Alright.I’m tired of all the conservatives whining about how the Collegian “is too liberal.” So let’s do some Dem’ bashing! (I love being a Libertarian, because I can bash on both!)
Here’s my problem: About every single Democrat is against President Bush’s handling of the war in Iraq. Oh, and according to a recent Gallup Poll, so is 72 percent of America.
In fact, I personally think Iraq is a total mess and I mostly blame George.
But I digress.
My actual problem is that the Democrats aren’t doing much better.
So all the Democrats disapprove of Bush’s handling of the war. Yipee! Hooray! Good for them!
But besides asking where the hell you all were in 2002 when most of you gave the President authority to invade Iraq, there’s a much more pertinent question: now that you are in power, what do you plan to do differently?
After talking with some of the Democratic presidential contenders for 2008 (by which I mean looked at their exploratory committee websites), I managed to come up with what seems to be the general consensus of the Democratic Party, and quite frankly, nobody has a very good answer.
Senator Hillary Clinton wants to cap troop levels in Iraq and begin a phased redeployment of troops already there. She also promises, “If we in Congress don’t end this war before January 2009, as president, I will.” (Sen. Clinton voted to go to war in Iraq in 2002.)
Sen. Barack Obama is also an advocate of phased redeployment. (He did not vote to go to war in Iraq in 2002, because he was not yet a Senator. He does claim, however, that “in 2002, I strongly opposed the invasion of Iraq.”)
Sen. John Edwards takes a more drastic approach. His idea is for Congress to cease all funding to US forces in Iraq, forcing them to come home immediately. (Sen. Edwards also voted for the war in Iraq.)
So those are the plans. It sounds like it’s either immediate withdrawal or “phased redeployment.” And after doing a little research, I found that “phased redeployment,” while it sounds really cool and well thought out, is just another way of saying withdrawing US troops, albeit gradually.
So basically we’d be giving up. I don’t care how you put it, that’s what we’d be doing.
Now as an American, I don’t like to lose, but the pride of putting another war in the “W” column isn’t worth losing more American lives.
So according to the Democrats it may be that giving up, while hurting our pride, is still the best option.
However, there just has to be a better option. Please read my column next week to find out why a withdrawal from Iraq is one of the worst things we can do.
Conservatives, I think you’ll like it!
Andy Nicewicz is a senior political science major. His column appears every Monday in the Collegian. Replies and feedback can be sent to email@example.com.