Search Archives:

Custom Search

Monday, February 26, 2007

GOP Would Rather Ignore Iraq than Deal With It

Some of you know I spent the weekend snowed in, so my news consumption has been pretty low. I listened to the radio while I dug, but it was Wisconsin Public Radio. You still get the news, but it was mostly about all the damned snow. I wake up this morning and turn on CNN -- it's all about the Oscars. Normally, I could care less, but I'm glad Al Gore won.

I usually bookmark what I want to write about the night before and the stuff I marked friday night is still pretty fresh. I'm pretty happy the blizzard hit on a weekend, although digging for two days is a lousy way to spend one. I'm still sore and I've got a little cleanup left today -- not even an inch.

Not a lot has moved on my story since friday, it being a weekend. And it being Oscar weekend, I don't think many wanted to move on it and get overlooked in the news. Here we go:

Associated Press:

Brushing aside criticism from the White House, Senate Democrats said Friday their next challenge to President Bush's Iraq war policy would require the gradual withdrawal of U.S. combat troops beginning within 120 days.

The draft legislation also declares the war ''requires principally a political solution'' rather than a military one.

The provisions are included in a measure that would repeal the authority that lawmakers gave Bush in 2002, months before the invasion of Iraq, and replace it with a far more limited mission.

If they couldn't get the non-binding resolution through, this isn't going anywhere either. Republicans seem intent on avoiding debate on the war. You can't blame them, really. It's such a political loser. An AP-Ipsos poll finds that 63% oppose Bush's surge, 61% think invading Iraq was a mistake, 77% call the number of US casualties 'unacceptable' and an identical percentage say the same about iraqi civilian casualties. 56% call the war 'hopeless.' If there's a perfect way to describe these results, it's that opinion regarding the war in Iraq is overwhelmingly negative.

So the GOP doesn't even want to talk about it, much less vote on it. And the idea of reopening the debate on the authorization of force has got to be their worst case scenario. All you have to do is go back and look at it and you can see it's all BS. There's no way this pig would pass today. Here are just a few points that republicans would rather everyone forget:

White House, Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq:

Whereas the efforts of international weapons inspectors, United States intelligence agencies, and Iraqi defectors led to the discovery that Iraq had large stockpiles of chemical weapons and a large scale biological weapons program, and that Iraq had an advanced nuclear weapons development program that was much closer to producing a nuclear weapon than intelligence reporting had previously indicated;


Whereas Iraq both poses a continuing threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region and remains in material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations by, among other things, continuing to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons capability, actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability, and supporting and harboring terrorist organizations;


Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;

Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and safety of American citizens;

Whereas the attacks on the United States of September 11, 2001 underscored the gravity of the threat posed by the acquisition of weapons of mass destruction by international terrorist organizations;


Whereas the above laundry list of BS has all been proven untrue, the GOP hereby resolves to never, ever discuss said laundry list again. In fact, looking back at the joint resolution and it's rationale for war, we see that we're now at war for pretty much no reason at all.

Yeah, defend that -- voters would love to hear it. Republicans know that the only way they can keep from losing more ground, let alone gain seats, is for voters to forget all the crap they were sold about Iraq. The last thing they need is to have to debate the rationale for going to war, since it undercuts the reasons for remaining at war.

Which is why the debate should happen. The only reason the republicans are blocking these things is to cover their own asses. They aren't concerned with what's best for the nation, but what's best for their party. As the body pile up and the blood flows, they're more concerned with their jobs than with a war that most americans believe is already lost. They'd rather dick around, play politics, and protect their party, rather than serve the nation.


Technorati Tags: ; ; ; ; ; sometimes, I think s would rather pretend we aren't at in at all

1 comment:

John Shuey said...

The problem with your post is that the very Democrats who today oppose our presence in Iraq voted for that resolution.

Further, previous presidents as well as all CongressCritters who saw the intelligence over the preceeding 10 years or so had been told the very things that the resolution contained.

Now, I'm not defending the Shrub. His management of the whole sorry affair has been dismal at best. But it seems to me that the real failure leading up to this fiasco was with the intelligence community, and for a rather long period of time.

If the Dems are REALLY opposed to our presence there, and not simply posturing for political gain, then damn it let them do something...cut off all funding for the Iraq effort. Stop it. Period. End of story.

What do you want to bet they won't?