Iraq, Where Do We Go From Here?

Withdrawal timing is "not too important," says McCain.

The troops might disagree.

Robert Dujarric and Andy Zelleke’s article, “The Death of US Strategy in Iraq,” in the 17 April csmonitor.com analyzes the implications behind McCain’s recent statement that the timing of troop withdrawals from Iraq is “not too important.”

The authors submit that McCain may believe there is still a political objective, but it will be different from Bush’s only in that it will be more modest.

However, McCain has not given us answers to the most pressing question of “just what are our objectives in Iraq or the Middle East?” They authors break that question into three components:

· What are the political objectives for keeping large numbers of troops in Iraq for years to come?

· What plausible outcome would justify the costs (dollars and lives, I would guess)?

· Given one or more objectives, what is the strategy for getting there?

All valid questions and I would add, “What are the measures (metrics) that tell us we are making progress toward those objectives and how will we know we are there?” Dujarric and Zelleke write that slogans such as “winning” and “stability” are just not good enough.

War is a Continuation of Policy

Military folks and other strategic thinkers have brought Sun Tze and von Clauswitz back into  popularity. von Clauswitz’ most famous statement that war is simply a continuation of policy by other means is pertinent here. If there is no policy objective, then there should not be a war.

Personally, I’ve been against this Iraq War since it became obvious that the Bush Administration was bent on war regardless of the facts. However, like many Americans, since we are now there and made a terrible mess, I have believed we need to stay and fix the mess and leave with honor. But I am no longer sure our civilians can define an end, or an objective, and therefore an honorable end is unlikely. And, I’m no longer sure that success in Iraq is necessary to our military’s sense of honor.

ur military has always been self-contained and isolated from the rest of society. Success to our servicemen and their military leaders is gauged within the military, by each other and by military leaders. Civilian opinions matter less. Our servicemen and servicewomen certainly don't want to be pitied as victims of Washington, DC (and I've been guilty of that kind of thinking). They do want to be recognized for their skills and accomplishments, but that's kind of hard when the great bulk of America has little knowledge of the military or its skills.

Going to war is not a military decision and stopping a war is not a military decision. Our civilian leaders start wars and declare when a war is done or when it is time to withdraw without success. One can hope that such wars are the result of defined political objectives. Afghanistan was one such war that had and has a clearly defined political objective – Iraq is not.

A Time to Fight

For a military opinion I turn to Jim Webb, Virginia Democratic Senator, who has written A Time to Fight (2008, Broadway Books, Doubleday, New York). Webb, like several other ex-military folks, ran for Congress, as a Democrat. Webb discusses why the military learned to hate the Democratic Party beginning in the 1960s and why all that is changing today, but that is for another post.

Webb also asks that the political objective(s) for Iraq and the Middle East be clearly defined. Here are some quotes I cherry picked:

· “Their [Bush Administration, extreme elements in Congress, and the RNC] most glaring and crucial failing has been an adamant refusal to match the sacrifices of our military with a sound, regionally based diplomatic strategy designed to take advantage of the military’s performance.”

· “Such a strategy could have, and should have, been in place as early as 2003.”

· “Our military has consistently answered that call, never failing to control its tactical battle space. But over the same span of time the region, from Lebanon to Pakistan, has descended into ever more dangerous instability.”

· “Most military people can see and understand these realities. But rather than openly recognizing them, Republican leaders have for years claimed that any mention of the insults “the troops” and comprises a form of defeatism that will not “let them win” in Iraq.”

· “Except in an Orwellian world, wars are not supposed to be endless. Nor are occupations supposed to last forever.”

· “Those who claim that one cannot oppose the President’s policy and still be supporting the troops should consult the opinions of the troops.”

Is Iraq Worth It? Ask the Troops

With that last point in mind, Webb presents the following poll figures from Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps Times and LA Times (and I checked them and they are as Webb stated):

· 2006

o 72% of troops believed we should pull out of Iraq by end of 2006.

o Dec: 60% disagreed with Bush’s Iraq policies.

· 2007

o Dec: 60% of military families believed the war was not worth the cost

o Dec: 58% said US should withdraw within a year or sooner.

from Military Times Poll Dec 29, 2006

egardless of whether our next President defines our objectives for Iraq, Afghanistan and the rest of the Middle East, our troops will continue to perform with honor and bravery. But they do deserve to know what they are fighting for.

Webb ends the chapter that I’ve been quoting with his own quote from President Eisenhower in 1952.

