HANOVER, N.H. (AP) — The leading Democratic White House hopefuls conceded Wednesday night they cannot guarantee to pull all U.S. combat troops from Iraq by the end of the next presidential term in 2013.
“I think it’s hard to project four years from now,” said Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois in the opening moments of a campaign debate in the nation’s first primary state.
“It is very difficult to know what we’re going to be inheriting,” added Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York.
“I cannot make that commitment,” said former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina.
Sensing an opening, Sen. Christopher Dodd of Connecticut and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson provided the assurances the others would not.
“I’ll get the job done,” said Dodd, while Richardson said he would make sure the troops were home by the end of his first year in office.
Imagine that we’re on the board of directors of Widgets Inc., the world’s largest producer of widgets, when the CEO announces that he’s retiring next year. So we need to find a new CEO and set about interviewing applicants.
We’re not very happy with the company’s prosperity, and most of us on the board agree that we really should have expanded our product line to include gadgets when they were a hot new thing – a move that the current CEO resisted. So one question we ask all applicants is, “Will you add gadgets to our products if you’re hired?”
Some of those applicants figure that we want to hear “Why yes, of course I will do that,” and those seem to be the applicants that you prefer. But the more honest ones will say, “That would depend on market indicators at the time that I’m hired.”
And this is the correct answer. Gadgets might not be so popular next year. One of our bright engineers might invent a superior doodad – maybe we should produce those instead.
This is the same thing, really, only on a larger and more critical scale. We have some candidates who are telling you what you want to hear – “Why yes, I’ll end this war the very second I take office!”
There’s little doubt that we all want this war to end, and we all know (now) that it should never have been started in the first place. But the truth of the matter is, nobody knows what the situation will be as of January 2009. It’s foolish to promise gadgets next year based on today’s market.
You seem to want the candidates who will blow sunshine up your ass. I prefer some damned honesty, despite Bart’s Law #1.
Comment by Peregrin — September 27, 2007 @ 12:45 am
Apparently you believe that if we just give it another 6 more months ponies are going to start magically sprouting in Mesopotamia. You would fit in well at a cocktail party full of rich, white, inside the beltway pundits. Except, of course, they would have nothing to do with you.
Fortunately, the rest of the country (not to mention the rest of the world) recognizes that this war was lost a long time ago, and that regardless of whether we stay or leave, things in Iraq aren’t going to get any better for a long, long time. Even the military and about half of the neo-cons are admitting as much.
You are the one who wants candidates to blow sunshine up your ass, by telling you there is some hope that “next year the gadget market may improve.” Sorry champ. Not gonna happen. There is no hope. Things aren’t going to improve. Bush lost the Iraq war, and nobody is going to fix that. Not next year, not the year after, and not the year after. We’ve created a mess that will last a decade at least, and maybe longer.
The only question is whether the Democrats will be stupid enough to stick around Iraq for four more years trying to pull a rabbit out of George Bush’s hat, because if they do, they will wind up getting blamed for it. God I hope they don’t take your advice, but it sure looks like they are going to.
Comment by brew — September 27, 2007 @ 11:14 am
You’re promoting a false dichotomy, in which the only choices are “endless war” and “pull out now.” That is not realistic at all.
And you are also misinterpreting what I wrote. The simple fact is, no one knows what the gadget market is going to be like in January 2009. If we have to wait that long to get the reins, then we need to wait until then to formulate a plan. You have decided that you want them marketed regardless.
Comment by Peregrin — September 28, 2007 @ 2:52 am
True. I’ve decided I want out of Iraq, regardless. I consider it the best thing to do for every reason that matters, strategic, national interest, and political. That being said, I seriously doubt it is going to happen, regardless of who wins the election.
Sadly, I’ve become convinced that the Democratic leadership in the house and senate, as well as the front runners in the Presidential race, all think they can pull the Iraq rabbit out of the hat. It appears to me that no matter who wins the election, the plan is to leave troops in Iraq to try to stabilize the situation. I believe this plan is doomed, and when we eventually leave, it will allow the GOP to tar the Democrats with having “lost” the war.
If they allow that to happen, they will again lose both the Congress and the White House.
Thanks to Bush, the GOP has now lost their signature issue: National security. The American people will tolerate losing their Constitutional rights. The will tolerate obscene levels of corruption. What they won’t tolerate is losing a war, and that is why the Democrats did well in 2006. Does anyone rationally believe that if Iraq had been successfully pacified into a functioning democracy, Nancy Pelosi would be speaker?
Mark my words. If the Democrats screw around and allow the GOP’s failures in Iraq to be hung around the Democrat’s necks, the Democrats will have lower approval ratings than Bush. They will go from dominance to minority status in less than 4 years. They will lose the house and senate in 2010, and the white house in 2012.
Comment by brew — September 28, 2007 @ 11:52 am