I chaired a hearing on the GAO Report yesterday, the report that stated that Iraqi civilians overall aren't any safer, that the political benchmarks aren't being met in Iraq, that, in short, none of the rationales for the escalation in Iraq have come to pass. It unfolds with maddening, enraging regularity: the Administration claims goals for their policy, they gradually back off of those goals and substitute smaller, less easily measured goals, and then muddy the waters hopelessly on whether even those modest new goals have been met. Time and again we've been through this.That's why the Congress set up some clear benchmarks to measure what's happening in Iraq. Mitch McConnell praised the "clarity" those benchmarks brought to the debate. "Just wait until September," they all said. "We put in these meaningful benchmarks, we can judge in September."
Well, how do they judge those benchmarks now? Only three of 18 have been met. Another four were "partially met," ...
This is reality talking. Not dreams of winning World War Three, democracy flowering all over the Middle East, and "kicking ass" (yes, our president said that today). This is called accountability based on the president's own terms! He said the escalation was for creating "breathing space" so that the Iraqis could come to a political reconciliation. Not the Democrats, George W. Bush. And he has failed.
Later in the afternoon, Senator Kerry responded to a poster who said that by going to DailyKos, he was only "preaching to the choir":
Believe me, I intend on making this case as forcefully as I can as often as I can. Although you are selling yourself short there, many, many people read what happens here, from politicians to journalists. So making a case here is not just "preaching to the choir." A lot of others are listening in to the choir in this case. As for coordinating message, I think that's part of what we do here. This isn't a grass tops campaign, it's a grassroots campaign. One thing about Democrats: We don't march in lockstep and take orders, and I wouldn't want to belong to a party that did. But we're as united as we've ever been on this, and media reports to the contrary are overblown. Keep in mind - only one Democrat wasn't on board with our deadline the last vote we had. Harry Reid put himself on the line fighting for the Reid-Feingold amendment to fund a very different mission and change course. Don't underestimate those decisions. We've got a ways to go, but I've seen how the perseverance of you, me, and a lot of folks is paying off. We need to keep fighting.
I think that what he says about a national blog is also true with the Virginia blogosphere, and should not be underestimated. And then he came out with the goods on the Republicans:
Meanwhile, the Republicans are not confident at all. Their party is being driven over the cliff by the President's stubborn insistence on sticking to this failed policy. And they know it. No one wants to consign themselves to a permanent minority, but that's what's happening. They're not unified at all on this.
I think it will also please Virginians that Senator Webb's amendment on the troops will be offered up again, and that is from the Washington Post article:
One measure Reid said he will seek to resurrect would tighten rules on the use of troops by requiring soldiers' leave times to be at least as long as their most recent deployment. The proposal, offered by Sen. James Webb (D-Va.), would not set withdrawal terms, but it could effectively limit U.S. force levels. A vote of 56 to 41 in favor of the measure on July 11 fell four votes short of the 60 needed to overcome a GOP filibuster, but it had seven Republican supporters.
My point in bringing all of this to the forefront is despite what all the talking heads are yammering about on cable, this thing is fluid, and the Republicans are not winning. In fact, they're miserable about this. It's time we join in on this offensive, not just by getting the message out as articulated in Senator Kerry's diary, but also by calling, e-mailing, and visiting our Senators and Congressmen/women to encourage them to bring our troops home.
I'd urge everyone who wants an end to this insanity to do likewise. Now.
Do you remember how aimlessly this nation was drifting in the first months of Bush's presidency?
Do you remember how we put aside our differences and forgave those earlier sophomoric efforts after the tragic attacks on 11 September?
Do you wonder if the nation could be wandering any more aimlessly than it is right now?
Do you wonder if the legislative branch can ever provide the leadership the Democratic majority promised following last year's elections?
Do you wonder if some malicious tyrant might provide another cause celeb that will distract us from a right and just course before the Congress can act?
I'm sure you heard about the recent attacks that targeted the Kurdish villages of the Yazidi minority, that killed 500. After the WTC, this is the largest terrorist attack in history. Isn't that incredible.
Jack Reed is on Tavis Smiley and saying that pockets kept peaceful by local tribes is not the same as a successful policy that will bring peace to the overall country. He also just said the argument to cut off funding is picking up momentum and that it may be the only solution left.
So Senator Kerry is right, they are still fighting to get a change and an honest policy.
You bring up a good point. If the surge was so dandy, why did the second biggest terrorist attack in history happen in Iraq during that time? It's the politics, stupid. The politics is what will solve Iraq's problems. 30,000 more troops was not going to change that fact.
I wish it didn't also define the Democrats. We'll see how our leadership does between now and November. They wasted January - July. But I'll take almost any shred of hope at this point.
Good write up beachmom. Thanks.
I suspect that events on the ground in Iraq, Iran, Turkey, Pakistan, and Afghanistan will very much frame the debate--that is, if the news percolates through to the U.S. political class. For example, the U.S. press has given virtually no coverage to this major incident in Pakistan, where the Taliban has captured between 120 and 300 Pakistani soldiers (the bulk of foreign reporting suggests between 180 and 240). The incident suggests that the Pakistani Army really has little interest in picking a serious fight with the Taliban or with al Qaeda elements on its frontiers.
Throughout the region the quality of reporting, both official and journalistic, has been spotty and even abysmal. It is extremely difficult to figure out what is happening at the ground. Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno and Brig. Gen. Kevin Bergner in Baghdad seem just to make stuff up, as does Gen. David Petraeus with his laughable and self-serving claim of a 75 percent reduction in sectarian violence. Michael Gordon of the NYT is merely a Judith Miller clone in serving as a transmission belt for Odierno and Bergner. About all we have for a reality check is Michael Ware of CNN, who is doing his best under terrible conditions.
I am reminded of one of Graham Greene's lines from an earlier conflict:
This was a defeat: no journalists were allowed, no cables could be sent, for the papers must carry only victories.--Graham Greene, The Quiet American
Or, going back even further:
Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.--Sun Tzu, The Art of War, circa 500 B.C.