MUScoop > The Superbar

Are the Dems digging themselves a hole ?

(1/5) > >>

Murffieus:
Only two things can happen in Iraq----the troop surge works and the violence is quelled to a manageable level----or the troop surge fails and the Dems force us out.

If the trrop surge works, the political price the Dems play is obvious----in that case they were wrong and can be painted by the Republicans as not only incompetent on foriegn affairs, but also unpatriotic.

If the troop surge doesn't work and the Dems force us out by cutting funding-----and then all hell breaks lose there and an Iranian Theocracy puppet comes to power (Al Sadr and massive ethnic cleansing takes place (ala Yugoslavia)----or worse yet if this spreads to other countries (crape vs Sunni) or still worse yet if terrorist camps are set up ala Afghanistan and we get attacked again (inevitable) and/or oil production/shipment gets disrupted in a major way with obvious implications to our economy------the Republicans can remind the electorate, "I told you so".

Seems to me either way the Dems are screwed !

mu_hilltopper:
Your argument is as if the Dems in Congress are out there on their own.  At this point, they are simply representing the will of the people.

The country is massively in support of ending the war.  ~65% oppose the surge.  True, that drops to 40% who want funding cut off, but that number would rise if the surge doesn't quell the violence. 

And honestly, I don't think there's any way the electorate will blame the Dems for bad things that happen in that region going forward.  The Bush  presidency is entirely about this war and the future, whether good or horrific, will lie at his feet alone.   To date, all congress has done is signed checks and blown hot air. 

77ncaachamps:
Last November, The Dems - not the Republicans - can reminded the electorate, "I told you so."

As in, "I told you so that funding a protracted war in Iraq with no clear vision and with little of a just cause now would get us into this mess."

The citizenry knows either you stay or go. They voted for the Dems so as the above poster had intimated, "They're for a break from Iraq."

Even with all of the possible implications, it's time. It's time to get out.

The Dems can also remind the US people: Bush got us into this mess, he ain't getting us out of it...so clean-up is always harder to do.

Murffieus:
The Dems should be leading public opinion not following it! That's a Bill Clinton MO-----look at the polls and do what the people want----tell them what they want to hear-----but is that good leadership?

The majority of people in this country are not always right (far from it). (people's opinion  follow sthe news----they don't lead it) e.g. Harry Truman had a worse approval rating than GWB when he left office in 1952-----now he's seen as one of our greatest Presidents-----go figure!

If we get out of Iraq------Al Quida and Hezbullah following will soar as radical Islam claims victory. Also when the going gets tough they see that America quits! Makes for a bigger and much more expensive war down the road-----not to mention an excelleration of terrorist attacks all over the world-----INCLUDING the USA !

mu_hilltopper:
"If we get out of Iraq .. Al Queda/Hezbullah will soar.." -- Yeah, and who's fault will that be?  No one but Bush and the neo-cons.  Period.  The dems would very easily say "He started it.  He bungled it.  The plan for the future wasn't working.  We let him go 4 years (certainly a 5th and 6th will occur) and it's just plain hopeless.  So we cut our losses and ended it."

As I've said before, the only legitimate debate is over leaving tomorrow, or staying for 5-10 more years.  Any short-term surge is doomed, and quite frankly, laughable.  (It's been said more than once by these same leaders that the war on terrorism is a generational struggle.  Some 22k troops for 6-12 months gonna stop that generational struggle?  Yes.  Laughable.)

 If Bush and the Republicans were the "leaders" you say they are, they'd cowboy up and propose an honest plan for the next decade, and an honest cost estimate (say, $3 more trillion or so ought to do it.)   But of course, that would mean their political death.  That would be some true leadership, though. 

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page