“[The Korean War] was never inevitable, it was never inescapable… America … appealed to the heroism of its youth… The answer to that appeal has been what any American knew it would be. It has been sheer valor…

“from these heroic men there comes back an answering appeal… Where do we go from here? When comes the end? Is there an end?

“[These questions] demand truthful answers. Neither glib promises nor glib excuses will serve. They will be no better than the glib promises that brought us to this pass….”

Amen

Back from Another Trip

I haven't posted or even thought about posting in the last few days. My wife and I just came back from another trip to northern Virginia with the usual repeated backups at every exit on I-95. I drove those miles daily from 1972 to 1985 but that masochism is now hard to imagine. I can't believe I spent hours in the mornings and evenings, never knowing how long it would take to get to work or home.

This trip was to attend the high school graduation of our third oldest granddaughter. We have four.

Brian informed me by comment that Tom Perriello, who is opposing Virgil Goode for the 5th district Senate seat, is running on a platform that excludes donations from corporations. He is also running as a Christian that believes in the following:

• ensure that all hard-working Americans are guaranteed a living wage and secure retirement
• every American deserves access to a doctor, and none of our elderly should ever have to face the soul-crushing choice of whether to buy medicine for a spouse or put food on the table
• Americans are less safe today than on September 12th because of the decisions made by this Administration and many in Congress.
• our national security, our climate, and our economic competitiveness demand that we achieve independence from fossil fuels during this generation.

To contribute to his campaign, you must, "confirm that the following statements are true and accurate":

• I am not a foreign national who lacks permanent residence in the United States.
• I am not a Federal government contractor.
• This contribution is made from my own funds, and not those of another.
• This contribution is not made from the funds of a corporation or labor organization.
• This contribution is made on a personal credit card or debit card for which I have the legal obligation to pay, and is not made either on a corporate or business entity card or on the card of another person.
• I am at least eighteen years old.

I would like to hear more about other issues from this man, but this is a good start. He seems to believe in personal integrity. His Christianity is refreshingly old fashioned - back to a time when Christianity was in your heart, not in your face.

I can't say, at this time, whether I will vote for him. I need more information. But I've heard enough to contribute to his campaign, and I did. I hope my contribution at least helps Perriello develop his message.

Fix Congress Wrap Up Correction

Brian, also of my area, noted that Tom Perriello is opposing Virgil Goode. I knew that but my mind must have been in neutral on my last post. What I didn't know is that Perriello has taken a pledge not to accept PAC or lobby money. Thanks Brian.

One of my problems with the Change Congress site, is that access to their database of candidates is limited. I tried to locate Perriello and couldn't find him in their database. Perriello might have made his pledge but not at the Change Congress but that site should still know about him. I sent an email to Change Congress asking for better access to their database and some clarification on how to help with their research.

Visiting Change Congress reminded me of an item of note. Most of us know that Obama says he will not accept special interest money of any kind. Few know that the DNC has also pleldged to "not take a dime from Washington lobbyists or special interest PACs..."

That's good but we'll see how far that pledge goes with the candidates for Congress. The Democratic Party is known as, among many other things, a party with little centralized control - perhaps the exact opposite of the Delay/Rove gestapo.

I, for one, would hope the candidates do oppose the DNC, except for the special interest pledge. Democrats have, since the late 1960s, become identified with special interests of just about any minority (gays, etc), but at the expense of the non-special interests of the majority. Democrats also lost their moral compass long before the Republicans did during the Pharaoh Bush years.

In order to get my vote, Democrats needs to regress (as we've blamed Republicans for doing). They need to study FDR, Truman, and Kennedy. They need to remember that addressing the needs of the majority of Americans was once the Democratic platform. And, most of all, Democrats need to remember that the Democratic platform was once a moral one.

Even so, as a retired military guy, I have other issues with Democrats, but that's for another post.

Anniversary and Fix Congress Wrap Up

Sorry about no posts for a week and a half. My wife and I have been away for a 50th wedding anniversary celebration put on my our two sons and their daughters. It was quite an affair a chauffeured (number 1 son) ride to northern Virginia, some visiting, an elaborate and fancy dinner, a reception after the dinner with cake cutting and such, then a chauffeured (number two son) ride back home. We were out of town for four days and I purposely did not take my laptop.

