A suggested way of countering the Administration's spin. I don't understand why the Democrats continue to flee from this issue. The majority of the country is now against this war. The Democrats should stand up and represent our position.
----------
The Bush Administration's Iraq policy is an unmitigated disaster, and yet neither President Bush nor any of his advisors has expressed even the slightest bit of willingness to truly confront this problem of their own creation. Instead they spout slogans and platitudes. "Stay the course". "Support the troops". "The insurgency is in its last throes". "This is a noble cause." In the same way that the reality on the ground did not match what we were told, before the invasion, about Iraq's WMD program, the reality on the ground during the occupation has not matched the Administration's rhetoric.
We have heard it repeated, ad-nauseam, that we must "stay the course" in Iraq. Staying the course implies that a plan is in place. If the Administration's pre-determined course is to let Iraq devolve into civil war with American troops caught in the middle of multiple warring factions, and with our young soldiers dying at the rate of 3 per day, then America needs to pick a new path. If the Administration remains obstinate about accepting the reality of the quagmire they have created then America needs to choose new pathfinders. This nation cannot afford to be led by those who are willfully blind to their own mistakes.
Neither should our good men and women in uniform continue to suffer the brand of "support" this Administration has offered since the day they were asked to sacrifice their lives for reasons which, again, did not match up with the realities they've encountered. Anymore when "support the troops" is uttered, what is meant is "support the policy". Any policy which puts the entire weight of an extended war solely upon the shoulders of the men and women of the military is a horrible policy. It is a mistake for a nation to use its military might without a reason, or for reasons so spurious as to be untrue. It is an even bigger mistake to not only support but celebrate such abuses of our military. Our troops are men and women with hopes, dreams, and desires like anyone else. They deserve the opportunity to pursue those hopes, dreams, and desires. They deserve the kind of support that will not put them in harm's way without a valid reason, and which will not keep them in an untenable situation indefinitely. It is time for the President to level with the troops about how much more they will be asked to sacrifice.
They need to know how much longer they will be asked to occupy a country that is becoming increasingly hostile to their presence. Contrary to the Administration's statements that the insurgency is in its last throes--a statement they have made for over two years, now--the attacks on our troops, and upon the Iraqi military forces our troops have been training, have increased in frequency and sophistication. We have been told that success in Iraq is "just around the corner", that there is "a light at the end of the tunnel". Sadly, that light is the flash from the barrel of an AK-47 or an RPG lanncher, shot by an insurgent fleeing around the corner after cutting short the life of yet another of our soldiers. We were told that our troops would be greeted with showers of rose petals. What we were told was wrong. We were told that once Fallujah was under control, the insurgency's back would be broken. What we were told was wrong. We were told that once elections took place, the attacks would decrease because democracy would have won. What we were told was wrong. Now we have been told that the solution lies in the Iraqi constitution, and that once that piece of paper is approved, we will have succeeded. If prior examples are any indication, then our troops had better be able to use copies of that constitution as body armor. This Administration has, after all, made being wrong a policy.
And how can being wrong be "a noble cause"? What, even, is the cause that our troops are dying for? Not a single weapon of mass destruction was found. Not one ounce of the tons and tons of chemical agents we were told that Iraq possessed. Is the noble cause a phantom, as well? No connections between Iraq and al-Qaeda existed, though they certainly exist, now, since the next generation of terrorists are being trained at the expense of the American lives and money that has gone into this occupation. Is the noble cause creating new terrorists? Iraqi citizens continue to live in fear of death, as violence rages around them. The majority of Iraqis still lack many life essentials, as well: clean water, food, and medical care. Contrarily, we have created for ourselves a lush oasis full of all of these things and more, and dubbed it the "Green Zone". Is the noble cause defending a small island in a sea of chaos? That sea is rife with the possibility of civil war. No constitution is proof against that. Especially not a constitution that is based upon democratically-incompatible rules which place women and minorities in a second-class position. We experienced that here, in America, and we are witnessing it in a microcosm in Iraq. Is the noble cause the creation of a fundamentalist Islamic state?
It is time for the Administration to step up and answer these questions. Or do they echo the sentiment of their supporters who traveled to Crawford to say to Cindy Sheehan, "We don't care!" Certainly the President has expressed his desire to move on with his life, as he enjoys his month-long vacation. That is well and good, Mr. President. We would all enjoy such an extended vacation. I'm sure the men and women over whom you are Commander in Chief would especially enjoy such a large chunk of free time. Many have been separated from their homes and families for two years, now, with only a week or two weeks of leave at a time. But, while their Commander partakes of leisure on his ranch, refusing to meet with the mother of one of a soldier who died while under his command, much less to confront the realities of the situation he's created, moving on home in a coffin remains a very likely possibility for each of our troops.
Like a certain emperor who fiddled amidst a crisis in Rome, our President clears brush while the fires of his creation burn in Iraq. Is the President unconcerned about the fate of Iraq, much like he expressed his lack of concern about Osama bin Laden? Is moving on with his vacation more important to him than addressing the problems in Iraq, and getting the men and women he leads out of harms way?
It's time for some answers, Mr. President. Cindy Sheehan wants to ask them. We all want to ask them. What is your reply?