Monday, January 21, 2008

The Iraq Debate

The debate on Iraq has been remarkably silent for the past few months. This summer that is all that was in the news. The surge was a failure. The war was lost. We must withdraw. This is all the democratic leadership would talk about. In September many in the democratic leadership said they would not trust or believe GEN Petraeus when he reported to Congress. The house and senate leadership castigated Mr. Crocker and called him a puppet of the administration. Moveon.org ran an ad in the NYT that called the theater commander GEN Betray us.

As summer turned to fall there were signs the surge was working. Violence was reduced and Al Queda was on the run. US forces managed to control 75% of Baghdad (an increase from 8% pre surge)and civil strife abated. The democratic mantra changed from the war was lost and the surge was a failure to well violence is down but there is still no political progress. To the democratic leadership the surge was failure because while it reduced violence it did not solve political issues. The democrats expected that within 90 days of full surge implementation that a country at war would miraculously lay down arms and reconcile politically.

However, just this month the Iraqi parliament just passed major de-baathification legislation. This was one of the major political benchmarks the democrats insisted on. This along with other political reforms such as allowing Sunni volunteers in the security forces and improvements in the legal and penal systems show that the surge has thus far been a major success.

This war has been largely unpopular. Progress was slow and mistakes were made. However, the pandering democratic party that sways with the political polls have been wrong every step of the way. Obama's rhetoric about always being consistently against the war is nothing more than pandering to liberal left extremes of the party. Hillary voting against funding the troops this Spring was an attempt to make the anti war folks forget she voted to authorize the war. Harry Reid's "the war is lost" comments were nothing less the treasonous.

Is this the party we want to be in control? A party that can not make the tough decisions? A party that will change depending upon the political winds? The democratic party is a party that stands for nothing. They pander to ever minor issue constituency possible and break when the going gets tough. They are the child with good intentions that will start projects but in the end they finish none of them because they are just to hard or they lose interest. Simply put the democrats have no principles they stand firm on. There are no guiding principles that will make them strong. They are easily distracted and easily swayed.

No comments: