Heads-up from the ABC news blog, via Atrios: several GOP Senators are ready to cut and run but don’t want to admit it before the midterm elections.
Now today comes word fom Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware, ranking Democrat on the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee, that two other Senate Republicans have told him they’ll break with the White House Iraq strategy.
But here’s the hook — they won’t do so until after the November elections.
“Two leading Republican Senators have come to me,” Biden recalled, and said that after the election “the need to protect the president will be nonexistent” and Republicans will be freer to break with the White House and call for change in Iraq.
Unlike Atrios I don’t have much a problem with the political calculus here. Admitting that Howard Dean and the rest of the crazy defeatocrats were one hundred percent right is a stupid thing to do just before an election. The headlines would pretty much cut the Republican campaign narrative off at the knees, which sucks when you consider that they have literally nothing else to run on.
“Fighting terror” means what? Warrantless wiretapping? Torture? For years Republicans have argued that the central front in the terror war is Iraq. Following GOP logic capitulating to the Democrats on Iraq basically means capitulating on terror. So yeah, the pressure on influential defectors to keep their yap shut must be enormous. No problem as far as I’ve concerned.
However, thirty-five coalition soldiers have died since the first day of October. I would probably take it badly if I knew that a sister, father, son or cousin died while influential politicians held their tongue for partisan reasons.
***Update***
In case my meaning was not clear, I will put a finer point on it.
Richard Bottoms
Well since the Republican party is now mostly evil I’m not in any way surprised. Not evil in the snarky sort of way, but you know… evil.
Pb
Make no mistake–they will (and have). It may not be your sister, father, son, or cousin who died, but they’re just as dead. And there are tens of thousands more like them in Iraq.
Craig
I think that the military families are smarter than you are giving them credit. I think that many will be upset about the soldiers that were injured or killed after the fall of Saddam since, we have not accomplished much since then. I don’t count elections that lead to weak gov’ts that can’t control their county an accomplishment. I also hope that the media looks at the “progress” that has been made since the Dems started calling for strategy changes in our Iraq policy. This is a failure of democracy on both the Iraqi and US part.
Steve
Of course none of us are surprised that things work this way, but that’s different than saying it’s okay, and it’s pretty cynical of you to be completely untroubled by it.
We’ve had arguments in the comments before about the politicization of the Iraq war vote, the fact that Bush forced a vote on the war right before the 2002 election, in contrast to his father who had delayed a war vote until after the elections so the issue could have a fair hearing.
And people like Darrell responded, not unreasonably, “What’s wrong with that? Why shouldn’t voters have a chance to hold politicians accountable for their votes? Why should Democrats be allowed to wait until after the election to tell their constitutents how they feel on an important issue?”
Yet now, we’re faced with a scenario where Republicans get to smear the Democrats’ position right up through the election, until afterwards when they magically adopt the position they were smearing. The idea of giving voters an informed choice has gone right out the window.
If lives weren’t on the line, maybe it wouldn’t be a big deal, but they are. If you think the course should be changed, but you’re going to keep your powder dry until November for political reasons, how will you ever explain yourself to the children of someone who dies in Iraq between now and then? How could you live with yourself?
APS
Yes, 35 soldiers have died since the beginning of October, which should be a big problem for everyone. There is a special place in hell reserved for those who are playing politics with this. Andrew Sullivan posted a letter from a father of a U.S. Marine who is furious over this issue:
http://time.blogs.com/daily_dish/2006/10/a_marines_fathe.html
ThymeZone
Yes, that ship sailed a long time ago. Twenty-six years ago, maybe? Or in 1968? Can we say “Peace with honor?”
I figure 25k American kids died for that slogan.
RSA
This is what makes me think that Biden is doing something very smart in making his statement. First, he’s pushing the Democratic perspective on what should happen in Iraq. Second, he’s saying that Republicans agree with it but are too cowardly to admit it, which should undercut the appeal of voting Republican. Third, he’s acting like a Democrat who’s taking charge of this idea that we’re going to get out of Iraq in the near future; it will be that much harder for Republicans to flip-flop without looking completely dishonest. (Bush has managed this in the past, e.g., with the DHS, but Republicans in general may have a harder time of it now, given that the public doesn’t trust them.)
Tim F.
That was more or less the point of my post. Maybe I was being too cavalier about it, but it seems to me practically impossible for an influential Republican to do the right thing right now. The consequences for the election narrative would be too devastating. However, my last paragraph sums up what I believe to be the moral consequences of that decision. I don’t think that I minimize it in any way.
Richard Bottoms
I dunno. The folks who voted for George Bush twice and the Republicans in congress three times seem pretty content with themselves.
You proceed from the premise that all this political calculation is something glaringly new.
Some of us have been saying the Republicans are evil for about six years. Not Dr. Evil evil, but take your rights away, fly you to Syria and torture you evil.
You know, hire your gay daughter to campaign for you while the party calls gays an abomination kind of evil.
The send soldiers to war without proper body armor, cannibalize assests, and train in non-desert conditions for desert combat so your guys will more likely be killed in combat evil.
The strip funding from veterans while cutting taxes for Paris Hilton evil.
You know, evil.
Steve
Well, of course it’s impossible, if you view political consequences as a life-or-death matter. I understand that politicians are basically cowards, but when it comes to matters as important as war, I still expect people to do the right thing as they understand it, regardless of whether they think the voters will approve.
See Wendell Wilkie and the 1940 election for a perfect example of what I’m talking about.
There’s also a larger issue: we should have changed course in Iraq a long, long time ago, and the Republicans who aren’t blithering idiots either knew it or should have known it. They refrained from any criticism of the administration up until now, and gee, now it’s “too close to the election” to do anything about it. Maybe they should have considered doing the right thing a little sooner.
Punchy
That’s because the “right” thing to do–the ONLY right thing to do–is hold onto that power. That’s really ALL they care about.
Kids dying? Fuck ’em, they say. Kids molested online? Fuck them, too. Kids without health insurance? Who the fuck cares. As long as they rig enough Diebold machines, they don’t care two shits about anyone or anything, except maybe lobbyists.
RSA
What’s incredibly ironic about Republicans’ concern for the timing of their decisions is that they seem to think everyone else is as morally bankrupt as they are. Every talk radio gas bag is going on about the Foley scandal being a Democratic plot, simply because it came out on the last day the House was in session. Uh, no, not everybody waits for a moment of maximum political opportunity before taking some action. Mayberry Machiavellis, mainly.
stickler
Thymezone referenced Nixon upthread:
Not just “peace with honor.” Remember the “secret plan to end the war?” Herblock drew a cartoon about this in 1972. Herblock only blamed Dick for 20,000 dead.
Man, that guy was a good cartoonist, though.
Bob In Pacifica
I was against Joe Biden before those two Republican Senators talked to him!
BlogReeder
Tim F. I told you that you like posting death counts.
It’s very sad that 35 have died since the beginning of the month.
But what does it mean? Does it mean we are failing in Iraq? You once proposed that we should have sent 500,000 in to Iraq. You don’t really think that would have meant less of our soldiers would have died, do you? I’m sure more of them would have died. Let’s take your side; fewer soldiers would have died if we sent in 500,000. Some would have stilled died.
But to you that would have been OK because then Iraq would have been in a more stable state than it is now, wouldn’t it? It would have shown we were serious. The war would have been run competently.
I doubt you would have just posted death counts without saying something about the results.
D-day is always mentioned in terms of results first and causalities second. That shows respect for the soldiers that fought. What they were fighting for.
These are American soldiers and I still don’t think you’re showing respect to their sacrifice when you use them as numbers.
Explain to me how you’re showing respect for them. I’m missing it.
Andrew J. Lazarus
W has made clear what victory in Iraq means. It means that we will still have troops there in 2008 so that no one can ever say that Drunken Frat Boy wimped out. He said not even if only Laura and Barney the dog were behind him. In particular, he doesn’t care if Poppy Bush and his consigliere James Baker tell him he has screwed up.
Don’t expect the GOP Senators to come out of the closet post-election, either.
stickler
Ah, the concern is palpable.
They were fighting to defeat Nazi Germany. Less than a year after D-Day, Hitler was dead and Germany was occupied by the Allies. There was no paramilitary resistance in the country. And our soldiers came home by the million.
We’ve captured Saddam Hussein, and established a new Iraqi government. Why are our soldiers still dying in Iraq?
RSA
Go to the DOD web site. Click on casualty reports. One page, with numbers.
Why doesn’t the U.S. military show respect for the sacrifices of the U.S. military?
Tim F.
Blogreeder,
I see that death counts make you uncomfortable. That is not my problem. In fact it is more or less my point. You are not supposed to like seeing those numbers.
BARRASSO
I think all this worry about repubs losing this november is overblown, they can just fix the vote.
http://www.boingboing.net/2006/10/09/video_testimony_of_v.html
Perry Como
More dishonesty from the left. You forget the Nazi Werewolves that were the bain of our occupation forces in Germany. It’s the same thing in Iraq. And like in WW2, our forces will prevail.
BlogReeder
Why doesn’t the U.S. military show respect for the sacrifices of the U.S. military?
It’s the intent. DOD informs, Tim F. doesn’t. He admits it’s just for shock value.
BARRASSO
Yes that’s exactly what Tim’s saying, it would be like sending four cops to subdue a crazy guy with a knife instead of two, much less chance of the situation getting out of control.
Tim F.
And:
I get the impression that you only read one in three words that I write. You want to talk about results yet you miss when I do so. My post about James Baker talks precisely about results, specifically that even the rightest of rightwingers recognize exactly what the results are. Sadly you seem unable to perceive results you don’t like and information that makes you feel bad. If you won’t meet me halfway then it really doesn’t seem to be my problem.
Andrew
I can only conclude that blogreader masturbates furiously whenever an American serviceman dies.
Barry
Another: “There was no paramilitary resistance in the country.”
Perry Como: “More dishonesty from the left. You forget the Nazi Werewolves that were the bain of our occupation forces in Germany. It’s the same thing in Iraq. And like in WW2, our forces will prevail.”
Smarter liars, please – this lie isn’t even used by the administrations anymore. No US soldiers were killed by Werewolves.
Note: It’s also an excellent example of right-wing Freudian projection – a right-winger, while stating a known lie, accuses the left of lying.
kirkaracha
Not really:
The National Review’s John O’Sullivan said, “Not a single ‘Werewolf’ emerged from his lair” in his April 2003 “the allies will be welcomed as liberators” piece.
(O’Sullivan also said, “What these setbacks allegedly foreshadow is a long-running guerrilla warfare campaign against the allies that will continue long after Baghdad has fallen and Saddam Hussein has been dispatched to enjoy his 70 virgins.” Which I guess is still accurate since Saddam hasn’t been dispatched yet.)
stickler
Thanks, Barry. The Werewolf program was a miserable bust. The only “success” they had was killing the mayor of Aachen in January ’45. After the fall of the regime, the Werewolves disappeared.
So, yes, Perry Como is lying and projecting at the same time.
And how did I get appointed an honorary member of The Left(tm)? I’m a paleoconservative. Strange world.
Steve
Typical leftist strawman. Barry dishonestly pretends that Perry Como said the Werewolves were the “bane” of the U.S. forces in Germany, when he quite clearly said they were the “bain” of the occupation forces. This, of course, is a reference to the noted postwar figure Friedrich Bain, who, like his countryman Georg Ohm, was best known for his work in the resistance area. The leftists can’t help lying like this. It’s who they are
Tortuga
“Well, of course it’s impossible, if you view political consequences as a life-or-death matter.”
For some members of the ruling party, it could concievably literally be a life-or-death matter.
Imagine Democratic control one or both houses of Congress being used to unleash far-reaching hearings and investigations. Imagine folks like John Conyers with the power to really start slinging subpoenas, demanding reports, asking questions. Imagine all the witnesses that might come out of the woodwork once they realize there’s somebody with real power interested in what they have to say — or those suddenly fearful and deciding to cut a deal. I don’t think it’s too much of a stretch to posit that there might be a few folks in power now who might be looking at very serious legal trouble. Possibly legal trouble accompanied by very, very long stays in prison. Even concievably crimes that would preclude their ever leaving prison as free men.
