On Fighting In Iraq

by DemFromCT

On the day after Christmas, I'd like to point you to a WaPo opinion piece by Emily Miller, a soldier's sister and a member of "Military Families Speak Out'. My wife and I for some time have sent boxes of books, socks, etc to soldiers we know who are deployed overseas. As Ms. Miller writes:

My brother told me that he takes his oath to defend the Constitution seriously and that he will fight and die if necessary to honor his commitment. When I asked him if he would be offended if I participated in activities opposing the war, he replied that it was not only my right but my obligation, and the obligation of all civilians opposing this war, to try to change bad policy. "Give us good wars to fight," he said.

I don't intend to suggest that anyone can speak for the soldiers and their families except for the soldiers and families themselves. and we're not bragging that we do such a thing. But 'supporting the troops' sure means more than slapping a magnet on the car and then forgetting about them. To me, it means holding our politicians accountable for the decisions they make. Now, some important ones are coming up when the Decider gets his shit together and decides to ignore the ISG, reality and military advice by escalating as if it'll solve everything.

It won't, and it shouldn't be expected to. The hard decisions still lie ahead, and the Decider needs to decide whether he's trying to protect his country or himself. They're not the same, and never have been. Ms. Miller again:

It's not too late for us to honor the almost 3,000 U.S. service members who have died defending the principles of our democracy. It is morally imperative for us to honor our living service members and to do what is demanded of us by our democracy and by common decency. We have taken a small step by changing some of our leadership in Washington, but now it is upon us to follow through at home and demand accountability from our leaders.

I'm okay with that. Our leaders have a lot to be accountable for.

Comments

[Mimikatz]

Absolutely. I spoke with some folks over the weekend who are "low information voters" if they vote at all. They could see Bush for the incompetent ox that he is and had nothing good to say about his policies, especially the war. Only in DC does he have any credibility, why I have no idea.

People are looking to the Dems to do something about the war, even if it isn't wholly successful in getting us out now. Also about corruption and the fleecing of the taxpayers. I really hope they come through.

[dismayed]

I agree. Dems are now in a position to be very hard nosed and public about policy. The citizenry has a good focus on the leadership at this point and will support sound leadership based on reasonable policy. I say be hard nosed as hell, based on facts and clear goals. Stay clear of partisan driven positions. Doing the right thing is all we need right now. The nation wants champions, not politicians. Virtue will be rewarded.

[Sara]

Well, I for one want the Democratic Congress to get the credit for opening up oversight hearings and asking the right people tough questions. Today Biden says he plans to call Condi and Powell as early witnesses in his 8 week marathon of hearings -- and that may be where to start. I wish I had his full plan in front of me to critique.

If I were Biden, I would start with the "Authors" panel. I've just finished a complete re-read of George Packer's "Assassins Gate" and I clearly would call him -- as would I call Woodward with "State of Denial" And there are others, Suskind and the One Percent Solution, and Ricks with Fiasco and Gordon and Trainor with Cobra II. I would not be asking about their sources, what needs doing is officially putting on record their analysis, and how that emerged. I'd bring in Moore on both Vulcans and "The Architect" -- because taken all together these books tell a tale that has to be what any testimony from Administration members have to answer to. As Brecht put it back in 1920 in Mahagonny, "They made their bed so let them lie in it." We should not be about any effort to further shield Americans from truth, -- whether they have read the books or not, they are ready for it. That's why they elected Democrats. All these pleas to not tell what is in the content of the critical books for fear of whatever is judged by whoever as politically acceptable is the kind of sewer sludge that Packard describes as essentially the norm on the streets of Baghdad when he arrived about a month after "Mission Accomplished" and started reporting. (Someone should have driven Bush and Cheney around in a vehicle that had adequate armour, but allowed for a sample of the smells when the temp is 120 in the shade. I hope Biden does the hearings so the smell of sewage comes through clearly.) Ask Rice if she ever went out and had a smell of it all?

I want Biden to call Jay Garner and put on the record under oath what he told George Packer. I want Paul Bremer under oath talking about his instructions from Rummy and then from Rice and Bush. Afterall, this stuff is not official till it is under oath, and not just odd quotes in the Journalists books.

[jwp]

The Dems will fold, and wait until 2008. Excuses along the way.

Lots of bloodshed; incredible horror; and a violent legacy in the region for decades. But all off-stage.

Given the insipid American media, and the usual public desire to believe what it wants to believe (i.e., there must be some graceful way out) probably make the Dem play smart politics.

Gutless. Immoral. But smart.

The only way for the Dems to get Bush's army out of Iraq is to cut off the funding. All the other stuff is just good politics for 2008.

Cutting off the funding will be portrayed by Repubs as the stab in teh back. Press will go into a feeding frenzy on that issue.

Dems know it. Dems will do nothing.

Only way to change the dynamic is direct citizen action. Massive protests in DC on a continuous basis. And that will probably only work if the protests are organized by moderate liberal churches.

A fantasy.

The reality: at least two more years of disaster. Maybe more.

Most Americans will feel a little uneasy about it. But nothing we can't handle.

[Powerpuff]

We, the people, should be doing everything we can to discourage people from joining the military, not trying to encourage them to obey the authority of people like W. Bush or LBJ.

I suggest we revoke the citizenship of anyone who joins the military and ostracize and separate them from our society. Wanting to serve in the military indicates a flawed and potential murderous personality requiring separation from decent society. Also, if someone belonged to a foreign military, they should be prevented from entering the country and never allowed to achieve citizenship.

[jwp]

Powerpuff,

Very odd comment. Completely irrelevant.

The issue is the misuse (slaughter, maiming, emotional destruction) of our military, and people in foreign lands, by Republican leaders for cynical gain (they hope) in domestic politics.

Our sympathy lies with our military, and the victims in foreign lands.

Our contempt is for the vicious, ruthless Republicans. Our frustration is with a political system primed to punish anyone who attempts to stand up to the tyranny.