Liberal types (I'm talkin' to you Clueless Old Liberal, or you Cindy Sheehan, or you Michael Moore and you MoveOn.org types) are going to be surprised to read -- if they actually read this news -- that the Democrats that are running for President are really no more inclined to completely exit Iraq than the current administration is.
I suppose that the liberal types might, just might, read this news as it shows up in their own national rag:
Democrats Say Leaving Iraq May Take Years
Some choice words from that original article:
Even as they call for an end to the war and pledge to bring the troops home, the Democratic presidential candidates are setting out positions that could leave the United States engaged in Iraq for years.
John Edwards, the former North Carolina senator, would keep troops in the region to intervene in an Iraqi genocide and be prepared for military action if violence spills into other countries. Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York would leave residual forces to fight terrorism and to stabilize the Kurdish region in the north. And Senator Barack Obama of Illinois would leave a military presence of as-yet unspecified size in Iraq to provide security for American personnel, fight terrorism and train Iraqis.
These positions and those of some rivals suggest that the Democratic bumper-sticker message of a quick end to the conflict — however much it appeals to primary voters — oversimplifies the problems likely to be inherited by the next commander in chief. Antiwar advocates have raised little challenge to such positions by Democrats.
Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico stands apart, having suggested that he would even leave some military equipment behind to expedite the troop withdrawal. In a forum at a gathering of bloggers last week, he declared: “I have a one-point plan to get out of Iraq: Get out! Get out!”
On the other side of the spectrum is Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware, who has proposed setting up separate regions for the three major ethnic and religious groups in Iraq until a stable central government is established before removing most American troops.
Still, many Democrats are increasingly taking the position, in televised debates and in sessions with voters across the country, that ending a war can be as complicated as starting one. |
Paying attention to these words liberals? You folks that keep talking about the fact that our current President got us into this mess and it will take Democrats to get us out of it get the real picture here?? The real picture being that if we meet the new boss, it may be the same as the old boss.* (*partial lyric borrowed from Mr. Townshend and his friends in the Who)
It doesn't surprise me that the Democratic candidates are having to admit that they too will have to proceed slowly in Iraq. It doesn't take a genius to see that leaving in a hurry (as Bill Richardson is talking about doing) will cause many more problems than would be solved by exiting Iraq in a huff. Besides issues of just how we can leave that quickly (besides taking the Richardson approach of leaving everything behind) there's the idea that leaving too quickly just puts a black eye on the U.S.A. for years to come when it comes to our relationships with other countries and other potential allies.
We've already seen that many of the problems in Iraq relate back to the impression we left the Iraqi people with following Gulf War I. Back then we encouraged the Iraqi people to overthrow Sadam and then when some tried to rise up against him we abandoned them and let them suffer at his hands. Many of those people will, rightfully, never forgive the U.S. for that, and most certainly will never forget it.
In anycase, I hope this article comes back again and again to remind voters that the Democrats really won't be any different than the Republicans will be when it comes to Iraq. If voters vote on the other issues, then perhaps the Democrats will watch themselves lose again as the voters realize that putting the liberals in charge of the purse strings won't be doing anyone any favors when it comes to their own personal wallets. (Try checking the article here: Liberal until it's inconvenient or costs the liberal money for clues on what happens when liberals start worrying about their own pocketbooks.)