Sunday, November 20, 2005

No Debate About It

The dust-up in the House of Representatives over the “Murtha Resolution” is a perfect example of the non-debate over the war in Iraq. The Republican parody of Representative John Murtha’s serious criticism of a failed effort a political sound bite with no redeeming merit. The merits (or, for that matter, the demerits) of his proposal were not discussed. Instead the Republican leadership hid behind charges of “cut and run” and “our troops”. I heard one Democrat responding to the resolution with accusations of “THIS is IT? This is all the debate you allow?” He’s right. Debate on the War in Iraq has been limited

At every turn, BushCheney has sought to limit discussion, to control information and otherwise prevent any criticism of their plans. The run-up to the Iraq invasion was largely lies, distortion and unnecessary haste. American success in Iraq has never progressed beyond the heady days of the invasion. Despite heroic and determined efforts, the US military cannot defeat an Arab nationalist resistance on its home turf. Continuing the same policy will continue to produce the same results, creating more enmity for America in the Islamic world.

Murtha did not call for abandoning Iraq. His original resolution correctly noted the counterproductive impact of foreign troops in Iraq and offered a reasonable strategy for removing one major cause of instability in Iraq. In place of American troops destroying cities and barging into civilians’ homes, he would leave that job to Iraqis. For major threats (terrorist bases and cells, for example) Murtha proposed an “over the horizon” Marine quick reaction force. Murtha’s pIan is similar to one offered by mid-east expert Juan Cole. In all, Murtha and other critics have offered reasonable approaches that are worthy of consideration.

But no discussion is allowed in BushCheneyWorld were any questions “demoralize the troops”, where any strategy that seeks to reduce an objectionable foreign occupation is “cutting and running” that means “Americans died in vain”. America must “stay the course” which means more Americans and more Iraqis die while Kurdish and Shi’ite militia leaders consolidate their control and further disenfranchise the Sunnis. A prescription for more chaos, instability and death that will ensure that Americans died for nothing. Given the sordid history of this war, beginning with the lies and deceit that put American forces into Iraq and running all the way through the torture scandals, failed reconstruction and systematic destruction of Sunni cities, I wonder what our troops are dying for. The results of their efforts, however heroic, are not likely to benefit America.

Murtha’s resolution offers a chance to redeem that sacrifice. Reducing the presence of foreign occupiers will remove a major flashpoint. Iraqis must still navigate a difficult process of political reconciliation, one that will no doubt sometimes be bloody. This is a path only Iraqis can choose and follow. If they have a reasonable chance to do that, perhaps America’s sacrifices will not be in vain. If BushCheney were smart, he’d listen to Representative Murtha. Unfortunately, for America and Iraq, BushCheney listens to no one.

postscript

Arizona (my fair state) figured prominently in the non-debate. Arizona Representative J.D. Hayworthless was the primary proponent of the Republican alternative to Murtha’s resolution. It only seems appropriate that a an odious character like Hayworthless was involved. He’s a former sportscaster who rode into Congress in one of Arizona’s safely Republican districts in 1994 when Republicans won the majority. He was a fat, blubbery white boy who could at best read Republican talking points. Like many of the Class of 94, he pledged to serve only three terms and like many, he ignored that pledge and is now in his sixth term. He has lost considerable weight because his excellent medical coverage allowed him to have a stomach bypass or staple. He is still a phony.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home