Sen. Reid has endorsed a March, 2008 deadline to withdraw troops and end most spending in Iraq. Sounds great, right? Maybe not.
Reid spokesman Jim Manley said the Democratic leader does not expect the bill to become the official position of Senate Democrats, given its strong terms, but rather the “next in a series of steps designed to try to force a change in administration policy.”
Sigh. More Anti-war Lite. What at first glance look like a substantial commitment is, upon closer examination, just air. The way to ‘force a change’ is most certainly not by telegraphing that what you’re doing is just a ploy, and that you aren’t serious about it. But then, that’s the favored game of congressional Democrats, isn’t it? Like little barky dogs, they make growly noises, but really, they’re just ankle biters.
Stop the funding and bring the troops home now. Not next year. NOW.
There are so many options available: negotiating with the “enemy” (many of whom, the Iraqis at least, will end up becoming part of any peace settlement)… turning the military duties over to other countries, especially Muslim countries (a la Indonesia’s proposal)… working with Iraq’s neighbors…
So far, neither Dems nor Repubs have taken any serious measures to *eliminate the need* for troops. In the case of the Republicans, it could be said that the war benefits some big supporters. In the case of the Dems, I see no excuse. But there can be no moral withdrawal without solutions.