MemeStreams | MemeStreams Discussion

Create an Account

This page contains all of the posts and discussion on MemeStreams referencing the following web page: Iraq Debate Prompts Senate Cloakroom Clash, Presidential Hopeful Defends Bush As White House Lobbies GOP Senators - CBS News. You can find discussions on MemeStreams as you surf the web, even if you aren't a MemeStreams member, using the Threads Bookmarklet.

Iraq Debate Prompts Senate Cloakroom Clash, Presidential Hopeful Defends Bush As White House Lobbies GOP Senators - CBS News
by Decius at 6:50 pm EDT, Jul 11, 2007

XM Radio has me listening to C-SPAN in my car these days. The debate yesterday was challenging.

Fresh off a trip to Iraq, a visibly tired McCain lit into the "liberal left" for advocating retreat in Iraq and then went behind closed doors to brawl with a fellow GOP senator over the war.
In what one senator called "the most serious fight that I have seen in my time in the Senate," McCain clashed with Sen. George Voinovich, R-Ohio, over the Arizona senator's assertion that the most dangerous threat facing U.S. troops in Iraq was Al Qaeda members.
Voinovich, who recently urged President Bush to change his war policy now, shot back that Al Qaeda "wouldn't be in Iraq" if American forces weren't there, according to people who witnessed the exchange.

Partially, thats correct. Al'Z wasn't really associated with Al'Queda until long after the insurgency was in full swing. If there had not been an insurgency, they would not be anyone in Iraq calling themselves Al'Queda. The problem is only partially with "Al'Queda in Iraq". They are a problem which seemed positioned to remove itself from the equation willingly over a year ago. The problem is with Shia militants. Shia militants are even less reasonably considered "Al'Queda" than Iraqi Sunnis. Conservatives seem to like to use the word "Al'Queda" to refer to any middle eastern militant group and its a transparent attempt to overstate the connection between 9/11 and our present problems.

It is doubtless that there will be extremely negative consequences associated with pulling out of Iraq. You cannot take years of arrogant mistakes and make them go away by withdrawing. It is certain that staying in Iraq also has negative consequences. There is no direction from here that is going to work out great. The question is whether the costs of staying in do or do not exceed the costs of pulling out.

The problem is that the voting public will never hear a straight answer on that question from anyone, just as they have not heard a straight answer from anyone about anything related to this war.

The conservative base is interested in a hard line because they like them some killn'. Their candidates are going to have to insist on taking a hard line regardless of how reasonable it is, and so the conservatives are going to insist that staying in Iraq is a good idea long after it is completely obvious that leaving would cost less, both because it speaks to their base, and because its a perspective that avoids admitting that they were wrong before. Some day the United States will pull out of Iraq, and for the rest of time there will always be some conservatives who think it was a bad idea regardless of what the circumstances are.

The liberal politicians believe that they were elected to get the US out of Iraq. This is only partially true. They were really elected because of the federal mismanagement of the immediate aftermath of Katrina. However, ... [ Read More (0.2k in body) ]

RE: Iraq Debate Prompts Senate Cloakroom Clash, Presidential Hopeful Defends Bush As White House Lobbies GOP Senators - CBS News
by k at 9:37 pm EDT, Jul 11, 2007

Decius wrote:
The problem is that the voting public will never hear a straight answer on that question from anyone, just as they have not heard a straight answer from anyone about anything related to this war.

It doesn't matter. Truth or no truth from the politicians or the media. You have what you have. Call it "going with your gut" if you must, but it's what we can do. I'm not at all confident that leaving entirely is *the* *best* course of action. It's a devils choice, and we're largely fucked either way. It's more important, now, which action sends the best signal to the rest of the world. I hate to say it, but there's no predicting which course will save more lives, or ensure stability, or whatever. Whether there are or are not any "smart people in a box," this administration has systematically dismantled trust in any such group. They've assaulted the notion of intelligence, reason and merit in favor of blind faith, absolutism and false populism. "Experts" are distrusted. That's one of the many things it'll take years to repair in the aftermath of this presidency. So smart counsel gets you nowhere, the media have decided to become entertainers, to the dereliction of their oversight role, and the public is left holding the bloody bag, where we will, and must, go with our gut, or whatever we can reason out of what little truth we do have. It's genuinely academic to me at this point. The Republican contenders for the presidency are all toxic to me. A lot of the Democrats leave me sour, but I'll take lemons over plutonium any day.

Hyperbole from Democrats who will insist that everything in Iraq will be just fine if only we would leave.

I don't think this is the majority opinion at all. I think the Democrats realize that Iraq is fucked, and will remain fucked even if we pull out, but they're going to try to hang that around Bush's neck, and the neck of any Republican (shit, or Democrat) possible. The primary narrative I see is that Iraq is fucked, and Bush is the one who fucked it. Our removal of troops is a conciliation to the reality of no positive outcome in sight. Given no good alternatives, less dead american soldiers is probably best.

Of course, the Right will have you believe that saving the soldiers now will kill civilians later.

This is a belief that I think plays directly into the hands of the terrorists (as so much of the knee-jerk, totalitarian bullshit perpetrated in the past 6 years has). I absolutely believe that our enemies are expecting a pullout, a Democrat president, at which point any successful attack they pull off will completely destroy the country. The Right will beat their breasts as if it could have been prevented, if only the traitorous Left hadn't led us out of Iraq and hamstrung Bush or Bush 2.0. The Left will have no response, and the result will be the end of free America, while Osama laughs away.

I am not optimistic about the future, regardless of what choices are made now. Not one bit.

If politicians actually listened to those kinds of people we wouldn't be in this mess in the first place.

Hear hear, and thanks again to the right for dismantling the public's notion of expertise and encouraging unquestioning partisanship. And thanks to the Left for permitting it. We're in deep shit, friends.