I was just listening to the Thom Hartmann program on Air America. In the second segment of his first hour, he made an argument regarding the political implications of giving the President what he wants regarding the Iraq supplemental. Using "defunding or otherwise hampering the war effort is political suicide" as the base assumption, he boils the debate down to the following question.
Would you rather accept a certain amount of chaos, death, and destruction in the short term to ensure Democratic majorities that will restore sanity to domestic and foreign policy, or would you rather cut off the chaos right now and run the risk of Republican majorities who will instigate even worse wars with Iran and Syria?
Tom wisely does not answer the question. But I believe there's an important question to ask before that decision becomes a legitimate topic of debate. If the President gets what he wants and we allow him to continue stepping on the gas with the cliff's edge in sight, can we survive it?
(Details below the fold)
Can we, as the United States of America, survive another 20 months with George W. Bush at the helm getting what he wants? In order for a new Democratic Majority to take possession of leadership, there must be a meaningful leadership position to take possession of. The office of President and Congressional majority are meaningless if the good ol' U. S. of A. becomes a third world country, or worse, a corporate controlled fascist state.
Obviously, in a strictly physical sense, we will easily survive. I of course do not mean to minimize the sacrifice of our soldiers. I have great respect for those who stand up to defend their country. But on a national level, their sacrifice is not shared. In other wars, millions of soldierswere killed, and entire cities were leveled, civilian populations included, in pursuit of victory. No such thing is happening here. Our citizenry is under no such assault, and no draft means our national sacrifice is relegated to those volunteers who take up arms in our stead. Even if "they followed us here", as Bush likes to claim, there are simply not enough terrorists in the world to make a meaningful physical impact on the American people. That's not really what terrorism is about, anyway. They don't want war, because they can't win war. Insurgency and Fear are far better tools when you're outnumbered and outgunned.
If there is an existential threat to the United States, it comes not from violence. Terrorists, no matter how ferocious or devoted they are, cannot kill this country with suicide bombers. They can, however, offer an existential threat by whacking at the underpinnings of society - our civil liberties and our economy.
Bonddad had a diary up today saying we can't afford this war. I believe this statement actually becomes more true the longer the war goes on. Four years in and over 400 billion dollars, with estimated long-term costs in the trillions. And the war is not getting any cheaper. The current idiotic surge plan and reports of additional troop surges by December are only going to increase projected costs.
With that much red ink, how long can we realistically expect foreign investors to prop up the war effort? As Bush continues implementing a fiscal policy that can only be described as utterly insane, the dollar becomes more brittle. Having outsourced a good portion of our manufacturing sector, we are critically dependent on the strength of the dollar to enable our lifestyles. We can't even seem to make food for our pets without getting ingredient from China, as the massive pet food recall has shown us. If one of our creditors decides to cash in their paper, our economy becomes paralyzed. All manner of imported goods becomes prohibitively expensive, and we are crushed under our own currency. We won't even be able to go to work because we don't have a viable oil alternative yet. In such an event, American society will require a fundamental reworking, and it will not be pretty. At that point, it's hard to predict what America would look like, but I think it's a fair bet that we will not be "the world's sole remaining superpower" any longer.
You all are also familiar with the GWOT's erosions of the civil liberties that this nation was founded upon - Habeus Corpus (RIP), 4th amendment (last throes), 1st amendment (I'm looking at you, Fox News). While the gradual dismissal of our freedom is only tangentially related to the Iraq occupation, it dovetails with continued acquiescence to Bush's agenda. Keep giving him what he wants, and he'll keep taking it. There must be a line. A stand must be taken somewhere, or else we may as well let him bury that "goddamned piece of paper" in a toxic landfill.
And thus, back to the point - we could opt to cut the Democrats some slack, and hope they don't yank the football out from under the people when they have true, unencumbered legislative power. But we really should doublecheck our airbags before we let the Boy King shift into 3rd gear.