A Troop Draw-Down or Another Free Pass?

Recently, I started reading about the possibility of a troop draw-down in Iraq. Five of the twenty brigades ordered there could be pulled out by July. It isn't exactly a withdrawal on the scale that many of us would like to see, but it is something. And it is certainly a big something for the troops that would have the opportunity to go home sooner than they thought. It is a massive something for their family members as well.

This morning I read that there may be a "pause" in the draw-down. Defense Secretary Robert Gates is now saying: "A brief period of consolidation and evaluation probably does make sense," after meeting with General Petreaus, who has already voiced an intention to stall.

I have to ask myself: What have these guys been doing all this time? Shouldn't this "evaluation" be an ongoing event? And what exactly constitutes a "brief period"? Gates himself acknowledged the inevitable questions, how long might this "pause" last and what will happen then, without providing any answers or solid indications if and when those answers would come.

As usual, these comments are vague. Gates wouldn't want to saddle himself with actual dates or deadlines. He's gone this long without having to own up, why start now?

We could say the same thing about the entire pro-war administration. Has our inability to demand answers given officials a free pass? Have we surrendered to the idea that we must endure the Iraq catastrophe until the next president takes office?

The congressional Democrats seem to be thinking this way. These Democrats have let defeat smother the fierce opposition they are supposed to be championing. That's why we gave them the House and Senate, isn't it? Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and all our fallen Democratic saviors have effectively resigned themselves and off-loaded the anti-war effort into the lap of the incoming president. They are acting as if we won't notice, banking on the distraction of multi-colored pie-charts, worthless statistics and super-delegate babble for cover.

Of course, this is all assuming that the next occupant of the Oval Office will be a Democrat. As much as I try to stay optimistic, and truly believe the Democrats have a solid chance, I am not naive enough to think that McCain won't prove a difficult adversary. One of the biggest mistakes the Democrats can make is to underestimate the Republicans' chances. The GOP has proved to be well-organized when they need to be. Can we say the same about the Democrats?

It's just too bad that the Republicans couldn't bring the kind of dedication and organization that they use to elect party members to the issues of Iraq instead. Its even more disappointing that Congress hasn't been able to achieve the change that America was relying on them for. So, why wouldn't someone like Gates feed us empty assertions, when nobody is demanding answers anyway?

Comments

[Nonamnesiac]

The lives and limbs of loved family members of mine are on the line, so I have listened closely to all Hillary and Obama. As I look at the reality of what Obama and Clinton are saying, both of them intend to continue the war. When Obama was asked if he would commit to having all US forces out of Iraq by 2013 he said "no". As the only way to keep US casualties lower is by keeping large numbers of troops there and killing, maiming and relocating large numbers of Iraqis, anyone claiming they're going to leave a substantially reduced "non-combat" force in there (there's no such thing as "non-combat" troops in a war zone) is either lying or too stupid to have thought it all out. If Hillary or Obama is elected s/he will keep the numbers in Iraq as they are, no matter what they say now. The only way to end this is to get all troops and contractor forces out rapidly and commit to doing it. Then we provide massive aid through the UN, allies and NGOs to fix what we broke.

Hillary and Obama refuse to say we will get out all US troops and contractors if they win, therefore realpolitic means they will not reduce US forces, as that would increase US casualties.

It is important that those of you who honestly want to end the war are not tricked by Democratic candidate rhetoric.

The realpolitic also means that McCain will win, as he will campaign on keeping US casualties lower by maintaining our force there and Hillary or Obama will double talk about reducing troop levels -- which McCain will show means more US casualties.

The only way to defeat him is to come out for a rapid, safe pullout and explain that's the only way to end US casualties and bring security to the region.