Sunday, June 25, 2006

Optional Withdrawal

I can't wait for the spin on this one. They were against it before they were for it. They aren't flip-floppers, they are flexible.
Playing Politics With Iraq - New York Times: "'Withdrawal is not an option,' declared the Senate majority leader, Bill Frist, who sounded like an actor trying on personas that ranged from Barry Goldwater to General Patton. 'Surrender,' said the bellicose Mr. Frist, 'is not a solution.'

Any talk about bringing home the troops, in the Senate majority leader's view, was 'dangerous, reckless and shameless.'

But then on Sunday we learned that the president's own point man in Iraq, Gen. George Casey, had fashioned the very thing that ol' blood-and-guts Frist and his C-Span brigade had ranted against: a withdrawal plan.

Are Karl Rove and his liege lord, the bait-and-switch king, trying to have it both ways? You bet. And that ought to be a crime, because there are real lives at stake.

The first significant cut under General Casey's plan, according to an article by Michael Gordon in yesterday's Times, would occur in September. That, of course, would be perfect timing for Republicans campaigning for re-election in November. How's that for a coincidence?"
One person's coincidence is another's plan. These guys are like the Wicked Witch of the West, doing everything they can to stave off the inevitable. Which in their case means being replaced by candidates who listen to the people who elect them and not the highest bidder.

2516 and counting. Yes, I know it's just a number to this administration.
How many casualties will be enough? More than 2,500 American troops who dutifully answered President Bush's call to wage war in Iraq have already perished, and thousands more are struggling in agony with bodies that have been torn or blown apart and psyches that have been permanently wounded.

Has the war been worth their sacrifice?

How many still have to die before we reach a consensus that we've overpaid for Mr. Bush's mad adventure? Will 5,000 American deaths be enough? Ten thousand?
We've had enough clownish debates on the Senate floor and elsewhere. We've had enough muscle-flexing in the White House and on Capitol Hill by guys who ran and hid when they were young and their country was at war. And it's time to stop using generals and their forces under fire in the field for cheap partisan political purposes.
What? And be responsible for their actions? Surely you jest. For guys who talk about an ownership society, they don't want to accept responsiblity for anything when they screw up and things don't go their way. That's what "cut and run" really means.

No comments:

Post a Comment