What is a bi-partisan strategy?
I’m still trying to catch up on news and the idiocy that seems to have permeated the District of Columbia while I was gone (only three days, f’pete’s sake), so excuse me if this old news to you. In the Wall Street Journal’s Editorial column today, “Republican Retreat“, they quoted Dick Lugar;
“I do not doubt the assessments of military commanders that there has been some progress in security,” Richard Lugar, the ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, declared on the Senate floor late last month. But that didn’t stop Mr. Lugar from concluding that its chances of success are “very limited.” Why? The “short period framed by our own domestic political debate” won’t allow it, he says. Instead, Mr. Lugar wants a “sustainable bipartisan strategy” along the lines recommended in November by the Iraq Study Group. Last week, New Mexico’s Pete Domenici noisily joined this bandwagon, as have several other Republican Senators, some of whom face tough re-election fights next year.
All of this nuanced language is just goofy posturing. What the hell is a “sustainable bipartisan strategy”? That’s just buffoonery – you either win or you lose, you either have a strategy to win, or you have a losing strategy. You can’t have it both ways.
There’s no compromising on strategy to please a political base – the political base aren’t interested in the particulars of fighting wars and they wouldn’t know a battle formation from an SOS breakfast.
That’s why our founding fathers didn’t make Congress the Commanders-in-Chief – they just hand out the money. You can’t fight wars in Committee. Look how long it’s taken for Congress just to come up with a defense bill. Imagine how long wars would take if the military had to wait for Congress to make a decision about tactics or strategy.
So what if Lugar, Domenici and the unnnamed ones are in a political battle? Will any of them be killed as a result? But, in the meantime, how many of our troops are dying because their political posturing rewards every bullet the bad guys fire at them?
For once, just once, I want to see a politician put the country and the folks fight for them ahead of their political careers.
The WSJ concludes;
As for Mr. Lugar’s bipartisan hope, it would be wonderful to think that Washington could come together around a sustainable, long-term Iraq strategy. But how many Democrats are ready to work with Mr. Bush on that? Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid now calls ending the war his “moral” obligation — as if America’s departure would end anything — and he responded to Mr. Domenici’s statement by saying GOP Senators must now vote for a rapid withdrawal.
The Democrats don’t want to end the war before next November any-damn-way – They need the issue for the election. And Harry Reid wouldn’t know a moral obligation if it bit his hip pocket. Apparently, Lugar and Domenici suffer from the same affliction.
Category: Antiwar crowd, Politics, Society, Terror War
