What is the purpose of a timetable for Iraq? Is it to set limits on the President? If so, then Congress should cut off funding for the war immediately. Otherwise, when they say timetables express the will of the American people who don't like the war, they are being disingenuous. Is there another reason that our representatives would let more and more Americans bleed and die?
Bush certainly bridles at the timetable. He sees it purely as an attempt at limit setting, much like the way he felt when he said that he didn't need "a permission slip" from the UN in order to invade Baghdad. By converting every bump in the road into something adversarial, Bush continues to live in the narrowest of possible worlds as he tries to protect himself against what he must experience as potential humiliation at the hands of Congress.
Can there be another purpose to having a timetable? What about giving the President and the Pentagon time to think, time to plan a proper exit strategy that would be responsible to the people of Iraq as well as to our own interests? As long as everything is seen as adversarial, as long as Bush turns Congress into his latest set of parents against whom to rebel, there can be no thinking - only reacting.
Our President - and he is our President like it or not - has never had anyone say no to him. When they do, he just waits for them to turn their back and then does whatever he wants. Hence he waits for the Senate to go on holiday, and then appoints Sam Fox of Swift Boat fame to an ambassadorship. It is time for the Senate and House to set limits, and not turn their backs. Bush is not capable of using a timetable to help him think through his policy. And it is not safe ever to turn one's back on this particular President - not ever.
Comments for this entry are currently under maintenance but will be restored soon.