The ebb and flow of political opinions - 8.23.2007.1
As we approach the coming report on the surge in Iraq, several candidates vying for their respective parties nod in the primaries are taking another tack in their recent speeches. While this is not a bad thing, a Commander-and–Chief should be able to evaluate changing conditions in any on-going military action and act accordingly; it does cause me to pause.
While some have remained steadfast in their opposition to the war and any actions we take there, others have begun to bend, and on the other side a few are prepared to take advantage of any positive results. It’s not that things have changed as much as it’s the political maneuvering that has opened or closed some doors. That troubles me.
Some feel that President Bush has been too single-minded in his approach to Iraq; others say he has not been strong enough. I think all would say that there have been mistakes made in the execution of every step of the war in Iraq. But do we want to have the next President to be equally as resolute in their opinion of what to do, or flexible in their actions merely for the benefit of polling results?
I don’t question anyone that takes a critical look at the situation and based on the facts changes their mind. Yet, considering that there has not been a report made and that it will not be for several weeks still any changes now are more political in motivation than fact based. Those kinds of changes in position are pandering, to me.
“Now, I believe the facts that have brought us to this fateful vote are not in doubt. Saddam Hussein is a tyrant who has tortured and killed his own people, even his own family members, to maintain his iron grip on power. He used chemical weapons on Iraqi Kurds and on Iranians, killing over 20 thousand people. Unfortunately, during the 1980's, while he engaged in such horrific activity, he enjoyed the support of the American government, because he had oil and was seen as a counterweight to the Ayatollah Khomeini in Iran.
…
In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001.
…
Now this much is undisputed. The open questions are: what should we do about it? How, when, and with whom?
…
So it is with conviction that I support this resolution as being in the best interests of our nation.” – Senator Clinton October 2002
“If I had been President in October of 2002, I would have never asked for authority to divert our attention from Afghanistan to Iraq, and I certainly would never have started this war.” - Senator Clinton February 2007
“It's working. We're just years too late in our tactics….
Clinton's positive assessment of the troop surge puts her in agreement with some high-ranking military officials and scholars, but in direct opposition to many fellow Democrats.” - Senator Clinton and article comments August 2007
I am singling out Senator Clinton because she may be the most easily tracked of many candidates, but by no means is she alone. As facts and political polls have changed over the years and months, so have the responses from many candidates. Often the current comments conflict with the emotion and strength behind words said previously.
Hollow comments based on political gain are not what is needed in a President, in my opinion. Strong opinions balanced with actual fact and viewed from the vantage of the good of the Nation, are what is needed.
Keep this in mind as we hear the responses from all the candidates about the surge in Iraq, and what we can do next. Keep that in mind when we wait for the plans proposed and what consequences are envisioned with Iraq. Keep it in mind as polls move back and forth and the primaries approach.
Emotion may be powerful, but a vote for the wrong person and the wrong reason has ramifications that lasts decades and affects millions. That will not fade even long after emotion have.
This is what I think, what do you think?
Labels: election 2008, Iraq War, opinion poll, Presidential candidates, Senator Hillary Clinton
posted by M. Vass @ Thursday, August 23, 2007
2 Comments
2 Comments:
Politicians, especially Clinton, have access to intelligence. It wasn’t so difficult to come by even directly after 9-11, with people like Scott Ritter, former UN weapons inspector in Iraq touring the US and telling people that there were infact no WMDs in Iraq and that the their were already plans to for a new war, which was a bit suprising to many at that early time. The democrats supported the resolution to invade Iraq because they knew it would lead to long term failure of the Bush administration, releasing the government from the grip of the Neo Cons. However, this only now has begun to blow back to their advantage and even this is uncertin.
I strongly feel that any presidential candidate who had opposed this war from the very beginning is the right choice. However, that candidate must also have and be devoted to a strong domestic policy. Let’s remember, external enemies and wars are created to distract people from the real problems at home that the face in their everyday lives and that leaders don’t indent to address.
An English language German political think tank gives very clear and concise breakdowns of the various current exit strategies from Iraq. It includes plans by presidential hopefuls, the meaning of the original Baker-Hamilton report, a few maverick think tankers, and that Bush Administration favourite, the 'Surge'.
Iraq: Who's Got the Best Plan?
http://www.atlantic-community.org/index.php/articles/view/Iraq%3A_Who%27s_Got_the_Best_Plan%3F
Politicians, especially Clinton, have access to intelligence. It wasn’t so difficult to come by even directly after 9-11, with people like Scott Ritter, former UN weapons inspector in Iraq touring the US telling and people that there were no WMDs in Iraq and that the their were already plans for a new war, which was a bit surprising for many at that early time. The democrats supported the resolution to invade Iraq because they knew it would lead to long-term failure of the Bush administration, releasing the government from the grip of the Neo Cons. However, this only now has begun to blow back to their advantage, and even this is uncertain.
I strongly feel that any current 2008 presidential candidate who had opposed this war from the very beginning is the right choice. However, that candidate must also have and be devoted to a strong domestic policy. Let’s remember, external enemies and wars are created to distract people from the real problems that they face in their everyday lives at home that leaders don’t indent to address.
An English language German political think tank gives very clear and concise breakdowns of the various current exit strategies from Iraq. It includes plans by presidential hopeful John Edwards, the meaning of the original Baker-Hamilton report, a few maverick think tankers, and that Bush Administration favourite, the 'Surge'.
Iraq: Who's Got the Best Plan?
http://www.atlantic-community.org/index.php/articles/view/Iraq%3A_Who%27s_Got_the_Best_Plan%3F
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home