Topic: 2006
As the mid-term elections draw ever nearer, and amid evidence that the Republicans are resurging with a more inspired and united base, I wonder what exactly do the Democrats mean when, as part of their platform, they say they want a "redeployment" of US troops out of Iraq.
Can anyone explain what that means? Democrats have long lambasted the administration as not having a "plan" to "win the peace" in Iraq. They themselves have been labeled by the media as not having an alternative to the GOP "stay the course" mentality. In lieu of actually explaining how they would fight the War on Terror, the Dems have resorted to arguing for a "redeployment".
Let's get right to the point, shall we? Because Democrats have been labeled, rightfully so, as weak on defense (this was really begun during Vietnam, cemented by Jimmy Carter's weakness, and reinforced by Clinton's lack of fortitude and unwillingness to spend political capital to fight for this country), they cannot realistically proclaim as their platform what is really in their hearts. What is that? What won't they admit? They want to retreat from Iraq.
Democrats were weak in the build up to the war because they did not admit their true feelings about war in general. They do not approve the use of force unless, apparently, enemy troops are standing within our borders (and I even wonder then...). But in light of President Bush's popularity, and that Americans by far supported the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, they did not oppose it. They voted for it. The only way they could gain political points was to critisize the lack of WMDs, and the on-going violence spread by Jihadists.
However, as soon as the war became unpopular in the polls, they quickly argued they'd been duped by a President whom they had only seconds before called an idiot. They never really wanted to vote for the war (John Kerry I am looking at you), which is probably true, but went with what was more politically expedient.
And so here we are, in 2006, over three years since the beginning of the war, and Democrats still are too afraid to all-out call for retreat, though that's what they want. Very few Democrats are in general keeping with their votes, like Hillary and Joe Lieberman, and most are calling for "redeployment". A handful want immediate retreat.
So what does redeployment mean? I would ask that to, say, Barak Obama who calls for that. Would he, as a "rising rock star" Democrat whom the Left drools over every time they hear his beloved name, take the troops from Iraq and redeploy them to, say, Iran? Would he redeploy them to Syria? What is redeployment?
Redeployment is a thinly coded word for retreat. It's plain and simple. The Democrats want the troops to pack up their tents, put away their guns, get on planes and come home. Republicans want that too, even the most avid pro-war supporter, though the difference is that they want it done when the mission is accomplished. Democrats want us to retreat now, whether or not Iraq is pacified, and leave it to al-Qaeda and Baathist wolves to feast over.
As America defends liberty and democracy around the world, it is amazing to me that the Left in this country, and European leaders, are against this mission. We liberated millions in Europe and Asia from tyranny, and gave these liberal democracies what they have today, through our blood and good intentions. But in Iraq, they want us to allow dictators and tyrants to reign. Those in Europe advocate a nuclear Iran in return for short-term peace. Historically, when the US supported tyrants in order to get peace or cheap oil, we were critisized. When Afghanistan was left to the Taliban after the Soviet defeat, somehow it became our fault that that country was left in ruins and became a terror state. Yet now we want the peoples of the earth to have control over their lives and live in freedom...we are wrong for this?
But call retreat what you want, Democrats. Redeployment is akin to calling "liberalism" "progressive" politics. It's the same thing though it seems to sound nicer. Is there a better explanation?
