Surrender

The Democrats in Congress appeared to have caved in to Bully Bush on funding the Iraq war without any timelines for withdrawal (or any other meaningful provisions for accountability). In a game of chicken that Bush is an expert at playing, the people we elected to slow down, if not stop, his deadly delusion-driven obsession GAVE UP (though I heard they spun it as merely a delay). And it makes me sick.

As the Republican leaders continue to chant the absurd notion that timelines equal surrender, I can’t help but wonder what they really expect to win, and what by surrendering to them the Democrats are allowing them to get. By invading Iraq, we took a country from a partial dictatorship to almost total anarchy in a matter of months (anyone that thinks anarchy is good should take a look at the news some time). This left several factions struggling to regain some control over their lives, fighting anyone who threatened whatever sense of identity they had left. The argument for us leaving should be clear to any rational person: we would be removing one more (and perhaps the largest) threat the people face. The argument for staying implies that imposing more order, any order, would bring the Iraqis back from the brink (and keep others from imposing a kind of order we don’t like); it neglects, however, the fact that they are already past “the brink,” and will only accept order that they impose themselves.

Meanwhile, our military is at or past the breaking point, unable to deal effectively with any real and direct threats to us, both from other people who would harm us, and from natural disasters that pose an increasing and comparable direct threat to us. We need to be especially strengthening our National Guard, not squandering (if not decimating) it.

We’re pretty much out of time, people! Giving up or delaying until a better day is NOT an option. This may have been the last of the “better days.”