Al's Opinions

I really like and admire John Murtha's proposal. He proposes requiring the Defense Department to provide proper equipment, including body armor; proper training, including combatting insurgency; and proper rotation schedules to provide rest and recuperation for veterans of the war. His proposal does not call for an end to the war. However, forcing the Republican Party and the public to think and talk about his proposal and, for pro-war Republicans to try to refute it, brings home to all of us the big "elephant in the room."

Regarding the question of "winning" in Iraq, examining the implications of Murtha's proposal shows us that we do not at present have the resources to "win." We don't have nearly enough troops that we can field and provide with proper facilities, training, and rest. Regarding President Bush's proposed "surge" of only 21,000 additional troops, no one believes that it will be enough. The best thing that can be said for it is, "give it a chance. It just might work."

Naturally, supporters of the administration's decision to escalate the scale of the war are aghast that Murtha's proposal might actually be passed. Bush would have to veto it. He would then become the target of accusations of "not supporting the troops." The truth is, the "surge" can be accomplished only by lengthening tours of duty in Iraq and shortening the rest and retraining time of the troops sent home. The surge will wear out our Army and degrade its effectiveness.

Labels: degrading the Army, expressing disapproval of "surge, John Murtha, Winning in Iraq

In some South American countries it is the custom, when people are fed up with the President and his failed policies, to take out cooking pots and pans and beat them with wooden spoons and other suitable objects. The result is a din heard all over the nation. There follow demonstrations of disapproval of the President and all his works. Eventually the hapless fellow is obliged to leave office. The office may be taken over by a military junta, or it may be filled by a special election. In any case, the custom of the nation allows for removing an unpopular and incompetent President, even if the Constitution doesn't.

We need such a device in our country. Our President is about to embark, in our name, on an escalation of a failed policy in Iraq. Rather than cut our losses and withdraw, we are to send additional troops in the fond hope that just a little bit more effort and we can "win." It is clear that in the recent Congressional election, the public voted to end our military involvement in Iraq. If our government operated on democratic principles, the Administration would be planning a strategic withdrawal and using the advice of the Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group as cover. Instead, the Administration seems to be planning an escalation - a "surge" in our troop strength to accomplish - what?

Ladies, get out the cooking pots and pans and start beating them. Men, plan demonstrations of our disapproval of our President's plans to send still more troops to Iraq. The Congress we elected doesn't have the power or the stomach to oppose the Commander in Chief. Our work is cut out for us. Let us begin.

Labels: " Baker-Hamilton group, beating pots, expressing disapproval of "surge