Buchanan on Sheehan
In his latest column, conservative pundit Pat Buchanan opines on why Cindy Sheehan's anti-war message has resonated and become a public relations nightmare for the White House.
Put bluntly, the bottom is falling out of support for the commander in chief. What is remarkable is that no Democrat has stepped forward, as Gene McCarthy did, to lead an anti-war crusade and call for a date certain for withdrawal of U.S. troops. Cindy Sheehan is filling that vacuum.
As the White House seems to be losing control of the debate, our war leaders no longer seem to be singing from the same song sheet. When the U.S. commander in Iraq, Gen. Casey, spoke of "substantial" withdrawals of U.S. forces by spring, with Rumsfeld beside him, he was contradicted by Bush who dismissed this as "speculation" and reportedly rebuked.
Since the time Pat submitted this column, Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) has announced he will introduce a resolution calling for a complete withdrawal of US troops by the December 31, 2006.
Meanwhile, there are still reportedly 14 "enduring bases" being built in Iraq. This would be a good question for ambitious journalists to investigate since it looks like we have no plans for a complete pullout any time soon.
posted by Scott @ 7:55 PM
3 Comments:
I think the point is here, tough guy, that goals are best met when deadlines are set. If we have designs on staying indefinitely then we need to define our endgame, and when this turns from Vietnam style occupation to a Saudi style presence.
And let us not forget Iraq became the haven for terrorists that it is post-invasion.
Furthermore, I can name an "Axis" of countries for which we need to mend our troop and supply depletion, countries that actually have WMD or are trying to, or have been long time confirmed terror-harboring states.
"Liberal" doesn't mean pacifist. Wilson, FDR, and Truman were all Democrats. War is a failure of state and a solution for peace, not a franchise to be exploited by a few.
But you're just a mouthpiece, aren't you.
I'm sure the Iraqis that we are supposedly "liberating" are just thrilled that we sought to destabilize their country so terrorists could come in and screw things up.
Also, the majority of the insurgents in Iraq are Iraqis, not foreign born terrorists.
Alright. Here's a more recent and thorough article from the July 17, 2005 Boston Globe:
"Foreign militants make up only a small percentage of the insurgents fighting in Iraq, as little as 10 percent, according to US military and intelligence officials. The top general in Iraq said late last month that about 600 foreign fighters have been captured or killed by coalition forces since the Jan. 30 Iraqi elections. The wider insurgency, numbering in the tens of thousands, is believed to consist of former Iraqi soldiers, Saddam Hussein loyalists, and members of Iraq's Sunni Muslim minority."
Post a Comment
<< Home