The Democrats' Quagmire

By Geov Parrish, WorkingForChange.com. Posted November 4, 2003.

On the Democratic presidential hopefuls' plans -- or lack of them -- for Iraq

Tools
EMAIL
PRINT

Share and save this post:

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
Bailout a Done Deal -- So What Happens Now?
Henry Blodget

Democracy and Elections:
Democratic Election Protection Strategy's Missing Link: Electronic Vote Counts
Steven Rosenfeld

DrugReporter:
Marijuana Is Real Medicine
Paul Krassner

Election 2008:
What I Learned at the Sarah Palin Rally Before They Threw Me out
Linda Milazzo

Environment:
How Local Governments Are Standing in the Way of Clean Energy
Kyle Rabin

ForeignPolicy:
Chomsky: "If the U.S. Carries Out Terrorism, It Did Not Happen"
Subrata Ghoshroy

Health and Wellness:
Will the Economic Meltdown Undermine Interest in Health Care Reform?
Niko Karvounis

Hurricane Katrina:
From the Bayou to Baghdad: Mission Not Accomplished
Amy Goodman

Immigration:
Arab "Registry" Upheld; Policy About Immigration, Not Counter-Terrorism
Edward Alden

Media and Technology:
The Growth of Talking Points Memo: A Case Study in Independent Media
Joshua Micah Marshall

Movie Mix:
The "Battle in Seattle" and Beyond
Stuart Townsend

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
Our Next President Will Transform the Supreme Court
Ellen Goodman

Rights and Liberties:
In Historic Move, Court Orders Release of 17 Innocent Gitmo Prisoners Into U.S.

Sex and Relationships:
New Poll: Parents Overwhelmingly Support Age-Appropriate Sex Ed
Scott Swenson

War on Iraq:
The End of Iraq's "Awakening"?
Robert Dreyfuss

Water:
New Information Shows How Climate Change Will Affect Water

More stories by Geov Parrish

Main AlterNet RSS Feed

Yesterday, if you went to johnkerry.com and followed the links to discover Kerry’s thoughts on Iraq, you’d finally reach the prompt: “What is Kerry’s plan to win the peace in Iraq? *Read here*.”

Clicking the link simply took you back to Kerry’s home page.

Kerry’s web team thus inadvertently captured perfectly the problem Iraq presents to the Democrats’ nine major presidential hopefuls. All of them agree, to varying extents, that George Bush has made a mess of things. But they’ve been so busy of late harping on Dubya’s failures that few of us have any idea what each of them would do. And there’s this nagging suspicion that they don’t know what they’d do, either. Ask them, and they’re likely to simply send you back to their home page, the one that reads “Bush = bad. Me = good.”

The reality is that no matter how flawed George Bush’s reasons for invading Iraq, the invasion happened. No matter how poorly planned the occupation of Iraq has been, the U.S. still controls Iraq. No matter how corrupt the awarding of no-bid reconstruction projects has been, the contracts are being signed and fortunes are being made. And no matter how absurd the mandate of American soldiers is, the bombs, grenades, bullets, and homemade mortars being fired at them are very deadly, and the weapons they’re firing back with are deadlier still.

If ever there were a time this country needed to set aside sound-bite politics and have a serious discussion of what to do next, this would be it.

Dream on. John Kerry, Bob Edwards, and Howard Dean all want to “win the peace.” (Who, exactly, would then lose the peace?) Perusing the candidates’ official web sites, not many have anything substantive to say at all regarding the future of Iraq. Along with all the ills of our once-popular President, we learn that:

Gen. Wesley Clark (ret.), whose candidacy is almost entirely a consequence of his perceived gravitas on military affairs, thinks we must define our exit strategy. However, he doesn’t offer any suggestions himself. Clark gained public prominence by analyzing the invasion for CNN -- but isn’t analyzing the occupation in nearly as much detail. He’s not alone.

Howard Dean, at this point the likeliest nominee -- as a direct result of grassroots response to his anti-war stance -- preaches that “America must lead the world, not oppose the world.” His foreign policy specifics? Dean would create an alliance among governments and people everywhere. Cool. You may say I’m a dreamer, but I’m not the only one.

Sen. John Edwards supported the invasion but believes the U.S. “cannot rebuild Iraq alone.” You read it here first. He voted against Dubya’s $87 billion Iraq bill -- as did John Kerry -- but does not want the U.S. to withdraw. Huh?

Amazingly, the official site for Richard Gephardt‘s labor-centric bid lists positions on 29 issues, of which only two have anything to do with foreign affairs at all: “International minimum wage” and “Working with Israel.” No war on terror, no Iraq, nothing on the half of federal discretionary spending that goes to the military. It’s the economy, stupid.

View as a single page

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

AlterNet Home » Story Tools: EMAIL PRINT

More News and Analysis:
In Historic Move, Court Orders Release of 17 Innocent Gitmo Prisoners Into U.S. Rights and Liberties: The prisoners are all Uigur men who would face persecution -- even death -- if returned to their native China. Center for Constitutional Rights. October 7, 2008.	Arab "Registry" Upheld; Policy About Immigration, Not Counter-Terrorism Immigration: A New York court says the program is legitimate. By Edward Alden, New America Media. October 7, 2008.	Months After Boumediene, Justice Delayed Is Justice Denied Rights and Liberties: Months after it granted habeas rights to Gitmo prisoners, the Supreme Court's decision has yet to translate into concrete results. By Aziz Huq, The Nation. October 7, 2008.

Search: