I agree with almost everything you just said. Therein lies my frustration with the administration and the progress of this war. Unfortunately, Gates is just an uncontroversial stopgap for the President, and I expect nothing drastic will change. What it tells me is that this administration is lined up to punt this war to Bush's successor. There won't be a "cut and run" (thank God), but there also won't be a hammer to bring down on the insurgency.
Whether or not we agree or disagree about the current state of affairs in Iraq, I think we both agree that, at this stage, this is a most perplexing nomination.
***MY (TXRANGERETTE'S) "TAKE"***
I've been watching the hearings since Senator Imhofe was questioning.
There seems to be some kind of general consensus around Gates. Imhofe did not raise a stink nor did Jeff Sessions, that I saw. Byrd was thrilled to get Gates agreement on some of his rhetorical flourishes about Osama, but Gates finished strong with his views that Osama is NOT the be-all end-all figure that he was once thought to be, and refused to blame US for his being on the loose. Byrd wanted to get agreement that Osama, not Saddam, was the true threat, yet Saddam was captured and Osama was not, and he wanted somebody on our side to be blamed for it. Gates gave to, then took away from, Byrd's emphasis.
Most revealing was Gates and Lieberman's coloquey on the need for politics to stop at the water's edge when it comes to fighting the international WOT, including Iraq. It was then, especially, but through ALL I heard, that I came to understand why Robert Gates is sitting there. He talked about the need to operate in the culture of Washington, to work within a system where many, many people and egos have to get along, including many partisan people, in order for a victory such as winning the Cold War over many many years to be achieved. He said THIS is what he plans to devote himself to. He will do all within his ability and power to work with all of these interests successfully to forge a war policy where politics stops at the water's edge so our enemies don't think all they have to do is play politics with a divided, weakened America and they will win.
As much as I love Donald Rumsfeld, and even though none of it is his fault but is the Dems' and Media's fault, there is no way Donald Rumsfeld could remotely hope to get anywhere if he had stayed and had attempted to do that.
Apparently President Bush has come to believe that the extreme divisiveness in America is the worst threat to our survival that we have, and he is going to give Gates a chance to work with these partisans and these hyped-up egos and the Media, et al, as well as within the Administration itself where there is division, to forge something as close to a bipartisan war policy as we can get.
Then, if some of these who vote for Gates and praise Gates go off into Partisan La La land again as they have been, dividing and ripping apart our country in order to "get" the President or gain political advantage, Gates will have the creds to call them on it. I for one can understand this effort. I hope it does some good.
For any who think I want Gates and the President to give away the store to these terrible people, I absolutely defy you to find anything in my past here to justify such a charge against me. If I am so charged, I will not dignify the stupidity of the accuser by replying. Besides, my time is gone and I must do something personally more important even than this Hearing. Those who know me know what I refer to.
Cheers, ALL...