber -- lots of fiber. But fascism is constipating -- just look at what's happened to the Democrats... by
Blue Pilgrim (0 articles, 3 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 998 comments)
on Saturday, June 2, 2007 at 2:30:06 PM
BTW -- if want the facts... Go to VFCN Iraq and Afghanistan Supplemental Spending 2008 and read and/or listen to (or download) the presentation. I suggest listening to speech which has some extra comments. by
Blue Pilgrim (0 articles, 3 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 998 comments)
on Saturday, June 2, 2007 at 2:27:47 PM |
