Dec
09
2007
Some Democrats Seeing the Light
Posted by ThirstyJon in News, Politics, and World Events, tags: Democrats, Iraq, News Commentary, Politics, Victory in IraqA growing number of Democrats are recognizing that the Surge in Iraq is working. Some even see that we need to give more time for our troops to increase their success.
According to Deroy Murdock:
Iraq War foe, Rep. Brian Baird (D –Wash.), recently returned from there a changed man. “We are making real and tangible progress on the ground, for one, and if we withdraw, it could have a potentially catastrophic effect on the region,” he told The Olympian newspaper. Baird now opposes troop-retreat timetables. [Read More]
Entries (RSS)
Call me skeptical, but I think they are preparing for the possibility of actually winning in 08 and discovering that they cannot just pull out. It is a political issue only so long as it is expedient.
Sometimes, I wonder if we would have been better off with Kerry. I have no doubt he would have had to have gone a similar course and I doubt he would have had the opposition. But then there is everything else…not that GW has been much of a conservative, however. : (
I wonder if some Democrats are changing positions (especially Hillary) because they know the inside scoop on the current progress. They see that things are going to start getting better and better in Iraq and thus they want to start slowly changing their position now so they can say “I was for it all along” later on!
I hope that is not the case, but I’ll admit it, I am suspicious.
I don’t believe all Democrats are evil (nor are all Republicans right), but I am very concerned with how the Democrat party as a whole has handled the Iraq war. I think they are in a position where they almost need us to fail there in order to gain power!
I am kinda glad they are starting to squirm out of that position!
ThirstyJon
Interesting stuff.
I will agree and disagree, all at the same time.
Nobody is “Seeing the light”. Most of us on the Dem/Left side still believe that the Invasion of Iraq was the worst foreign policy decision in the history of the United States. We have called for withdrawal because we saw it as the best possible way to end the issue, and to begin undoing the damage inflicted by the worst mistake made by the worst president in US history.
General Petraeus has changed the way our people operate. The de-facto ethnic cleansing by the civil population (Sunnis killing/running off the Shia in their neighborhoods – Shia killing/running off the Sunnis in their neighborhoods) is nearly complete. For many reasons, the level of violence in Iraq appears to be decreasing. From this point of view, looking forward from where we are today, it may appear that a continued engagement for some period of time may yield a better outcome than the US simply leaving the Iraqis and their neighbors to sort out the mess that’s been made. That’s where the Dems are today.
Let’s try an analogy – a parable if you will. Imagine that a hyperactive child is running through his mother’s kitchen with a large clay pot, full of sewage. The foolish young’un decides to smash the pot on the kitchen stove. How do you correct this? You might just dab it up with some paper towels, you might strip the kitchen to the walls and replace the stove, you might decide to just move and let the next owner worry about it.
This is what we’re talking about today. Yes, perhaps the Democrats were advocating that we move out of the house – and now the smell has died down a little and we may be willing to discuss scrubbing the kitchen with bleach. But never forget that it was your hyperactive little monster from Connecticutexas that covered the kitchen in poo in the first place. And no matter how well the cleanup goes, I doubt very many will brag “” I was for it all along “”.
Hello Casper!
For anyone who wants to read the rest of my conversation with Casper Go Here:
http://freedomthirst.com/2007/11/14/sickeningly-politically-correct-not-honoring-veterans-day-in-school/
I am glad some Democrats are willing to consider the possibility that “…continued engagement for some period of time may yield a better outcome than the US simply leaving the Iraqis and their neighbors to sort out the mess…”
I wish Ron Paul would consider that as well. It would make him a very interesting candidate.
As far as the rest, you already know my disagreement with your view of what has happened and my disagreement with your view of our President. No need for me to go through all that again.
Thanks for your comments!
ThirstyJon
“…the worst foreign policy decision in the history of the United States. ”
Wow, now that’s a bold statement. I suspect that supplying North Korea with nuclear reactors would rank pretty high up there, too. Failing to eliminate Hussein during the Gulf War was a pretty bad decision, too.
Didn’t know we gave NK a reactor. The little research I did says they started out working with Soviet equipment.
We had a lot more justification for going to Baghdad then then we had in 2003, but I still think Bush I was right to stop, for all the reasons he and Dick Cheney and Paul Wolfowitz gave at the time. They were so sensible then,,,
Many of us call it the “worst foreign policy decision” for a lot of reasons, and the biggest is the simplest.
Did Iraq attack the USA? – No
Did Iraq threaten to attack the USA? – No
Did Iraq have the equipment to pose a credible threat to the USA? – No
Did Iraq have anything to do with the 9/11 attacks? – No
Knowing all that – did the USA attack Iraq? – Yes
((Huh?!?!))
We attacked a country that didn’t attack us first. Surely you can understand that to the rest of the world this looks a lot like Germany marching unprovoked into Poland in 1939. And look where it’s gotten us, and our 3,900KIA, and our 30,000WIA, and beaucoup Iraqis, etc. etc.
IM(NS)HO, if any decision rivals Iraq it would be standing by and watching as the Pakis built a bomb. Or allowing the Pakis to basically harbor Bin Laden. Or allowing the Iraq campaign to draw resources and people needed to successfully handle Afghanistan.
Yep, bold statements. Lots of ‘em going around.
Hmmm. Too bad nobody listened to Winston Churchill and stopped Hitler earlier.
By the way, Mike Huckabee has some sharp criticisms of Bush policies and some interesting thoughts on how to deal with Iran.
http://freedomthirst.com/2007/12/15/huckabee-on-iran/
One small difference Jon,
Hitler had the Wehrmacht, the Luftwaffe, and Leni Riefenstahl’s “Triumph of the Will” – which was an actual movie released documenting Germany’s flaunting of the weapons limitations impressed on the nation by the Treaty of Versailles.
SH had nothing and was contained.
They are similar in that they were both Jerks. Other than that, it’s not even apples and oranges – more like engine blocks and birthday cakes. A specious comparison Jon, I’m disappointed, you can do better.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
On foreign policy – Huckabee disagrees with Bush, and actually sounds a lot like some of the stuff I’ve been saying to you for a while. Is Mike Huckabee a Liberal? (actually, yeah, a lot of his policies are pretty close,,, Hehehe).
Welcome aboard brother.