Home › Opinion › Opinion
Politics costing U.S. lives
Bush and Democrats need to regain their vision
STORY TOOLS
More from Opinion
On this day after the legally observed Memorial Day and just before the traditional day of remembrance, it would have been nice to know that U.S. troops would soon be redeploying from Iraq. Perhaps not all would be coming home, but they would be getting out of immediate harm's way.
That could have been a welcome breath of fresh air in a war that has added nearly 3,500 more dead to the ranks of those honored Memorial Day. It might have been so, if Democrats in Congress had stood their ground on forcing President Bush to confront the reality of a war going sour, and had Bush chosen to favor the troops instead of $17 billion in add-ons he did not request in the Iraq war funding bill.
But, when Democrats signed off on the withdrawal timetable demand, Bush signed on to letting the extra money stay in the bill. Politics created a deadly quid pro quo.
As of Friday, May's 92 U.S. military deaths in Iraq make it the second-deadliest month of this year (104 deaths occurred in April). According to Icasualties.org figures, May already is the eighth-deadliest month in this more than 50-month-long war. If deaths continue at the current pace 3.7 a day through Friday another 22 deaths will have occurred by month's end. May would then become the fourth-deadliest month of the war.
Many who argue for the war's end use Sen. John Kerry's "mistake question," the one he posited when, as a Vietnam veteran, he testified before the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations on April 23, 1971, on the Vietnam War: "How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?"
Concerning Iraq, the question should be: How do you ask men to continue dying while those in office play politics?
Bush politicized the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in his run-up to the Iraq war, invoking 9/11 and al-Qaida so often when talking about Iraq that a clear majority of people came to believe, wrongly, that Saddam Hussein had something to do with the attacks. And he continues playing the terrorist card.
Wednesday, in New London, Conn., Bush told graduates of the U.S. Coast Guard Academy he saw the Iraq war as a battle between the U.S. and al-Qaida. He might wish that so, but the true central front against al-Qaida remains in Afghanistan and northern Pakistan. Elements of terrorists do exist in Iraq, but only because the U.S. invasion created conditions for them to flourish. The reason Iraq seems on the verge of imploding comes from sectarian violence mostly Shiites against Sunnis.
Now, Democrats have politicized the war by acting too gingerly, especially in the wake of regaining power in the House and the Senate partly because the voters expected them to do what the Republicans had failed to do hold the Bush administration accountable for the muddle the Iraq war has become and to bring the war to an end.
All this plays out against the biggest political backdrop of all the 2008 presidential race. Democrats haven't yet learned from their losses in 2000 and 2004 that timidity in campaigning does not win elections. Neither party seems willing to act forcefully, lest a misstep occurs now that could be used against either at the polls. That leaves the estimated 146,000 U.S. troops in Iraq at loose ends while politicians trade sound bites.
And if you think politics doesn't play the major role in the debates that have been ongoing in the Capitol, consider this: After the Democrats capitulated on timetables and Bush rewarded them with $17 billion in extra spending, Bush announced he would follow, after months of dismissing them, the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group on withdrawing troops from Iraq.
How much different the debate might have been if Bush and the Democrats had sat down with those recommendations as a starting point.
Does no one have vision?
When Bush's father campaigned for the presidency in 1988, he spoke of a thousand points of lights people and organizations across the nation working to make their communities better places to live. As president, he created a program to honor the extraordinary efforts of these ordinary citizens. By the time he left office in 1993, he had named 1,020 points of light.
Since the first cruise missiles rained down on Baghdad in March 2003, under the son's watch, nearly 3,500 points of very bright lights have been dimmed. Thanks to the Bush administration's intransigence and the Democrats' failure to stand on principle, the forecast remains grim more violence leading to more lives sacrificed.
What a waste.
Richard Larsen is a deputy opinion page editor at The Star. His e-mail address is rlarsen@VenturaCountyStar.com.




Posted by rgmoeller on May 29, 2007 at 12:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)
You sir are the one that is costing American life's, by your surrender at any cost, your the tipical LIBERAL (thats it better to be RED than Dead) additude. Thousands of American Patroits have given their lives, so you can have your free speech rights and support our enemys of this country. You Sir are one of the reasons this country is in the shape it in. I would bet you never served a day in our Military or you would have more respect of our country. We lost 7000 men on D-Day on Normandy Beach, I'll bet you would have surrendered on that first day to the German's.
Your totally pathic and a trador to your country. Sir !
Posted by Tom_Johnston on May 29, 2007 at 4:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"rgmoeller" I beg to differ.
What's costing lives here is a President who, bound and determined to invade and conquer Iraq, did so with bad council. The soldiers won the battle but the political junta of George Bush has completely lost the peace. The occupation was ill-planned, under-manned, and not willing to consider that the first plans were not working out.
The real failure of George Bush, and the reason he, primarily, is responsible for the ongoing waste of American lives (and those of others) is his inherent failure to listen to any other council, to realize that things were not going well, to consider a path beyond "stay the course". This latest "surge" is what..the third attempt to convince the American people there is any strategy at all? The same moronic policies just packaged up a different way?
Put the blame for the loss of American lives where is squarely lies. Not with Mr. Larsen, or really for that matter the American Congress desperately trying to find some kind of way out of this mess, but put it where it clearly belongs. It belongs with Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Wolfowitz, and all the rest of the Neo-cons who by and large considered ideology ahead of military theory, and fantasies and lies over facts. By the way, it should be pointed out that almost NONE of these people had any service credit in the American military except Bush...then again he went AWOL didn't he? Cheney had "better things to do".
Some of them I feel may well be indictable on War Crimes charges.
By the way...its "pathetic" and "traitor". It's "attitude" not "additude", and people are "Patriots", not Patroits" And I think it would have been "You ARE pathetic....".
Make some effort to learn to spell, or at least recognize that when your words are underlined with red, they are mis-spelled. A little attention to grammer would help also.
(Requires free registration.)
Article discussions on this site are to support community debates of issues related to our stories and editorials.
Discussions should not stray from the subject of the story or editorial.
We do not allow the following:
We reserve the right to delete threads and/or ban users for these or other reasons we deem necessary.
Opinions are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.