Ending A Failed Occupation
Congress has just voted to fund the war for another year — $100 billion for Iraq and Afghanistan. How could that happen when two-thirds of the public are opposed to the war and the Democrats just gained the majority of both houses in the Congress with a mandate to bring it to a close?
Curbing a rogue president intent on sustaining a failed war is not easy. Public opposition is not enough. The mandate of the 2006 elections is not enough. A slim Democratic majority in both houses of Congress is not enough. Daily evidence of the deepening debacle is not enough.
In this instance, Bush vetoed the bill that set a date for beginning to bring home the troops. Republicans stood with the president, so his veto could not be overridden.
The Democratic leadership faced a hard choice. Activists urged that they pass the same bill again, inviting the same veto, and force Republicans to decide once more whether they stand with the failed policy of an unpopular president or for changing course in Iraq. More cautious voices urged giving the president the money he wanted for another year, and postponing the debate until September when they face the question of 2008 funding.
The first option—forcing another veto—took courage. It isn’t business as usual. It would create a firestorm of criticism in the right wing echo chamber. The president would spend the Memorial Day ceremonies and recess excoriating Democrats for abandoning the troops in the field. The Pentagon would announce that they’d run out of money, and were now forced to rob other programs vital to our defense to pay for the troops.
The more conservative members of the Democratic Congress were shaky enough on the first vote. They could easily revolt and vote with Republicans if the leadership forced a second one.
The leadership decided they couldn’t take the risk or didn’t have the votes. They chose instead to pass a bill funding the war for another year, with only symbolic “benchmarks” requiring reporting on Iraqi government “progress.” The president will have his surge; the debate will be revisited in September.
Then, to add insult to this injury, the apparatchiki of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee dispatched a fundraising email describing the war funding as an historic victory. Clearly the party operatives either have no clue about their core supporters, or utter disdain for them.
The lesson is plain. To bring this war to an end will require an independent and resolute movement willing and able to put pressure on politicians of both parties, and to hold them accountable for their actions – or inactions.
The catastrophe in Iraq will continue, with our troops caught in the middle of a civil war they cannot stop. The only question now is how long the folly will continue, how many more lives will be lost, how many more billions squandered, how much more harm to America’s security and standing in the world will be done.
The president isn’t about to change course. The Congress must bring the war to an end. Vulnerable Republicans must pay a price when they wring their hands, murmur words of opposition and vote to sustain the president’s course. Conservative Democrats, those who voted for it from the start and have been slow to understand the scope of the debacle, must be challenged, not sheltered.
The vote on the supplemental gives a good sense of where members stand—who is prepared to stand up and who is prepared to just go along. Over the summer, we should make certain that the latter understand that there is a price to pay to supporting the worst foreign policy debacle in American history.
© 2007 TomPaine.com
“…we should make certain that the latter understand that there is a price to pay to supporting the worst foreign policy debacle in American history.”
The problem is, there is no price to pay. There is no choice because you will have to vote either Republican or Democrat, knowing full well that third parties have no chance in the way the system is set up. So, how are you going to extract a price? Vote Republican?
The price will be paid in the Democratic primary elections.
I still believe the Democrats should be given a little leeway, but they are on a short rope.
I still believe that a third party would be a viable option. Remember, Jesse Ventura ran as an Indy several years ago as Governor of Minnesota, and won.
I do like Republican Ron Paul (the only Repub I respect). He tells the truth when he says that Muslim fanaticals hate us because we’re over there.
We’ll just have to wait and see what we hear from the presidential candidates as the next several months go by.
I do like Republican Ron Paul (the only Repub I respect).
Sorry, but I’m not ready to jump in with the so-called “libertarians”.
Saila is correct. There is NO way a third party candidate can be heard. The Republicans and Democrats made sure that only they can be part of a national debate, only they can get Federal matching funds. Sure there is the odd charismatic guy that gets his face seen nationally once or twice but they dont even have the clout to shape the debate. Of course “debate” insinuates a discussion that anyone is interested in which is not what happens in these so called “Presidential debates”. A bunch of milk toast soft ball tossed to the candidates who, if they dont like it, dont answer and never get their feet held to the fire. of course then we have the likes of John Kerry who couldnt even handle a soft-ball. “I would have done the same thing as the President”,OH PLEASE
There is just something basically wrong with America. I cant put my finger on it but it’s not just the politicians.
WTF: Where’s The Filibuster?
Afghanistan is not a failure…lets not abandon them to the Pakistani backed Taliban please. Lets not put Afghanistan in the same catagory as Iraq.
The latest news today is President Bush has declared South Korea a model for Iraq. Isn’t that nice we’ll probably be there another 50 years. It’s time to realize that Bush wants to keep the troops there to guard the oil!! It is all about the oil!!! It always has been about the oil!!! It always will be about the oil!!! As the body count rises in Iraq it wont affect Bush at all. He flat doesn’t care as long as his precious Agenda goes forth. Look out IRAN your next!!!!
the corporate Republican Party = fascism
the corporate Democrat Party = fascism
the grassroots Green Party = democracy
The argument of how much fascism can you live with is like how much cancer can you live with?
“Curbing a rogue president intent on sustaining a failed war is not easy.”
My understanding is that congress merely needs to pass a law ordering him to withdraw. What’s difficult about that?
… The very real possibility that he will simply ignore it.
If the management of any corporation were to create such a mess as the managers of this country have, they’d be fired. Yet, we reward these losers with re-appointment, high salaries, and, worst of all, respect.
Bosorage says that the choice was between voting on this blank-check funding bill without deadlines, & bringing the same funding bill with timelines that Bush vetoed to be voted on again. But Kucinich said that Congress did not need to bring ANY funding bill up for a vote. My question: could Pelosi, if she wanted to, have kept this blank-check funding bill from coming up for a vote? Was it up to David Obey, chair of the committee, to allow or not allow this to come up for a vote?
I know that some think the Dems could not POLITICALLY have gotten away with simply not bringing up another funding bill for a vote, but I agree with Kucinich; it seems the voters (including Repubs & self-described conservatives) understand that the only way to protect the troops is to get them out of Iraq.
Can someone please answer my question - could Pelosi and/or Obey have prevented this from coming up for a vote? Thanks!
“…we should make certain that the latter understand that there is a price to pay to supporting the worst foreign policy debacle in American history.”
We should also remember to protect Republicans who oppose Bush/Cheney on Iraq. Two that immediately come to mind are Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE) and Rep. Walter Jones (R-NC).
“…we should make certain that the latter understand that there is a price to pay to supporting the worst foreign policy debacle in American history.”
Regardless of political party affiliation the policy makers behind closed doors are the same, the corporate lobbyists and leaders are the same, and media output is all the same.
They all share a common goal: profit through exploitation, keep the masses ignorant, etc
“I do like Republican Ron Paul (the only Repub I respect).”
Yeah I saw him on Real Time last week. Man, you wouldn’t know he was a Republican if he didn’t have that big “R” next to his name. Maybe he’s a mole.
The guy seems a little too nice to be partyin’ with the pachyderms.
It bothers me though when people say that this war has been a “failure”. It hasn’t. The neo-cons have done what they set out to do. They’ve made their money. To say that this has been a failure imo is naive. It assumes that they truly wanted to liberate the people of Iraq and fight terrorism and radical Islam. The neo-cons KNEW they would “fail” at that. Being the good guys was never their intention. They don’t care about anyone outside of their little club and they really don’t care about anything aside from money and power and how they can retain it.