Translate

Sunday, February 18, 2007

The baby with the bath water as a foreign policy

I know too many people who do not want their family member going back to Iraq to possibly get hurt or die for a mismanaged cause. Almost all believe in the cause (or foreign policy objective since it is about us). It’s the President’s mismanagement of the war to date that makes sacrifice seem like such a waste. Much of this thought is directed against our President. Yes, he has integrity, and a fair objective, but he has taken the micromanagement problem to the other extreme by delegating too much in face of the way the war has gone, and then waiting way too long to take corrective action. And even then many of his hired minions have tried D.C. micromanagement to a bad degree (mostly in the limited war strategy). And yes war is not predictable. The consequences are never really known, even in the American way of war.

At least our President has integrity, and an ability to admit mistakes on his end, and then take corrective action, even if it is politically unpopular. That it is unpopular to many citizens at home is the price he has earned and will have to pay. That it is the correct way to go forward is supported by many at home, those in the military and their families, and by moralists looking at the bigger world picture and ignoring politics and its American reporting by the mainstream media.

All this talk does not change one life if lost for a mismanaged cause. Corrective action needs to be taken, and it has been taken by our President. Only time will tell if it will work to our advantage.

The Democratic party’s recent behavior is one way to try correct the failed management of the Iraq war by the President and his hired minions up to the 2006 elections. Their party strategy of using the power of the purse to try assert themselves in 2007 is way off the mark constitutionally, morally, and politically. Throwing the baby out with the dirty bath water is not a foreign policy, and the body politic recognizes this. There are so many other ways to proceed if the Democratic party still believes in the national interest foreign policy objectives stated by our President.

If the Democrats have other foreign policy objectives that differ from those stated by the President, they should say so and then stand for election. Millions of foreign lives (and their families) hang in the balance. Let us decide, not Pelosi and Reid and how they use their powers to manipulate what is said and voted on in Congress. Most of us watched and voted in 2006 for many reasons, a lot for what was said and promised. Now we voters can see just what will really happen. And really, in the end, it is out of the politician’s hands and in the voter’s hands.

One wonders about the Democratic party these days? It sure looks like many politicians running for office in 2008 (all classes) must be using polling data, or focus groups, or connections to the mainstream media, or even bowing to their extreme left wing types, to influence their votes and pontifications. Very few come across as looking out for our national interest. The Governor of New Mexico is one exception. In all cases the strategy of tilting left to get the nomination (for whatever) before going centrist to win the election is disingenuous at worst, and au contraire to our national interest. This tried and true plan worked in the past. It probably will not in the future.

No comments: