Monday, April 16, 2007

Iraq's Bridges Burning Down


Americans have become detached from the realities of war. Instead of listening to the news or reading the paper, many people have given in to listening to our politicians give their opinions on how the war is going. John McCain has said that there are streets in Baghdad that are safe to walk on. Meanwhile, the citizens of Baghdad have been begging him to tell them where this safe street is because no one seems to be living on it. Our politicians have their own agendas and make the war to be something that it is not. It is a smoke and mirrors trick in a whole show of illusions to influence voters that this party or that has the right stuff to become our next White House administration. The republicans want to convince people that they are succeeding and that Iraq is becoming freer, safer and an all around better place to be since the fall of Saddam. The democrats are making this out to be the war that puts them into the White House. But no one is actually considering that this is a civil war in which people are dying each day because we continue to bicker here in America all the while neglecting those affected most by this war: the Iraqis. This war has shifted its concern from them and onto the soldiers fighting it in an increasing effort to show which American political party cares most about our troops. The prize for the winner--a comfortable seat in the White House.
But we still can't get a bill passed into law. The president has continued to flank himself with family members of war veterans as his new sheep's clothing and has made repeated statements that he wishes to discuss the differences between republicans and democrats but at the same time is unflinchingly stubborn in his stance on the bill. And the democrats continue to stand their ground, barely, demanding that the troops come home. The only difference between these two stubbornly defiant stances is that Congress is representing the majority of Americans (democracy) while the president is representing his own image invested heavily in this war (tyranny). But if diplomacy can't even work here in America how the hell is it going to work in Iraq which has come to depend on us for its very survival?
And as this stalemate rages on in Washington, vice president and part-time grim reaper Dick Cheney said in a recent interview about the democrats, "They will not leave the troops in the field without the resources they need." He said this after making a prediction that soon the democrats in Congress will give in and accept the president's terms. Bull S*&t! This is more word spinning on the vice president's part. By cutting off the funding for the war, the troops will not be left in Iraq with stones and sticks to defend themselves. If the funding is stopped, then the war itself ends and the troops come back home. And if anyone should be blamed for this delay in funding it is President Bush for remaining stubborn on this issue and not even considering other options in his failed war.
It is not Congress's job to get involved in war but when the war is begun and fought with no exit strategy in sight, someone needs to pull our soldiers from the wreckage this war has become. And so far, the only people willing to put an end to this bloodshed are the democrats in Congress. Bush burned his bridges early in the war so that there was no turning back without victory. But now that the victory he imagined turns out to be exactly that--imagined--we need to start constructing a way out.

A Ranting In Response

Today's post is simply a let-out of some built up pressure created when I read an editorial published in Monday's Florida Today titled, "Standing with Bush in funding battle". Our author makes the first point that the democrats' strategy in Congress is "gutless". He cites that they won't vote on a bill to cease funding of the war in Iraq but instead want to ride this out until the veto, leaving Bush to "hang in the wind". This is crap to begin with. This government is far too bureaucratic for two bills on the same issue to be floating around at the same time.
Also, our author makes the point that, "If he [Bush] uses money to fight the war that is not approved, they impeach him." As noble as this person is making Bush appear to be, I question where our president is going to cough up over $100 billion to fund this war. Face the facts, whether he likes it or not, our president needs Congress to fund the war.
Another point our budding White House aid came up with was that a time table for troop withdrawal is a war-tactic and because it is not within Congress's power to "fight a war" the Supreme Court would rule in the president's favor that such a bill is unconstitutional. A time table is not a war tactic! It is within Congress's power to decide how the government will spend its money and if they say they want to stop the funding at this point, then obviously the troops would need to come home. Leaving the funding of the war in the president's hands is like handing someone else's credit card to your spoiled teenage girl who wants to go on a shopping spree. After all, it is the money of the American people.
And the way our author summed up his editorial was, "The Democrats will not budge, and I hope Bush stands firm." Well, I hope this person is a big fan of making no progress then. Congress has repeatedly asked the president to negotiate with them on this bill (after all, they're not terrorists). Bush has stood firm this whole time and if you can't see that it has led to nothing, then you are blind. This president is stunned and left confused after seeing for the first time that in a democracy, facing overwhelming change with a totalitarian resolve is met with utter defiance. He can't rule America with an iron fist forever, thank God.
Within Iraq, we can see a perfect example of what happens when the leader of a government acts out of sync with the pulse of the rest of the country. Six members of Iraq's Cabinet loyal to Muqtada al-Sadr will give in their resignations later today in response to the Prime Minister's lack of care toward the Iraqi people. They feel that because the majority of Iraqis wish to see U.S. troops leave their country and Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki supports the motion of keeping the troops in Iraq, the only thing left to do is step away from such a government. It is a shame that power-related loyalties are coming between diplomacy but that is the reality of what is happening in Iraq now. The people are ignored and left to be blown up in the markets of Baghdad while those made powerful by the U.S. occupation neglect diplomacy.
For our budding writer to the Florida Today: when you go back to the fuhrer bunker, say hello to Ann Coulter for me.