Wednesday, December 07, 2005

Real 'victory' in Iraq is not going to happen

Howard Dean says we're not going to win the war in Iraq. Well, no shit, Sherlock. What gave you your first clue?

Republicans, however, are upset that someone told the truth.

Let's start with what Dean, the Democratic national chairman, actually said:

Democratic Chairman Howard Dean on Monday likened the war in Iraq to Vietnam and said, "The idea that the United States is going to win the war in Iraq is just plain wrong,". . .

In an interview with WOAI-AM in San Antonio, Dean criticized what he called President Bush's "permanent commitment to a failed strategy" while saying, "We need to be out of there and take the targets off our troops back." Dean recalled that the strategy to stay the course in Vietnam cost thousands more lives to be lost.

"I wish the president had paid more attention to the history of Iraq before we had gotten in there," Dean said. "The idea that we're going to win this war is just plain wrong."

Oh, no, it's not, says Wisconsin Republican Chair Rick Graber. We're winning, can't you tell? From a Graber press release, parroting the party line:

"It is disappointing to see that Howard Dean, in saying that we can’t win in Iraq, is joining other Democrat leaders in supporting retreat and defeat in the focal point in the War on Terror. Merely days before historic elections, Dean’s comments serve to undermine the significant progress that has been made in Iraq. . . I encourage Democrat leaders in Wisconsin to reject his remarks and defeatist strategy.”

OK, I know the President said "victory" 15 times in his speech at Anapolis, because his pollster told him to. But that doesn't mean we can "win" in Iraq.

Just what would "victory" be? What would it take to "win?"

Since the Bush administration has never defined victory -- because it never had a plan for achieving it -- victory can be whatever we decide it is.

Maybe it's time for the Vietnam solution proposed by the late Sen.George Aiken, R-Vermont: "Declare victory and get out." (I'm not the first to say that. Helen Thomas wrote a column saying that very thing about Iraq on Sept. 12, 2003.

The Bushies sent troops into Iraq expecting them to be welcomed by the populace as conquering heroes, you may recall. Instead, they are reviled as occupiers. Most of the people of Iraq, the ones we are "liberating," want US troops gone.

Bush can say "victory" over and over again. Just like the May 1, 2003 "Mission Accomplished" sign, it doesn't mean a thing.

Howard Dean is right. We can't win. We should quit pretending we can and start planning an exit, while Joe Lieberman and Mark Green plan their Victory in Iraq rallies.

1 Comments:

At 9:59 AM, Blogger Terrence Berres said...

Perhaps "victory" and "win" mean the same thing as "success" does in the "Achieving Success in Iraq" section, pp. 6-7, of Ensuring America's Strength and Security: A Democratic National Security Strategy for the 21st Century (September 2005).

I note it says,
"We must succeed in Iraq, and will do what it takes to achieve our goals there. We must succeed for the sake of our own national security, the stability of Iraq and the Middle East region, and our global standing and credibility."
and
"... we do not believe that strict timetables for withdrawing American troops from Iraq are strategically
appropriate ..."

 

Post a Comment

<< Home