Too Soon to Celebrate
OK, maybe not too soon for a little celebration. But we still have a now seemingly hopeless war in Iraq, Bush is still Commander in Chief for the next 26 months, and our current account deficit is a real threat to our long term economic health.
The right wing wind machine and the idiot press (that is to say, between them, almost all of it) are saying that now the Democrats need to come up with a plan for Iraq. Well no. The Constitution makes the President commander-in-chief, and he couldn't delgate that power and duty to the Congress even if he wanted to. Nor can 535 people - any 535 people - come up with a plan.
What the Democrats can and must do is exercise their Constitutionally mandated oversight. For three years, Bush and Rumsfeld have said that they gave the commanders on the ground just what they asked for. For three years, everybody who talks to those commanders privately hears that Bush and Rummy have been lying. Now we can get them before Congress under oath and find out what they do think is needed, and what the real problems and possibilities are.
Bush's precipitate firing of Rumsfeld, only days after saying that he never would, shows that he is determined to at least pretend to have heard the voters. Congress's power to force him to do anything is very limited, but they can hope to penetrate the steady stream of lies and try to make the administration face reality.
The admministration and the military need to start answering the hard questions that the GOP Congress didn't bother to interrupt its stealing to ask. A few sample questions:
a) Who is committing the sectarian murders, and what are their political aims?
b) What are the links between the militias and the government?
c) What is likely to happen if we just leave? Really, I mean, not the propaganda version.
d) If we were to abandon the farce that we are just there to help Iraqi Democracy get on its feet and fight terrorists, what kind of force and committment would it take to occupy Iraq and restore order? I'm talking about a real occupation, the way we occupied Japan and Germany. One where we hire and fire the police, military, school teachers and garbagemen, decide what subjects are taught in school, and what side of the street everybody drives on.
These kinds of questions need to be asked of the military, the intelligence services, the civilian leadership, and especially of independent scholars. I'm not under the illusion that these questions are likely to elicit any attractive options, but it is important that we try to figure out what the least bad option is. "Stay the course" can't be it.
The right wing wind machine and the idiot press (that is to say, between them, almost all of it) are saying that now the Democrats need to come up with a plan for Iraq. Well no. The Constitution makes the President commander-in-chief, and he couldn't delgate that power and duty to the Congress even if he wanted to. Nor can 535 people - any 535 people - come up with a plan.
What the Democrats can and must do is exercise their Constitutionally mandated oversight. For three years, Bush and Rumsfeld have said that they gave the commanders on the ground just what they asked for. For three years, everybody who talks to those commanders privately hears that Bush and Rummy have been lying. Now we can get them before Congress under oath and find out what they do think is needed, and what the real problems and possibilities are.
Bush's precipitate firing of Rumsfeld, only days after saying that he never would, shows that he is determined to at least pretend to have heard the voters. Congress's power to force him to do anything is very limited, but they can hope to penetrate the steady stream of lies and try to make the administration face reality.
The admministration and the military need to start answering the hard questions that the GOP Congress didn't bother to interrupt its stealing to ask. A few sample questions:
a) Who is committing the sectarian murders, and what are their political aims?
b) What are the links between the militias and the government?
c) What is likely to happen if we just leave? Really, I mean, not the propaganda version.
d) If we were to abandon the farce that we are just there to help Iraqi Democracy get on its feet and fight terrorists, what kind of force and committment would it take to occupy Iraq and restore order? I'm talking about a real occupation, the way we occupied Japan and Germany. One where we hire and fire the police, military, school teachers and garbagemen, decide what subjects are taught in school, and what side of the street everybody drives on.
These kinds of questions need to be asked of the military, the intelligence services, the civilian leadership, and especially of independent scholars. I'm not under the illusion that these questions are likely to elicit any attractive options, but it is important that we try to figure out what the least bad option is. "Stay the course" can't be it.
Comments
Post a Comment