Harry Reid fights to keep our troops IN Iraq?
This is getting complicated. Harry Reid has made Iraq his only mission. He has pushed the mantra that walking off and leaving Iraq is the only acceptable way to win in Iraq. I really don’t think that argument has sold too well with most of America. So, what happens if Bush does decide to start withdrawing troops? Harry Reid opposes it:
“His plan is neither to draw down, nor a change in mission that we need. His plan is simply more of the same: to keep at least 130,000 troops — American troops — in the midst of an intractable civil war. This is unacceptable to me, unacceptable to the American people,” Reid said.
Someone help me here, but how is bringing 30,000 troops home NOT drawing down or changing the mission?
…Reid, backed by top Democratic war policy leaders Sens. Carl Levin and Jack Reed, said the president needs to change the course on the war in Iraq and spend more efforts fighting the war against Al Qaeda.
Now, this is the bugaboo that really irks me. Where is the evidence that what we are doing in Iraq has NOT been a fight against Al Qaeda? Let’s pretend, just for one second, that Al Qaeda is a bunch of flies. There is a huge light shining over the US. The US then installs a bug zapper right in their home. Which way are the flies gonna go? Al Qaeda, in many public statements, have stated their main intent is to “liberate” Iraq. That’s your bug zapper folks. It doesn’t get any simpler than that.
Reid then goes on to admit what his only intent on this topic truly is:
“I call on Senate Republicans to not walk lock-step as they have with the president for years in this war. It’s time to change. It’s the president’s war, and at this stage, it appears clearly as also the Republican senators’ war, and I hope that they will dump that legacy next week,” Reid said.
In the simplest terms, Reid’s not going to admit anything Bush does regarding Iraq is acceptable. It’s an election year and this is the only topic he’s got. However, I truly think he is gauging the US public totally wrong on this issue and is undermining the Democrat Presidential candidate on people’s perception of national security, which was already not the best there is.
What is obvious to me is Reid is more than willing to fight the drawdown just for the sake of partisan politics. I’ll bet he has the anti-war people scratching their heads right now. What he is doing is actually setting the stage for Bush to keep the troop levels at their current level and drop that in Reid’s laps. And, Reid, being so completely blinded by partisan politics, can’t see that coming.
However, Bush isn’t the brightest political animal in the world. My bet is, since he’s committed to a drawdown, there will be a drawdown.