Iraq War: Why Defunding is Politically Viable
WARNING: Graphic Images
Democrats risk inheriting American blame for Iraq War
Congressional Democrats are making a mistake.
With President Bush’s eighth major speech on the Iraq war since the 2003 invasion unveiling no change in strategy, the four-year war is set to continue without end. Speaking of a U.S. troop presence “beyond my presidency”, Bush acknowledged that the next president will be responsible for his nauseating foreign policy decisions.
Without the 67 Senate votes required to override a presidential veto, Congressional Democrats currently have but one option to end the U.S. occupation of Iraq: Defund the war.
Many liberals and those believing peace is preferable to war are frustrated with the inability and refusal of the 110th Congress to collectively take this dramatic step to bring our troops home. It is widely believed and reported that American desire to end the Iraq war was a major factor in the Democratic Congressional victories early this year. With Democrats not delivering, Iraq war onus has bled from the Bush administration to the Democratically controlled Congress.
While most Democrats in Congress support troop withdraw, most Republicans and some Democrats refuse to defund the the Iraqi occupation for a variety of reasons:
- Some support Bush unquestionably
- Some believe the war effort is a success
- Some want to give the ’surge’ more time
- Some believe pulling out would make the situation in Iraq worse
- Some believe pulling out would destabilize the Middle East
- Some believe it is dishonorable to leave
- Some won’t defund for political reasons
- Some won’t defund equipment while troops are ‘in harm’s way’
Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Joe Biden is one of the latter, asserting that the safety of American troops in Iraq would be compromised if the war was defunded by Congress:
[flv]http://garlinggauge.com/videos/bidenwar.flv[/flv]
Sen. Joe Biden explaining his position at a Democratic presidential debate
At the time this article was written, the Garling Gauge projects Sen. Joe Biden would be the strongest general election candidate against any Republican challenger. With his vast foreign policy experience, Biden would easily trump the Republican’s perceived ‘we’re-stronger-against-terrorism’ high card.
Even so, and with respect to the Senator, Biden’s perspective on troop safety is not beyond debate.
The longer the war continues the more American and Iraqi men and women will be maimed, blinded and killed. More children will grow up without a parent, and more of the following Iraq war horrors will occur:
Article continues below
Images of the Iraq war
Checkpoint
For obvious moral and ethical reasons the Iraq war should end.
Beyond that is politics.
Ultimately it appears that political motivations are driving the Democratic refusal to use their ‘power of the purse’ to end the conflict. This could be for several political reasons:
- Democrats believe they will lose Congress if defunding the war makes the situation worse in Iraq
- Democrats believe they will lose the 2008 presidential election
- Democrats fear blame for Iraq civil war atrocities
- Democrats are scared to play hardball with the Bush administration
- Democrats believe the Commander in Chief should ultimately make Iraq war decisions
- Democrats believe forcing an Iraq war change will shift American war anger from Bush to Congress
- For whatever other reasons Democrats believe it is not politically viable
Congressional Democrats are making a mistake in believing blame for the Iraq war will rest with the Bush administration after Bush’s presidency expires.
Americans have short memories.
With a current favorable outlook for Democrats in the 2008 election cycle, Democrats are likely to inherit the reigns of war. America’s short memory of Bush as the war beginner will fade in the new Democratic spotlight, with a majority of the angst, anger, blame, and political ramifications directed towards the Democrats.
If Democrats wait to end the Iraq war till after the 2008 elections, the deplorable consequences of Bush’s myopic decisions will rest firmly on their shoulders. To the American electorate, the Democrats will look like the pigs of Animal Farm, transforming into what they originally despised: the ones to blame for the war.
If Democrats do what is right and risk the political ramifications of defunding the Iraq war, the war will end during the Bush administration. While Democrats will receive some of the blame for whatever results occur, the majority of Americans (and history) will still blame an out of control, war-hungry Bush administration for the ensuing consequences.
It is proactive and politically viable to defund the war.
Many argue that the longer we are in Iraq the harder it will be for U.S. troops to leave. A similar analogy dovetails with Democratic politics: The longer Democrats wait to end the war the worse the repercussions for them will be. Democrats need to nip it in the bud.
‘Defunding the troops’ makes them safer by bringing them home.
Defunding the Iraq war is best choice for Democrats, morally and politically.
Defunding the war would show the strength of Democratic convictions, save more lives in the long run, mitigate sectarian violence in Iraq, impassion the Democratic base, bring our men and women home to their families, create victories for Democrats in 2008, and rest the blame for the whole mess firmly on President Bush.
A smaller contingent of U.S. troops could remain to train the Iraqi army and police, fight terrorism, perform special forces’ actions, and protect American interests in the region.
Politically, everybody wins and Bush loses.
In a nutshell:
- End war now and Bush is blamed
- End war after 2008 and Democrats are blamed
Defunding the war is the smartest political move the Democrats could make.
Inaction will weaken the Democrats
*
See also
- ‘Terminator’ Robots Armed in Iraq
- Cheney Calls Invading Baghdad a Quagmire
- Duncan Hunter Suggests Bush Admin Stoned
- Rove: Iraq War is Lose-Lose for Next President
- Iraqi Official Chooses Cartoons Over Congressman
- How Republicans Think (and why others have to die for it)
- Slate: Democrats play it safe - by Gary Kamiya
http://tinyurl.com/387q99
http://cache.boston.com/bonzai-fba/AFP_Photo/2006/09/28/1159438877_9412.jpg
http://albertolevin.wordpress.com/2007/07/04/what-iraq-war-really-looks-like/
http://img.timeinc.net/time/daily/2007/0707/pelosi_reid_0705.jpg
Stumble it!
I doubt if “cutting funding for the war” would stop GWB and his buddies. They’d find some funding *somewhere* in the pentagon, at least long enough to pawn the whole shameful situation off on the next administration. Bush has shown his contempt for any semblance of law (at least any law that he might feel somehow obligated to follow) in the hundreds of signing statements he’s attached to virtually every bill he’s signed.
Our “democracy” seems to have kind of turned the corner into a mild fascism in this respect, in that the (overwhelmingly evidenced) wishes of the population are largely ignored, our dear leaders refuse to give up any of the power they’ve seized (pay particular attention to the role of the VP) and futile aggressive foreign wars are being waged to “defend our way of life.”
I’m only shocked that Bush hasn’t announced an intention to remain in power for a few more years, you know, because the country needs him and all, and we’re in no condition to let silly things like elections (oh wait. . . we can have elections. . . just not where the popular will is reflected in the result or in any of the actions of the “representatives” who were “elected”) hamper his crusade to secure as much of the world’s oil reserves as possible. It would be certainly be in character if he did.
Politicians need to begin to dispel the myths that the administration has invented since 2001, and re-frame the “war on terror” (if we win, we’ll never be terrified again! Then starts the very serious “war on sadness” and everyone knows it’s Iran that is manufacturing weapons of mass depression. . . the “war on insecurities” will only be a minor skirmish in North Korea. . .) as an international effort to apprehend organized criminals.
Does anyone seriously believe that if Congress “cuts funding for the war” then GWB will say uncle and bring the armies home? He’s going to do what he feels like and then get his own army of lawyers and spin-doctors (however inept they might seem) to make it work out. He might just land on another aircraft carrier with a banner that says “The troops are home!”
Hi! figther from iraq don’t never given perdom to imperalism people.
Countinue your fight agains the colonialism until end of bleeding.