« KerryWatch®: The Good Senator Goes AWOL? | Main | Caption Contest Results »

June 07, 2005

McGovern: Leaving Iraq Isn't "Cut And Run"?

Huh?

There are no guarantees that militarily withdrawing from Iraq would contribute to stability or would not result in chaos. On the other hand, we do know that under our occupation the violence will continue.We also know that our occupation is one of the chief reasons for hatred of the United States, not only in the Arab world but elsewhere.

The argument so far from Democrats seems to be that the Iraqi defense force is a farce: that they are nowhere near ready to take on the job of fighting the insurgency.

Assuming this is true (and I'm not saying it is) then if we withdraw... and one assumes the terrorists aren't fighting for the fun of it... and you take into account that the majority of them are not Iraqis, but an invading force from other Arab nations who harbor terrorists, a logical person would expect the violence to:

a) increase
b) decrease
c) stay the same
d) all of the above
e) none of the above

You have five minutes to complete the quiz. When the timer sounds, please trade papers with your neighbor. I will give you the answer and we shall grade each other's papers.

Second question: If our current occupation "Makes the Arabs hate us", how much more will they hate us if we run like cowards, leaving the Iraqis defenseless against the insurgents?

Discuss amongst yourselves. There is no right answer.

Third question: what is wrong with the following passage, boys and girls?

Wars are easy to get into, but hard as hell to get out of. After two years in Iraq and the loss of more than 1,600 American soldiers, it is simply not enough to embrace the status quo.

We are not suggesting a ''cut-and-run" strategy. The United States must continue to finance security, training, and reconstruction.

Hint: see question one. If the terrorists seize control after we withdraw our troops, exactly what will we be "reconstructing"? If the terrorists take over and we use that as an excuse to cease providing funds for reconstruction and Iraq begins to slide back into the dark ages, how much more will the Arab world "hate us"? But how can we continue to fund terrorist control of Iraq? Didn't think of that one, did you, big guy? Alternately, if the Iraqi defense force is almost ready to take control of the national defense, then things are not as bad as Mr. McGovern seems to think. Admittedly, it is a puzzlement.

Question four: how sensible is it to demand Iraq undergo two hundred years of political evolution in a single year?

After all, the United States of America (that global beacon of democracy and freedom) did not attain perfect racial and ethnic harmony by 1777, did it?

There have been elections in Iraq, and yet it remains unclear whether the different political, ethnic, and religious factions want to work together.

One thing, however, is clear: Washington cannot determine Iraq's destiny. It doesn't matter how many times Condoleezza Rice or Donald Rumsfeld visit. It doesn't matter how many soldiers we deploy. The myriad factions in Iraq themselves must display the political will to demand a system of government that respects the diversity that exists in their country.

Is Mr. McGovern arguing that the United States is a perfect example of racial harmony and justice with all ethnic groups working together in perfect peace and love, with due respect for diversity? Oddly, this is not an argument I've from many in his party. Is he bucking to become a Republican by any chance?

In his determination to make the perfect the enemy of the good, Mr. McGovern will call the entire venture a failure whilst the minutest chance of achieving of complete perfection remains in doubt. By that standard, success is impossible: he has won the argument by redefining success so as to make it unattainable.

I don't know how you all did on your quizzes, but I give Mr. McGovern a D- in logic.

Posted by Cassandra at June 7, 2005 08:16 AM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.villainouscompany.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/681

Comments

Q1: Why cut and run when you can peddle?

Q2: I worked out a deal with my neighbor to give each other a perfect score. So I did get this one right.

Q3: If the terrorists seize control after we withdraw our troops, exactly what will we be "reconstructing"? A fabulous Tikrit night club.

Q4: After all, the United States of America (that global beacon of democracy and freedom) did not attain perfect racial and ethnic harmony by 1777, did it? Yes. Then things went to hell in 1865. Then they were fixed again in 1991, and we are back to perfect harmony.

Q5: Is Mr. McGovern arguing that the United States is a perfect example of racial harmony and justice with all ethnic groups working together in perfect peace and love, with due respect for diversity? If I can ride a unicycle naked in Key West without much bother, I think the answer is yes.

Posted by: man riding unicycle naked at June 7, 2005 09:14 AM

Didn't this guy run for president on pretty much the same platform back in 1972 and lose every state but Massachusetts?
Hello?

Posted by: spd rdr at June 7, 2005 09:45 AM

why is it that all the losers in my party feel they can dole out advice or commentary when they're records speak volumes about who they were/are?What does McGovern know?Vietnam aint free till this day because of useful idiots such as himself?Cambodia has millions of dead folks!why doesn't he shut his trap?nobody listens to losers!!

Posted by: Lisa Giliam at June 7, 2005 02:31 PM

McGovern's an idiot. The islamofascists hate us not for anything we do, but for what we ARE.

Leaving Iraq prematurely would simply delay the inevitable re-invasion we'd have to do after yet another terrorist cabal hits us and it erupts that they were based out of Iraq. Might as well stay there and keep ALQ against the ropes there and save us a round-trip.

Posted by: Ciggy at June 7, 2005 02:41 PM

Ciggy, it's sad when you see a man who hasn't learned anything in 35 years. Still singing the same old song - it's as though 30 years of intervening history never happened. Fall of Saigon? Who cares? It didn't happen to him?

Pol Pot? Someone else's problem, apparently. Like Saddam, the Communists were "never any threat". But such is the state of flower-power idealism. Genocide is such a shame... pass the bong, dude.

Posted by: Cassandra at June 7, 2005 02:50 PM

Oh no you don't! That bong is regulated by Congress pursuant to the interstate commerce clause!

Posted by: KJ at June 7, 2005 05:37 PM

Heh... did you get your brief filed?

Posted by: Cassandra at June 7, 2005 05:39 PM

KJ, the outrageousness of the Court's recent rulings on the dormant Commerce Clause may yet extend Iraq. I mean, suppose there is a downturn in the interstate sale of suicide bomber belts as a result of federal or state agency regulation? Can you imagine how this might impact the trade in leather and ball bearings???? Not to mention C-4.

Oh crap, the wife just set off the fire alarms. That must mean dinner’s almost ready. Terror Alert is now black and brown. Enjoy.

Posted by: spd rdr [TypeKey Profile Page] at June 7, 2005 09:00 PM

Post a comment




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)