Posted on 08/27/2005 1:40:43 PM PDT by RWR8189
WASHINGTON — It's time for the Democratic Party to take a courageous stand and call for the withdrawal of troops from the senseless war in Iraq.
Its human cost and the billion-dollar a week tab in Iraq should give all Americans pause.
Would the Republicans have hesitated to challenge the Democrats if the shoe was on the other foot? Did the opposition party give former President Bill Clinton any slack while he was in office?
What is the logic of Sens. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., Joseph Biden, D-Del. and other so-called moderate Democrats still backing the unprovoked war in Iraq when they know they were sold a bill of goods?
Furthermore, they are urging that more troops be sent to Iraq. And they are doing so at a time when the generals in Iraq are giving mixed signals. Some are talking about a draw down of troops in a year, others in four years.
Are the Democratic leaders afraid to admit they were wrong? Does the credibility of the administration — and therefore the country— mean anything to them?
Both Clinton and Biden are presumed presidential contenders in 2008. That leaves Democratic voters —many of whom are anti-war— with no choice if either wins the party nomination.
Can Biden and Clinton give young men and women any valid reason why they should lay down their lives in a war that we didn't have to fight in the first place? The fallback position apparently runs like this: "We're there and we have to stay there now. We can't cut and run."
I heard the same refrain during the dying days of the Vietnam War. And so did the moderate Democrats. Whether viewed as a "mistake" or a "noble cause," the fact is that Vietnam survived and thrived after we departed. It is a participant in the global economy and fairly friendly to us.
I always thought the debacle in Vietnam and its aftermath had taught us a lesson. But apparently not.
Not all Democrats are so clueless. In an opinion article on Wednesday in The Washington Post, former Sen. Gary Hart, D-Col., wrote that "history will deal with George W. Bush and the neoconservatives who misled a mighty nation into a flawed war that is draining the finest military in the world ... diverting Guard and reserve forces that should be on the front line of homeland defense, shredding international alliances that prevailed in two world wars and the Cold War ... and weakening America's national security."
But he is also tough on his own party and asks: "What will history say about an opposition party that stands silent while all this goes on?"
Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis. is proposing a total pullout of American troops by Dec. 31, 2006. Why wait a year?
Some Democrats think the party should simply take a back seat, bide its time and watch the Bush administration defensively struggle for answers to Cindy Sheehan, the California mother who lost her son, Casey, in Iraq. Her vigil continues adjacent the president's Texas ranch.
Bush told the Veterans of Foreign War the U.S. will accept nothing less than "total victory over the terrorists and their hateful ideology."
His new argument is that anti-war protesters who want the troops brought home quickly are "are advocating a policy that would weaken the United States."
Bush himself acknowledged there were no ties between the deposed dictator Saddam Hussein and the 9/11 attacks. The 9/11 commission concluded that there was no evidence of "a collaborative operational relationship" between Saddam and Osama bin Laden's al-Qaida terrorist network.
The U.S. invasion of Iraq has changed that equation. The Iraqi resistance is being helped by outsiders — whether terrorists or sympathizers — who were not in Iraq before we attacked.
Did Bush think that at least some Iraqis some would not stand and defend their country? Is patriotism simply an American phenomenon?
White House reporters have noted that in addressing military families, Bush is citing statistics on Americans killed in Iraq — a figure now approaching the 2,000 mark. But the candid test will be when he notes the numbers of Iraqis who have been killed since the U.S. invaded their country.
Democrats have gone about their lives after giving the president a blank check to do anything he thought was necessary. They think they have absolved themselves of responsibility. It's somebody else's war.
But they might find that if they don't get some backbone and take a stand soon, the voters might not be that forgiving.
Helen Thomas is a columnist for Hearst Newspapers.
You call that a pic? I wanna see a full body shot. She's too hot to cover up!!
Have they revoked this cretin's White House credentials yet?
the fact is that Vietnam survived and thrived after we departed.
I think being on her knees so long has warped her excuse
for a brain.
Pathetic these demoxrats.
That's showing blatant DISREGARD of the rules.
Man that women sure looks like Grampa Munster in drag
...on a chair strategically located under a rope tied from a tree branch with a large loop at the end.
Democrats don't have to take a stand because the MSM is doing it for them, just like this article is doing.
I think we should all cut Helen a break. If your formative years were spent seeing firsthand the awful results of the Civil War, you too might be reflexively against war.
This woman did too much LSD. Simple logic is beyond her. And her grammar sucks. BTW, is she still allowed in WH press briefings?
Unfortunately the opposition gave Billy Goat plenty of slack!
And, speaking of slacks, I imagine you were plenty jealous of those who were getting in the Goat's slacks.
If only you hadn't been a member of the herd that included such luminaries as Madeleine Albright, Janet Reno, et al, and weren't such a waterbuffalo you'd have scored big!
You could only dream of those masturbation parties in the oval office sink.
You are a disgrace to womanhood. Come to think of it, you're a disgrace to manhood.
Face it, Helen, you're just plain ugly.
Oh, helen, you nasty little play thing. How I lust for you helen.
Why won't this sack of crap die? She's got to be 150.
You can always count on Granny Goodwitch to give us the Arab point of view. Geeeesh she's ugly.
You can always count on Granny Goodwitch to give us the Arab point of view. Geeeesh she's ugly.
Take a stand?
I thought that they were all required to sit.
No...beauty isn't the issue.Character,wisdom and intellect are the issues.
Dr.Rice has all three,Mrs Thomas has none.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.