In a nutshell.
“We cannot effectively address any of these challenges if we continue
our military engagement in Iraq. As long as we stay there, our military strength
will continue to erode. Our standing in the world will continue to decline.
Our enemies in the region will continue to exploit our failures. Our occupation
will continue to serve as a recruitment tool for terrorists. Our support for
Afghan democracy, our conflict with the Taliban, and our hunt for al Qaeda
will continue to be compromised. And our brave men and women will continue
to lose their lives and suffer grievous wounds.”(snip)
“This will be a first step towards restoring Americans moral and strategic leadership in the world– one that draws on the strength of our alliances and the power of our diplomacy, and uses military force as a last — not a first — resort. …. ..” – Hillary
Clinton
The above statement encompasses the U.S. reality in the wake of Mr. Bush’s
calamitous obtuseness on what our Iraq policy has meant to the future of this
country’s safety and effectiveness to engage and be a part of the solutions
to world dangers. Candidate Clinton gets it. Whether she’s your candidate or
not, this is the type of speech Democrats need to be giving as we disengage
from our Iraqi occupation and take up a new role in Iraq and the region.
There are more troops in Iraq today then ever before. The Iraqi government
is more fractured and less effective. The right strategy before the surge
and the right strategy now — post-escalation — is the same. Start bringing
our troops home.America needs a president with the strength and experience to end this war.
I will be that president. Our brave men and women who wear the uniform of
our country deserve nothing less. As a senator and as a member of the Senate
Armed Services Committee, I have had the privilege of meeting with many veterans
in Iraq, here in Iowa and across America. They represent the very best of
our country. When called on, they respond, serving with tremendous courage,
dedication, and honor — many of them from our national guard and reserves.
And many of them not just once, but with multiple tours of duty.Each mission they were given, they completed. They conducted a thorough search
for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq — and found none. They removed Saddam
Hussein from power — and brought him to justice. They helped the citizens
of Iraq organize elections — and vote for new leaders. They gave the Iraqi
government the space and time to act — if they chose to do so. … ..IRAQ
(speech from Iowa)
Exactly right. Our troops have given the Iraqi government every opportunity
to step up. It is a choice they must make to die for a new Iraq. They didn’t
ask for Bush’s preemptive move, which Clinton and many Democrats approved, but
the Iraqis have been given a chance, though Bush’s ineptitude and policy failures
make it a moral obligation for the U.S. to continue to aid the Iraqis in some
way, with Arab nations joining in to keep Iraq from becoming any more unstable
than it already is.
However, every time Clinton gives a speech on Iraq the question of her apology
for her original Iraq vote, as well as her slow movement towards the realities
of redeployment, rises up yet again. I hear it all the time. I have chronicled
Clinton’s intellectual, philosophical and political walk on Iraq from the beginning.
To understand it you have to respect the deliberative caution Clinton brings
to her politics, especially when a change in strategy is involved. You simply
have to allow for the real implications of a politician taking in new realities,
confronting them and moving to address them with sound solutions.
This speech on Iraq was a good one. It’s ready for a primetime, general election
audience, too. The troop talk is real and represents someone who understands
the military. It also sounds like a woman commander in chief who has both feet
planted in what’s actually happening militarily and politically in Iraq and
the Middle East. Clinton continued to make her case that she is not only the right candidate, but that a woman commander in chief can get the job done just as well as a man. Anyone thinking that isn’t just as important is kidding themselves. But with Clinton giving speeches like this one, the gender and strength question becomes a mere whisper, instead of the primary question on the table.
Comments are closed.