We on the outside have no idea how deep the crimes go, but the party in power certainly does; and if the party in power can be so utterly out of control that you get something like the Foley case, imagine what the truth behind, for example, the Plame affair, might be. Imagine someone like Conyers getting the power he needs to really start digging. And imagine just how much that must scare certain folks.
Yes, losing control of Congress might literally mean the difference between life as a free man or life in prison for some folks…
Darrell
It had been debated for a year. More than fair hearing.
Darrell
First, this is hearsay rumor involving unnamed Senators.. and it’s coming from Joe Biden, who has a less than steller reputation for truthfullness. Second, even if true, we have zero info about what areas these Senators would break with WH policy. It could be a disagreement on how long we stay, funding.. who knows? Given the uncertainties involved, it’s quite a stretch, but typical of the left, to characterize this hearsay as:
Pb
Tell me another one. It had been debated for a year where exactly? Within the administration after 9/11? Within the state department?
Steve
That’s pretty hilarious. In September 2002, one month before the vote, the debate was so fair and well-informed that there wasn’t even a current NIE on Iraq.
Only after the Senate Intelligence Committee demanded that an NIE be created was a classified NIE issued, on October 1, 2002. That’s 10 days before the vote.
Democrats insisted that a declassified version of the NIE be made public. On October 4, 2002, a week before the vote, George Tenet issued a declassified version, less than one-third as long as the actual NIE – and with the qualifying language removed from the key judgments, to make them look more solid. Democrats like Bob Graham demanded fuller declassification, but Tenet refused.
Meanwhile, the administration was on the road making its case for the war, making claims that were at odds with the findings in the classified NIE – but since it was still classified, the Democrats were unable to tell anyone about these key differences.
On October 11, 2002, only one week later, with the discrepancies between the administration’s public statements and the NIE still unknown to the public, the Iraq War Resolution came up for a vote.
In September 2004, the Senate Intelligence Committee issued its bipartisan report on prewar intelligence, which found, among other things:
So that’s the way the Iraq war vote happened – members of Congress had a whole 10 days to review the judgments of the intelligence community, and opponents of the war had to cast their votes, less than a month before the election, knowing that the administration was publicly misstating the intelligence but there was no way to tell anyone, since the NIE remained classified.
Yes, a great debate. Brings credit on our nation. Obviously for some, the ends justify the means.
DonkeyKong
In case my meaning was not clear, I will put a finer point on it.
No, your meaning IS clear. As for your finer point Tim F, you can light it on fire and shove it up you ass, you motherless fuck!
The Ghost of Santa Claus
I think the GOP should bring up TWOC again. It may not matter to you atheist Marxist moonbats, but on May29, Canuckistani terrorists assassinated me. The TWOC is being lost, as my remaining elven forces are besieged within the very doors of my toyshop. They’ve been eating reindeer as food, for Chrissakes! Why hasn’t anyone come to help them, and why hasn’t the GOP made this a rallying cry again this year?
Oh, well. On the plus side, being dead isn’t so bad. I get to have sex with Marilyn Monroe a lot… in Hell!
Ho, ho, ho, bitches!
That’s the spirit! Of something. (It’s beginning to look a lot like Christmas…)
Bombadil
I’m sure DonkeyKong is arguing in good faith.
Tim F.
Both are very good points. Joe Biden hardly tops my list of favorites either. I think that we all should treat this as disturbing if true but not exactly extablished fact.
Yet another member of the angry, angry left.
The Ghost of Santa Claus
He saved a friend’s life. He intervened to keep the military from back-door drafting him back to Iraq. My friend left the Army in January 2004, after serving a tour in Iraq, but the Army was trying to send him back again this summer. He has PTSD and all that, but it’s not as if Rumsfeld really gives a shit, now does he?
The only one that stepped up to save him was Biden. Biden, who will win elections in Delaware until he’s 170 years old or dies, whichever comes first. Biden gets heaps of toys from me, Tim.
Are you even sure that’s where he/she/it is coming from? The post didn’t make it clear.