Okay, I guess I missed the memo, but suddenly it appears as if "100,000 troops in Iraq, indefinitely" has become the de facto Democratic position.
When did this happen????
How did this happen???
And what are we going to do about it????
I don't know when it started, but my epiphany over this weekend was dis-heartening. I have heard five different times, from five different places, that the emerging view on Iraq is that we will have "100,000 troops" there indefinitely.
Now, the "indefinitely" seems to vary. Some folks define that as "5 years", others just leave it open ended. But they are all seemingly taking the same line.
And, worse, what they all have in common is they are DEMOCRATS!!!!
Huh? What did I miss?
I thought the party view, from the work we have done with Congress, through the debate discussions, was about how to force GWB to get the troops out NOW! Immediately!! Before one more young man or woman has to die to support our insatiable desire for oil!!!!
When did that change?????
I've seen two diaries the last two days using the 100,000-indefinitely line.
I heard Juan Williams on Fox talk about it this morning (yes, I watch Fox sometimes...so banish me!)
And I saw the NYT story on Hillary's speech in Iowa, parroting this position.
And I know there was a fifth...but I can't remember it. Sorry.
What gives, folks? Is this really, now, our accepted, mainstream position? Is this what we want?
More importantly, if we DON'T agree with the 100,000-indefinitely position, WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO????
I'm actually out of ideas...I've written my Congress-people, and likely yours, too. I've approached the candidates. I've protested. I've discussed and debated. To what end?
This is where we seem to be now.
So, do I have to just accept that the Democratic Congress and the Democratic candidates are going to adopt this position? Hillary has already said she supports 100,000-indefinite. Whither Barack? What about JohnE?
Who will stand up now for immediate withdrawal???
And before you say: chaos will ensue...poppycock! If we leave, then the Syrians, Saudis, Egyptians, Jordanians, Kuwaitis, Europeans, and Russians, will have to get off their butts, and off of the sidelines, and step in to solve this situation. They will have no choice, lest they let the entire region descend into chaos.
The only way to solve Iraq is with their nieghbors. And the only way Iraq's neighbors will step up to THEIR responsibilities, is if we first leave, and stop doing the job for them!
Anyway, I am dismayed and disgusted! And I had to vent. If anyone has some ideas on how to stop this line of discussion among our candidates, please post them.
And if you think I'm wrong, please say so! I want to be wrong: that this position is not being adopted by the Democrats!
But right now, it seems like we have basically adopted the Republican line. And that makes my soul hurt!
Thanks for listening!