I am so shocked by this that I barely know what to say.
Saying the "idea that we're going to win the war in Iraq is an idea which is just plain wrong," Democratic National Chairman Howard Dean predicted today that the Democratic Party will come together on a proposal to withdraw National Guard and Reserve troops immediately, and all US forces within two years.
Politics is a full-contact sport and many things are said for partisan political advantage, but this is beyond the pale. If this is the Democratic Party's new stance on Iraq and national defense, they simply cannot be trusted with the national security of the United States. It's that simple.
In recent weeks, when I pointed to the Democrats' new strategy of "cut and run," Democratic supporters have acted shocked and claimed that the party has never said such a thing. I thought Murtha was clear enough in his words, but Dean has really made it clear for all to see.
Aside from the absurd tactical victory comments like this hand to our enemies, I am really getting tired of the Democrats' faux concern for our troops. I'm sorry, but I just don't believe it. If Dean were really concerned about our troops, he wouldn't effectively say to our enemies, "Your tactics are working perfectly. Keep it up and we'll turn tail and run as soon as we can!"
Shame, shame, shame on him.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
There is mixed support for the US's war effort in the US, and it gets reported. This is called Democracy, which I believe is what we're fighting for in Iraq (according to y'all). I mean, there's mixed support around the world. There has been for some time. My guess is the insurgents already know.
As far as believing the Dems cannot be trusted with national security - this doesn't even warrant a comment. Utterly absurd. The Republicans have done NOTHING to improve security in this country following 9/11. They've had over 4 years to step up to the plate, and instead they've got us fighting a war against the guys WHO DIDN'T DO IT.
There's not much to be said for blind partisanship.
Oh yeah, here are the parts of Dean's comments the Misanthrope chose not to include:
"I think we need a strategic redeployment over a period of two years," Dean said. "Bring the 80,000 National Guard and Reserve troops home immediately. They don't belong in a conflict like this anyway. We ought to have a redeployment to Afghanistan of 20,000 troops, we don't have enough troops to do the job there and its a place where we are welcome. And we need a force in the Middle East, not in Iraq but in a friendly neighboring country to fight (terrorist leader Musab) Zarqawi, who came to Iraq after this invasion. We've got to get the target off the backs of American troops."
Sounds shameful to me.
Chris -
Of course there is free speech, but Dean is a representative of one of two major political parties and he knows that his comments will be taken as indicative of what those politicians think. That makes his comments subject to a different level of responsibility, in my opinion. And I would suggest that having the representative of one of the two major parties state publicly that we can't win is a pretty silly move. That's a very different thing than private citizens expressing an anti-war view and I think it does mean that the people in charge of the Democratic Party are not trustworthy on national security. I know there are Joe Liebermans in the party, but he has been marginalized badly. His is not the dominant view. Until that changes, I would not trust the party.
The Republicans have removed the regime in Afghanistan that was sheltering Osama bin Laden who DID do it. He's been chased down to a bunch of caves in Pakistan and his operational abilities appear to have been badly degraded. They also addressed in Iraq a regime that had long been a safe haven for terrorists. I don't think anybody is questioning that. Whether or not he was actively funding or working with al Qaeda is another question. Obviously Saddam didn't have WMDs, but that was never the only justification.
Dean's further comments (BTW, I did link to the whole article) don't change what he said. Does he really think that you can just park an effective military force across the border in Kuwait? It's a seductive idea, but it's a logistical nightmare. Essentially, we'd have to keep re-invading the country and establishing bases, etc. How is that going to work?
Please pray for Howard Dean and his allies. They are so blinded by their dogma and hatred. According to the Holy Spirit's message on The Christian Prophet blog, the U.S. has already achieved great spiritual victories in Iraq. We need a Democratic Party that is spiritually attuned and seeing clearly. Please pray.
I'm with you, Misanthrope. Dean lives in a society where he is free to say what he likes -- and I will defend that right -- but it's disgusting for him to put an even bigger target on our troops there. If Dean tells our enemies that we will leave faster if they kill MORE of our troops, what does he expect to happen?
BTW, the "christian prophet" comment immediately above is why so many Americans cannot take voices from the right seriously. Unless it was in fact meant to be a joke, in which case ... well done, "prophet!"
-- david
I've been praying for the Democratic Party for years.
Post a Comment