Hi GST; Re: "The question remains, what do we do now? Bush is so highly identified with this failed foreign policy, it seems he must go before we can begin to chart a new course."
The same argument was made back in 1968 about how Johnson had screwed up Vietnam. Since our failed policy was so highly identified with Johnson, he had to go before we could begin to chart a new course. But the alternative to Johnson was Nixon and Nixon was a genius (like Kenedy) that thought that he could win the war. So the result was another 6 years of war.
Now you have a situation where the failed policy in Iraq is highly identified with Bush, but your only alternative is Kerry, a man who, like Nixon in 1968, believes that he is a genius who can win the war. Look at what Kerry is saying. He says that he will reduce US troops in Iraq "by the end of his term". That's hardly a guy who's going to do anything better in Iraq than what Bush has already done. Hell, Kerry doesn't even regret voting for the war. His only complaint is how it's been run, not that it's unwinnable. Only the far left wing of the Democratic party would actually pull us out at this time.
It's got into such a deja vu situation that Kerry won't tell us what his plan in Iraq is. Like Nixon in 1968, it's a "secret", LOL.
If we elect Kerry, then we're going to have to go through the same learning process with Kerry that we've already gone through with Bush. Like Bush, Kerry will have to learn that the war is unwinnable, but since Kerry can blame Bush for the earlier screw ups, Kerry is going to have to take that much longer to do it.
Kerry won't give up on Iraq until it is PROVEN that the US can't win even with Kerry's policies in place. If Kerry is elected, it will be at least a year before Kerry is willing to admit that he doesn't have a solution. After that, it will be another year while he looks around for other solutions. He'll start pulling troops out maybe 2 years after he takes office. With Kerry, you could see fairly large troop levels in Iraq through most of 2007. Bush, on the other hand, has already shot his wad. He may pull out early so that people will forget the (Republican) screwup before the next midterm elections. At the very least he won't spend US troops trying to push a rope.
As it is, Bush has gotten US KIAs down to the 2 per day level. Bush has been giving fairly mild orders, who knows what Kerry will do. Go look at his career. Kerry is not a man who shrinks at killing people. He's publicly stated that he's not going to significantly reduce our troops in Iraq, and he's repeatedly stated that we need more. Since politicians generally underestimate the requirements of war, you can be sure that in the commander's seat, Kerry is not going to disengage from Iraq. Bush, on the other hand, hasn't shown the slightest inclination to invade any more countries and he's already proven that he's NOT increasing our troop level there.
-- Carl |
