Tuesday, April 24, 2007

Liberalis erectus

Could the American democrats actually have located their backbone?

Their plan to push through legislation to end the Iraqi occupation, despite the unlikelihood of the bill passing, seems to suggest 'yes.'

The bill proposes to:
  • Start withdrawing most troops from Iraq on October 1 of this year.
  • Complete full troop withdrawal within 180 days of that start date, except for counterterrorism and training forces.
  • Require the Iraqi government to meet specific benchmarks that show they can stand on their own two feet.
  • Funnel money that was supposed to fund the ongoing war machine to medical funding for troops, support for U.S. farmers, and other non-Iraq issues.

The thing is, once the bill passes through the Senate and the House, apparently Bush can still veto it (something similar to Canada's infamous Notwithstanding Clause, it seems)--and of course he plans to.

Some experts don't think the legislation has a hope in hell of being passed, but what it will do is force Team Bush's leaden hand. It will force them to come up with some kind of alternate withdrawal plan, and then hopefully our neighbour to the south can start its long recovery from this collective nightmare.

Here's the funniest line in the whole piece: "Republicans accused Democrats of overstepping their constitutional authority and micromanaging the war." Pot...meet kettle.

Also humourous:

"Mr. Bush made it clear again on Monday that he would use the second veto of his tenure to kill the legislation, which would set a goal of having most American combat forces out of Iraq within six months of Oct. 1.

"An artificial timetable of withdrawal would say to an enemy, ‘Just wait them out,’ ” he said. “It would say to the Iraqis, ‘Don’t do hard things necessary to achieve our objectives,’ and it would be discouraging for our troops.”

Ah, the unnamed looming "enemy"...the "we've got to set an example for the poor hapless Iraqis" verbage...the "concern for the troops" spin...seems we've heard it all before, no? At the very least, maybe this move by the Democrats will force Bush's speech writers to come up with some more interesting material.

Labels: ,


Blogger Nameless4Now said...

From a Democrat point of view, it's probably good that the proposal is vetoed by Bush.

Bush et al were the ones pushing for the war on/in/of?? Iraq, from mid 2002. It hasn't gone well (understatement of the year!)

If this Democrat proposal HAD succeeded, it would mean that the Dems were in a sense 'taking ownership' of future developments Iraq.

We can assume that all wouldn't suddenly go swimmingly, no matter how well-considered the Democrats' various measures were.

So, come election 2008, the Republicans would be in the position to argue 'Look at the mess those rotten Democrats made of Iraq! It was going so well until they took control."

I guess it's what one calls a hot potato, a Pandora's box...
or... a busted-up beehive, shit on a stick...

3:00 AM  
Blogger whyioughtta said...

...same shit, different pile...shit on a shingle...shitstorm...up shit's creek without a paddle...

You make an excellent point, n4n.

5:49 PM  
Blogger Manuel said...

Iraq is truly hell on earth. Its gone past the point of being able to choose this/that route forward. But whilst the public turns away from the daily horror and politicians dither, playing the "over to you" game, soldiers, both American & British, and civilians alike are dying. Dead, gone, not coming back.

I dont know whats to be done, then again i'm a waiter so what would i know...
...cocktails anyone

7:23 PM  
Blogger whyioughtta said...

I think we could all use a good stiff drink right about now, Manuel. Whiskeys all around, please.

p.s. You're right. It's a complete nightmare and there is no, No, NO "winning" solution. Mess-O-Potamia, as they say on The Daily Show.

Maybe this will make us rethink the rush to war next time...Mmmmph...hmmmph...bwaha...
BWAHAHAHAHA!!!...I crack myself up.

11:33 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home