With possibly one exception, the rest of our would be presidents of the United States would be hard pressed to put together a functional backbone of an Iraq policy. Instead of triangulating speeches, posturing and jockeying for position, they should be bravely stepping forward without equivocation to call for an immediate end to the occupation of Iraq. Who of them will speak out, even as we ourselves need to keep speaking out now?
Isn't there some middle ground of a choice between an out of control dictator and a flock of well financed chickens (of both parties)? Who will lead where the American people have already arrived? Will it be the candidate who declared they are losing their patience, but not quite for another year and a half until they can get elected themselves? Or will it be the candidate who was the first to declare legislative surrender and predict that the Democrats would cave in, again, on a time line for disengagement in the new supplemental war profiteering bill? Or will somebody else FINALLY get it? Who will take the lead, and not just try to take political advantage? Whoever it is WILL be the next president of the United States.
Today in Iraq tens of THOUSANDS of their people marched in just one city demanding that we end the occupation.
Yes, it's an occupation. It stopped being a war when Bush declared victory four years ago. A spokesman for Bush's National Security Council gave the spin that the massive demonstration was wonderful evidence that the Iraqi people can now "freely gather and express their opinions". One would suppose in his mind it is even more wonderful to be able to completely ignore what they were saying because we're pointing guns at their heads. It is so much like the way they ignore the laws of our own U.S., what lingering attorney general Gonzalez once called the "opinions" of Congress.
The flimsy pretense that any of this was for the glorious benefit of the Iraqi people is in utter shreds. For those still arguing for burying our heads even deeper in the sand it's all about us now. They say we can't leave because WE can't afford to lose, because WE need to have access to all that oil. Who will admit we have already lost, when 90% of the Iraqi people hate us for being the unwelcome occupiers we have become? There are no smiles for us there anymore, let alone any flowers. Who will tell the truth to the American people that the Iraqis already know so grimly, that from the beginning this was all about stealing their oil and absolutely nothing else?
Would anybody like to venture a guess now much energy independence for America we could have purchased with an investment of a trillion dollars, the projected committed cost already and climbing of the colossal Iraq misadventure? We could have been swimming in biofuel by now. That's assuming we had a strategically shrewd chief executive in the first place. Is there any doubt left that the longer we persist in this senseless carnage the worse it is going to get? Is there any doubt that the Iraqis will get their country back? Will they have to finally chase us out, or will we leave with some slight grace remaining?
Bush accuses Congress of telling the generals how to run the war, and most of our Senators and House members run to cower in their cloak rooms from the rhetoric. No George, it's not them, it's we the American people who are telling you how to run YOUR war, at the cost of our money and our bodies, an occupation you barged into against the best of advice of all the generals you have canned as punishment for their wise counsel. We want out of Iraq and we are willing to take full responsibility for the consequences. And we are calling our members of Congress every day to demand they represent us by taking that responsibility as well.
And if we get "hit" again, George, and it's not because you were negligent in responding to the real threats, or derelict in effectively fortifying our actual homeland defense, and it's not because you turned potential friends into determined enemies with your military hostilities, you'll be able to claim for the history books that you were far, far, far right. Then you'll have something to put in your half billion dollar presidential library besides war wreckage and millions of mostly redacted documents. You'll probably have to even classify your own press releases to try to hide from your official lies of record.
But in the meantime, the coalition of the missing in action, our former allies, saw the handwriting on the wall quite some time ago, and they're all on their way outta there. Are the White House and a majority in Congress the only ones who can't read the message in blood? The occupation has got to end. The occupation is going to end. Who will have the political courage to admit the facts of death as they are on the ground, and put an end to it NOW?
Please take action NOW, so we can win all victories that are supposed to be ours, and forward this message to everyone else you know.
internet activist with the mission of generating as many policy messages to Congress as possible
Surely the answer to your question "Who has the courage?" must be Rep. Dennis Kucinich, but you failed to mention his name in the article! Please, go back to the article and name the only candidate of the entire crop who has had the balls, from the very begining, to call for an immediate end to this insanity. Thank you!
Jonmark Pierce
by
JonmarkP (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 92 comments)
on Wednesday, April 11, 2007 at 4:27:47 PM
Our intent was to let people fill the blank in their own minds, which you clearly have. And of those who have suggested who we were talking about, we don't mind telling you most who have communicated with us named Kucinich.
by
thepen (109 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 11 comments)
on Wednesday, April 11, 2007 at 10:14:12 PM
2 comments
How would you rate this?
You must be logged in (if signed up) to do ratings.
It's free to signup! And easy. And takes just a minute or two....
Must Read (
Well Said (
News (
Touching (
Funny (
Supported (
Interesting (
Inspiring (
Valuable (
