Enough With Bashing Democrats on Iraq Already
Sun Mar 18, 2007 at 09:53:36 PM PDT
I have seen a lot of back and forth on this site about whether or not the current war funding resolution under consideration by the US House of Representatives should be supported or opposed. Early on, I was dead set against the resolution, because of the usual "toothless" ground, but then my pragmatic side took over. Let me explain why.
Many have said here that there is no real enforcement of the bill. The troop readiness requirements, for example, can be waived by the President. Simply by certifying that benchmarks are being met and have been met, Bush is able to continue the war. And we all know what a smart idea it is to trust Mr. "Iraq is trying to acquire yellow cake uranium for Niger." And then, After September of 2008, the bill simply declares the wall illegal. So what, you might ask, is making my crazy head support this bill.
First and most obvious reason? Because first and obviously, this may be the only bill that can pass right now. Here are the other reasons.
It's the Paper Trail, Stupid
One of the things this administration is terrified of most is, in two words, paper trail. Take the warrantless wiretapping scandal, for example. One reason they did that, despite having a FISA Court that almost never ever denies the government's request for a warrant, is that Bush, Cheney and Gonzales did not want to leave any paper trail of who they were wiretapping and why. They learned from Richard Nixon, and they know a paper trail can be deadly. Although they don't seem to understand that email, too, creates a paper trail (in light of the US Attorney firings), but that's another story.
Now think about what happens. If Bush wants to continue the war, he has to do several things.
One, certify, on a unit by unit basis, that those troops, even though are not fully battle ready by the Pentagon's standards, must be kept in Iraq because of "national security reasons." Now, I don't know how many units are serving in Iraq in total, and how many have and will serve, but it's at least that many presidential declarations (1) Admitting he is sending unprepared troops to Iraq, and (2) admitting embarrassingly that the world's most powerful military is incapable of having battle ready troops; that is how much the Iraq war broke us.
And then there is certification on progress in Iraq. Again, paper trails.
They are afraid of paper trails not simply because those are potent political weapons, but Congress can further use that paper trail to hold oversight hearings, and demand answers justifying what's written down. There is no way to wiggle out of it when it's in writing. The paper trail, at the very least, makes it easier for Congress to clamp down and spread its roots of hard oversight.
Would I have been happier if the bill did not let the president wiggle out? Yes. But again, I'm a pragmatist.
Perpetual Debate Without Allowing Action Can Lead to Perpetual War
At least, there is a deadline of September 1, 2008. One can argue it is too late, and I won't be opposed to that argument. Hell, it's too late now. But as I have said numerous times in numerous comments section, I am not so ideological that I will be hell bent on continuing a debate in perpetuity if it does not end with my conclusion. Because the danger in continuing the debate in perpetuity is that the war, too, will with absolute certainty be continued in perpetuity. We cannot both be against perpetual war and perpetual debate on the war, if that debate does not produce any steps.
Much Ado About "Defunding" Not Being Included
This bill declares the war illegal after September 1, 2008. But, it does not explicitly cut off funding thereafter. That has caused an uproar. Before we go on an all out war against the Democratic majority though, we need to understand that it doesn't mean much either way. Saying it is illegal does in fact send a signal that Congress will not stand by this war after that date. Quite likely, that would mean defunding, for which we may even have the votes by then, given the continual scandals of the administration and further deterioration of the occupation in Iraq.
On the other hand, I caution against making a Congressional declaration of defunding a cause celeb, given that Congress itself is not bound by its previous resolutions. Congress can say "Oh we will cut off funding.... ohhh you watch out, we'll cut off funding!" and the go right back and authorize funding at a later date. There is absolutely nothing to stop Congress from doing so.
The Silver Lining: Bush's Veto
If this bill actually makes through Congress, Bush has promised to ink his veto pen for it. I can't say I'm not totally giddy over that possibility. Congress approves a bill with funding with strings attached, and Bush is forced to veto the entire bill, which will result in him vetoing the funding as well. That will end the war without the Democrats having to further lift a single finger. Sure the Republicans will blame the Democrats for "failure", but it's not like they aren't planning on doing it anyway. Besides, power is given to us to do the right thing, not for the sake of power itself.
This Bill Does Not End the Raging Debate on Iraq
If this bill passes, that is not the end of the debate. In fact, we can see this poorly crafted compromise as a minimal progress that we can build on. We do not need to shut up the day after this bill passes. There is no need to for us to take a hike from continuing to push for further Congressional actions. And in fact, we will not do so. We will not let up. We will continue to push, and continue to be a thorn in the way of Congresspeople and Senators that do not want to end this war.
Ending the war, friends, is not simply a resolution. It is a campaign. In that campaign, we will not be discouraged because we don't get something perfect today. We will not simply give up the campaign because don't think we are moving fast enough. We will not, for the sake of our troops, our country and our world, end this campaign until its goal has been achieved.
