Two Deadlines and an Exit

That's the title of John Kerry's NY Times op-ed. It offers a scary glimpse into Kerry's view of Iraq. It also is a glimpse into how willing Democrats are to demagogue the issue of Iraq.

Kerry's op-ed starts with this silly claim:

We are now in the third war in Iraq in as many years. The first was against Saddam Hussein and his supposed weapons of mass destruction. The second was against terrorists whom, the administration said, it was better to fight over there than here. Now we find our troops in the middle of an escalating civil war.

I guess that Sen. Kerry is mentioning the "supposed weapons of mass destruction" because he thinks he's winning activists over to his column should he run again. What Jean Francois is pretending is that the American people agree with him that President Bush intentionally lied about WMD's just so we invade Iraq.

Sadly, he's so out of touch with reality that he doesn't realize that most Americans don't believe that President Bush lied. They think he got that wrong but they don't believe he lied.

As more of the ISG and DIA documents are put into the public's view, the more people will realize that it wasn't shoddy intelligence that led to that conclusion but rather the clever plot of a maniacal dictator that fooled even his top generals.

Half of the service members listed on the Vietnam Memorial Wall died after America's leaders knew our strategy would not work. It was immoral then and it would be immoral now to engage in the same delusion. We want democracy in Iraq, but Iraqis must want it as much as we do. Our valiant soldiers can't bring democracy to Iraq if Iraq's leaders are unwilling themselves to make the compromises that democracy requires. As our generals have said, the war cannot be won militarily. It must be won politically. No American soldier should be sacrificed because Iraqi politicians refuse to resolve their ethnic and political differences.

Check out this sentence: "It was immoral then and it would be immoral now to engage in the same delusion." The implication is that we can't win now. Sounds like Howard Dean telling WOAI radio that the "idea that we're going to win the war in Iraq is an idea which is just plain wrong", doesn't it? Nothing like a defeatist Democrat first thing in the morning, is there?

It's disgusting, though, to hear him mischaracterizing the generals, which is what he's doing when he says "our generals have said [that] the war cannot be won militarily." They've said that the war can't be won solely by winning militarily. It might also help the distinguished Senator from France if he noticed we're about to get a permanent government. Support for al-Jaafari is almost gone, which is the last hurdle to putting the permanent government together.

But why let a few facts get in the way of a good rant, right?

So far, Iraqi leaders have responded only to deadlines, a deadline to transfer authority to a provisional government, and a deadline to hold three elections.

Deadlines that the Distinguished Senator from France said couldn't be achieved, if memory serves. In fact, I think he said it was "unrealistic" for President Bush to stick to those election dates and for turning over sovereignty.

Iraqi politicians should be told that they have until May 15 to put together an effective unity government or we will immediately withdraw our military.

The more you think this through, the more you realize that this is a recipe for failure. It's essentially saying that impatience is more important than success. That thinking is part of what I've called the "Democrats' deadline obsession." They can't do foreign policy without being impatient. They can't do foreign policy if things don't get done yesterday. Kerry's no different.

If Iraq's leaders succeed in putting together a government, then we must agree on another deadline: a schedule for withdrawing American combat forces by year's end...Only troops essential to finishing the job of training Iraqi forces should remain.

I couldn't disagree more. We've currently got American forces serving logistical support roles until more 'behind-the-scenes' military people are trained. The problem is that most Iraqi recruits want to be part of the fighting forces.

Other than those things, the Kerry plan sounds almost coherent. NOT.

Cross-posted at California Conservative

---

Posted Wednesday, April 5, 2006 7:03 AM

No comments.