Dick Durbin, the senior senator from RascalLand, voted last night to continue funding of the war in Iraq without any timetable for withdrawal of U.S. troops.Apparently afraid that Republicans would impugn his patriotism and accuse him of not supporting the troops, Durbin knuckled under to George W. Bush.
He explained himself thusly, according to the Chicago Tribune:
I share the frustration of those who are angry about this failed war policy and the soldiers who are fighting and dying. I'm doing everything in my power to keep this national debate front and center and to change this policy. Until we have more senators of both parties who feel this way, we are limited in our options.
Everything in his power to change this policy? By voting to continue it?
Well, at least our junior senator, Barack Obama, did the right thing.
The Trib has this story about antiwar pressures on Democratic lawmakers.
24 comments:
Just out of curiosity, how would you personally feel if, despite all odds, the surge and ultimately the United States involvement in Iraq, was successful?
Wouldn't that be a good thing?
Well you kooks lost another one and AMERICA won yesterday.
Look, the vast majority of Americans thinks this war was a mistake to begin with and want the troops withdrawn. A majority favored the original Democratic approach on a funding bill -- that is, with a timetable for withdrawal. America won nothing yesterday, except the loss of more of its sons and daughters. That's not winning. (By the way, I published your comment in this case because you actually came close to making an argument. Ordinarily, your comments are limited to a one-word idiocy --"kook" -- or to some ungrammatical, unintelligible nonsense not unlike what a chimp at a keyboard would produce. I'm glad to see that you're back on your meds. And I'm sure they're proud of you there at the home. I look forward to the day that you can offer a reasonably intelligent counter-argument to my brilliant observations.)
To mike s.: Yours is a false hypothesis. It's like asking how I would feel if my rabbit's foot invariably brought me good luck and great fortune. It ain't gonna happen. But, yes, success in Iraq -- that is, full democratization of that country, an end to its sectarian strife and peaceful relations with its neighbors -- would please me greatly. But there's no chance of that under our current policy, which is why so many military brass hats and Middle East experts warned against the policy from the outset.
Just checking. There's a difference between hoping for good results while doubting that they are achievable and being invested in achieving bad results. I usually admire those who strive for the best against seemingly impossible odds, don't you?
The problem seems to be that so many Americans with partisan concerns have painted themselves into a corner where their side fails if America succeeds. It would have been much better if they had emphasized the fact that their goals were the same and not been so strident in their opposition toward any solution other than immediate withdrawal.
Tell me, what do you think that America could do to aid Iraq in achieving full democratization, an end to sectarian strife and peaceful relations with its neighbors? That could only be achieved by U.S. withdrawal?
Mike: My reply to your latest question will have to wait 'til tomorrow at the earliest. I'm just heading out the door.
OK, Mike, I'm back. As for the last two questions in your comment, I don't think there's anything the U.S. can do militarily to achieve full democratization of Iraq or an end to sectarian strife there. The Iraqi people don't want us there, and neither do the American people. Those two factors should settle the matter, period. The only people who want us there are the al-Qaidas. For them, our military presence is a great recruiting tool all around the Islamic world. Your suggestion that I want America to fail in Iraq so that I can say I was right is insulting. I would love to be proven wrong. I've been proven wrong on more than a few occasions in my life, and I can deal with it. In this case, I would welcome it. As for the stridency of my opposition to U.S. policy, I won't apologize for that. Look, thousands of lives have been lost for a policy based on falsehoods and cynical appeals to patriotism. Excuse me for being strident about that. One more thing, you may "admire those who strive for the best against seemingly impossible odds," but in this case, I don't. Bravery in the service of foolishness is not admirable. It's stupid. It's also tragic when so many lives are lost. This whole business started in response to 9/11, but Iraq and Saddam had nothing whatever to do with that episode. Bush & Co. used the terrorist attacks as justification to pursue a policy they had cooked up beforehand. Shame on them. Shame.
