May 15, 2008
-
Obama is the next president
This morning in Ohio, John McCain said that under his leadership the vast majority of American troops would be home by 2013. And with that, folks, the contest is over. Barack Obama will be the next president of the United States.
Yes, I think it is that big of a deal. Here are the two options now presented to the citizens of the U.S.:
- Full and immediate withdraw of American troops from Iraq in 2009
- Make Iraq stable and peaceful in time for a withdraw of troops beginning in 2012, and then leave a limited number of troops behind to merely keep things in check and keep the peace for a hundred years or so.
Let me put that another way:
- 2009
- 2012
What’s the difference? If we’re going to pull out in three years, we may as well pull out now–the vast majority of Americans will agree with that.
Or:
- A tough policy that makes the best of a horrible situation
- A fairy-tale wish that will miraculously come true in three years, after which all we have to do is keep the Iraqi people living happily ever after
People who want us to continue to occupy Iraq believe that there is still some way that we can “win.” They don’t want a withdraw date, they want a satisfying resolution. Now that they realize McCain is not going to deliver a satisfying resolution, they will quickly realize the question is simply this: How long do you want to put off a deeply unsatisfying resolution?
Not three years. Zero years.
Obama is the next president. It’s over. Not just the primary; the general.
Comments (5)
Are you saying that an immediate troop withdrawal would constitute a satisfactory resolution? Because as attractive as that sounds ~ after all I don’t WANT my brother over there fighting for a bunch of ill-mannered uncivilized towelheads ~ I do think it’s fairly obvious that there is basically no government stability over there right now, & a withdrawal would plunge the country into bloodbath. So I guess the question is, should we care about the consequences??? (and maybe the answer is no… )
To the contrary, I am saying that an immediate troop withdraw would constitute an unsatisfactory resolution to the Iraq invasion and occupation. So would a withdraw in three years.
Given an unsatisfactory ending, I think we’d all rather have that unsatisfactory ending sooner rather than later.
I personally believe that hoping for a unified, democratic Iraq is what will ensure a bloody civil war. The Kurds deserve an autonomous state, for one thing.
P.S. J-Ru, you can be such a hick when you want to.
Er, thanks… I think. lol
Hello Daniel,
I see that the prez candidates intend to bring the soldiers home. What they don’t realize is that the soldiers are there to fulfill an ancient prophecy. They are all as good as dead: 19 Then I saw the beast and the kings of the earth and their armies gathered together to make war against the rider on the horse and his army. 20 But the beast was captured, and with him the false prophet who had performed the miraculous signs on his behalf. With these signs he had deluded those who had received the mark of the beast and worshiped his image. The two of them were thrown alive into the fiery lake of burning sulfur. 21 The rest of them were killed with the sword that came out of the mouth of the rider on the horse, and all the birds gorged themselves on their flesh. (Revelation 19:19-21) (NIV)