For Now We Stay The Course In Iraq
Critics of the war in Iraq were forced to put their money where their mouth is in Congress yesterday thanks to Democratic Rep. Murtha, who chose to create a firestorm in the media and on Capital Hill this week with his call for a troop pullout. Is he running for President or something? Or possibly having flashbacks to his days in Vietnam?
This is not Vietnam (although the tactics of the insurgents of hiding amongst the women and children is reminiscent of the guerrilla tactics used in that war). Some differences - we never had an established presence in Vietnam; we never overturned a ruthless leader and allowed the people a chance to create their own government; we never carried on a peace-keeping and humanitarian mission simultaneously while fighting in Vietnam; we never had to worry about the political mission of the enemy being embraced by sympathetic radicals throughout the world who would destroy innocent lives to "make a statement" in support of the Viet Cong; we never had an all volunteer army in Vietnam - comprised of soldiers who were motivated to volunteer due to an attack on our country or to receive college education and other benefits and whose military force is represented by a large number by National Guard members who range in age of 18 to nearly retirement age and are both men and women. No, this is definitely not a repeat of Vietnam.
Another Vietnam veteran (let's use that word loosely), Sen. John Kerry (Kerry said, "Let Iraqis stand up for Iraq.") came out to support Murtha, who was castigated by not only the GOP - but also by fellow Democrats, who obviously do not (at least for the record) agree with his stand on the war. The final tally on the resolution was 403-3 against the pullout. Democrats are calling it grandstanding by the GOP. I think that the call for a vote was done to stop the sniping by the Dem's of the war who were using it to take pot shots at the administration. How better to make it stop, than to call for a vote (which is now a matter of public record)? No longer can the sniping go on, without the snip-pee having his own vote thrown back in his face. Is the war of words done regarding the war on terrorism? Not hardly. As long as the world has terrorists it will continue. Politically, the Dems will use whatever they can to undermine a GOP leadership, and the liberals will continue their civil rights campaign to "embrace" the terrorists and "love them into remission" (note - submission is not a word in the liberal vocabulary). And to the liberals who think that open discourse and concessions are the best way to win this war I would like to remind them that in the case of remission (as in any lethal case of cancer) - remission does not mean cured.
(For another perspective of the Murtha mess, please read St. Murtha’s Day speech by ArrMatey posted at Stop the ACLU, which I have linked to.)
This is not Vietnam (although the tactics of the insurgents of hiding amongst the women and children is reminiscent of the guerrilla tactics used in that war). Some differences - we never had an established presence in Vietnam; we never overturned a ruthless leader and allowed the people a chance to create their own government; we never carried on a peace-keeping and humanitarian mission simultaneously while fighting in Vietnam; we never had to worry about the political mission of the enemy being embraced by sympathetic radicals throughout the world who would destroy innocent lives to "make a statement" in support of the Viet Cong; we never had an all volunteer army in Vietnam - comprised of soldiers who were motivated to volunteer due to an attack on our country or to receive college education and other benefits and whose military force is represented by a large number by National Guard members who range in age of 18 to nearly retirement age and are both men and women. No, this is definitely not a repeat of Vietnam.
Another Vietnam veteran (let's use that word loosely), Sen. John Kerry (Kerry said, "Let Iraqis stand up for Iraq.") came out to support Murtha, who was castigated by not only the GOP - but also by fellow Democrats, who obviously do not (at least for the record) agree with his stand on the war. The final tally on the resolution was 403-3 against the pullout. Democrats are calling it grandstanding by the GOP. I think that the call for a vote was done to stop the sniping by the Dem's of the war who were using it to take pot shots at the administration. How better to make it stop, than to call for a vote (which is now a matter of public record)? No longer can the sniping go on, without the snip-pee having his own vote thrown back in his face. Is the war of words done regarding the war on terrorism? Not hardly. As long as the world has terrorists it will continue. Politically, the Dems will use whatever they can to undermine a GOP leadership, and the liberals will continue their civil rights campaign to "embrace" the terrorists and "love them into remission" (note - submission is not a word in the liberal vocabulary). And to the liberals who think that open discourse and concessions are the best way to win this war I would like to remind them that in the case of remission (as in any lethal case of cancer) - remission does not mean cured.
(For another perspective of the Murtha mess, please read St. Murtha’s Day speech by ArrMatey posted at Stop the ACLU, which I have linked to.)
posted by Is It Just Me? at 9:10 AM
<< Home