If the vast majority of Americans think this war was a mistake the time tables would have past. You kooks do not speak for America you speak against America. GO BURN A FLAG TRADER.
The timetables DID pass, you pinhead. Bush vetoed them. The vast majority of Americans DO think the war was a mistake, as even FOX News polls show. Wake up, man. Try reading a few newspapers. Oh, by the way, You should work harder on your spelling and punctuation. Now put away your crayons and go out and play and quit bothering me. I'm trying to find a "flag trader" I can burn.
Rascal,
I did not mean to imply that you wanted America to fail. What I said was that many with partisan concerns had put themselves in a position where they would lose politically if America won. I didn't say you weren't hoping for that outcome, though pessimistic that it was possible.
You never did present an alternate solution that could lead to "full democratization of that country, an end to its sectarian strife and peaceful relations with its neighbors". I'd be perfectly willing to evaluate any solution that offered even partial success, but in four years I haven't heard a single one.
Anyway, I'm glad to hear that you'll climb on board if the surge appears to be working.
Mike: There is no "solution," alternate or otherwise, that will bring success in Iraq. The only way to halt the waste of American lives is to bring the troops home. The Bush policy has been a horrible disaster in every respect (with the arguable exception of deposing Saddam, after which we should have declared victory and withdrawn.)
Just because its difficult doesn't make it impossible.
http://michaelyon-online.com/wp/a-memorial-day-message.htm
http://www.daybydaycartoon.com/
Just saw this and thought I'd add it. The cartoon format may be easier for some of your readers to understand.
Mike: Thanks for the link to Michael Yon's Web site. I'll visit it regularly. Of course, I wish him and his comrades well, and I admire their courage. But I still think the policy that places them in harm's way is a mistake. If I'm proved wrong about that in the long run, I'll be glad to admit it.
Mike: As for the cartoon by Chris Muir (to which you provided a link), I coincidentally ran across some references to it earlier today (before you mentioned it). The material is an amalgam of stats gleaned from e-mails of unknown origin dating as far back as 2003. Snopes.com, a site that verifies or debunks various claims floating around the Internet rumors, says of the material repeated in the Muir cartoon: "These types of items are generally impossible to categorize with a single truth value because they typically contain a mixture of fact, opinion, subjective statements, inaccuracies, and literally true but often misleading claims."
Excuse the extraneous use of the word "rumors" in the comment immediately above this one.
Mike: One more thing, I'll be posting a report tomorrow (Memorial Day)about growing doubts among U.S. troops in Iraq with respect to their mission. My intention is not to dispute Michael Yon's observations but to show that there are other opinions among the troops.
Of course there are different opinions among the troops, as well as among the officers and the retired generals. You don't think that they all think in lockstep just because they are in the military? You still need to evaluate what they're saying because, as you say, they are opinions.
The polls on morale that I watch are the re-enlistment rates.
So, I guess I was wrong. No Iraqi schools are being opened and rehabbed, no buildings are being built, no Iraqi's are volunteering for the police or army, no children were given vaccines, no independent news outlets have opened and no free elections have been held. Anything less less than perfection is failure and just not worth doing. Sigh.
Mike: Let's not be silly here. I didn't say you were wrong. I merely said that the numbers haven't been independently verified and that they've been floating around the Internet for years. Moreover, even if accurate, the stats don't offset the fact that "mission accomplished" was a falsehood to begin with and remains an illusory goal. Yes, some schools have been built, etc. But it isn't all so peachy-keen that most Iraqis are happy with the presence of U.S. troops. Quite the opposite is the case. And several million Iraqis have fled their homeland.
mike s.: Please re-send your last two comments of a few moments ago. I accidentally rejected and deleted them. Sorry.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-070527anbar-story,1,785371.story?ctrack=1&cset=true
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070527/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq
I'm sure once we leave they'll change. They just want peace.
http://www.outsidethewire.com/blog/outside-the-wire/kharmah-awakens.html
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8PFFCQO2&show_article=1&cat=0
Post a Comment