"Debate shift" on Iraq not enough
Jonathan Singer makes a very good point: Yes, the debate on Iraq has shifted. People talk more openly about getting out of there, even the Bush administration doesn't insist we're winning there any more. But despite this shift in debate, there has been no corresponding shift in policy, nor is there any sign of one. All signs point to policy shifting in the opposite direction of the debate: Bush is talking about escalating our committment by throwing more troops into the violence.
"Shifting the debate" is all well and good, but to actually change the reality the Democratic congress is going to have to do more: cut off funds, revoke the "use of force" resolution, something with some teeth to it. No bipartisan group of "wise men" is going to sit down with Bush and convince him of the error of his ways. Really, the time for "debate" on the Iraq issue is long over. I want to see the Democrats take some concrete steps. And my support for the 2008 presidential nomination is up for grabs. Whoever can convince me they have the best plan for getting out of there (let's face it--it's very likely we'll still be there in January of 2009) has a good shot at getting Internal Monologue's endorsement.
"Shifting the debate" is all well and good, but to actually change the reality the Democratic congress is going to have to do more: cut off funds, revoke the "use of force" resolution, something with some teeth to it. No bipartisan group of "wise men" is going to sit down with Bush and convince him of the error of his ways. Really, the time for "debate" on the Iraq issue is long over. I want to see the Democrats take some concrete steps. And my support for the 2008 presidential nomination is up for grabs. Whoever can convince me they have the best plan for getting out of there (let's face it--it's very likely we'll still be there in January of 2009) has a good shot at getting Internal Monologue's endorsement.
Comments