Running Horse, 18x24, charcoal

Fix Congress Wrap Up

Based on the number of readers and the time spent on my blog, my Fix Congress series is not very popular. Perhaps I've not communicated well, perhaps I've not presented it properly, or perhaps you readers are not interested in the problems with Congress. I hope the reasons you readers are not interested in fixing Congress is that I've failed. If it is because you are not interested, then I'm concerned for the nation's future.

Whatever the reason, I'm going to wrap up the series and get on to other things.

My previous posts covered the overall picture of Congress and its problems in a historical context, the failure of the budget process, earmarks, and inaction on entitlement funding. I've also talked about lobbyists, who serve a useful purpose, but serve interests other than our middle and low-income class folks. In fact, many of these lobbyists push interests that are detrimental to the average American (think drug companies, mortgage banking, big oil, etc).

I'll not discuss personal corruption of individual Congressmen. It exists and is detestable. You can't out them without luck and a more general fix to the way Congress does business. A check of web sites that do try to out corruption. I find many wrongs were committed after they served in Congress, and those are not crimes against the voters. And I just do not think personal corruption is serious problem for Congress as a whole.

Pick a Fix

I said I would give a list of different approaches to fixing Congress and their web addresses.

rute Force or Nuclear Option: All members of Congress are bad, or all members of Congress are a permanent political class. All are out of touch with the public. The solution is to get rid of all of them - vote all of them out of officer and get a new, compliant bunch.

I don't like this approach. Not all Congressmen are bad. Most, I believe, start out by wanting to do what's right. It's the system that changes them and it is the system that needs changing. Voting out incumbents does not address the Congressional system. It stay and, sooner or later, the new Congresses will fall into the same abusive routine.

To work, we would have to vote out the majority of incumbents within a few short years, otherwise those who remained would keep the system unchanged and would convert the new members much as is now done. To vote out the majority would require a massive voter movement that's not going to happen. Typically in most democracies folks are elected by small margins of just over 50%, usually less than 60%. Too many voters would not jump on this bandwagon.

Still, if nothing else works and the voters do reach a state of rebellion, this might be the only option. Check out VOID (Vote Out Incumbents Democracy).

ind Better Candidates: Some folks believe that we elect incompetent people. While I would agree that we elected an incompetent (and dishonest) President, I don't think most of our candidates are incompetent. Because our elections have become arenas for character assassination, the candidates are certainly more brave than most of us. How does one determine incompetence? As Republicans, do we tend to Democrats as less competent? As Democrats, do we - you get the idea. As an Independent, I don't like anyone very much anymore (Kingston Trio line).

Check out Vote None of the Above if you think incompetence lies inside the Beltway.

ix the System: Larry Lessig, once an aspiring Congressman, has started a web site that is getting some attention. Lessig believes that our Congressmen should not author earmarks (do away with them completely) and should abjure connections of any kind with lobbyists. While I might quibble with some details, this approach is the only one that has a chance of working and he has set up a program where voters can determine the progress toward the fix.

Lessig says "It's not a dependence that reveals itself in the way evil people act, but a dependence that corrupts even the way good people solve the problems they come to Washington to address," he said. "We need to solve this problem now." Also, "We just need to recognize that money in certain places is destructive of trust."

Lessig has called for a joint effort on the part of Congressmen and voters. Both can visit the sight and sign an oath to support four tenets:

• accept contributions from individuals only, lobbyists excepted.
• support the fundamental reform of congressional earmarks.
• support reform to increase transparency in Congress.
• support public financing of public elections.

There's little fire-breathing rhetoric in these tenets, just clear steps toward changing the way Congress does the business of the people. The tenets are clearly geared to making Congress the prime lobbyist for all of us rather than special interests.

If you are interested visit Lessig at Change Congress. You can view the list of Congressmen who have taken the pledge and you can sign up to take the pledge and donate. You can also view a map, locate your local representatives, and see how much of their financing came from special interests.

I have joined Change Congress, signed the pledge, made my own pledge to contribute a certain amount of money to Congressional candidates who also pledge. Since my own Congressman, Virgil Goode of Virginia receives 43% of his 2008 campaign financing from PACs and he is unopposed, I plan to contribute the money to candidates outside my district.

Goode has supported military and veteran issues important to me, but I believe the greater good is to convince Goode and his pals to think hard about representative the people first.

My list of Fix Congress web sites has not been exhaustive as I first planned. For those who want more info on our government and our elected officials, I found that Sunlight Foundations, Insanely Useful Web Sites is the best list you can find in one place.