|
Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.
Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.
Editorial: The Work Ahead to Stop the Occupation of Iraq
Share and save this post:
Also in War on Iraq
As Vets Take to the Streets to Protest the War, McCain Snubs IVAW at the RNC
Liliana Segura
The VA Continues to Abandon Returning Vets
Joshua Kors
Spinning Iraq for a GOP Victory
Patrick Cockburn
How the Bush Administration Underestimated Nouri al-Maliki
Gareth Porter
In the Shadow of the RNC, War Resisters Convene to Stop the War
Sarah Lazare
As we look ahead to the elections this fall, the best chance for slowing down the dreadful war in Iraq is fast approaching.
Increasingly the public has been able to focus on the gruesome costs of the war -- the tragic loss of thousands of American and Iraqi lives, the tens of thousands of permanent physical and mental injuries, the obscene war profiteering, the stories of U.S.-hired mercenaries who carry out death squad tactics on innocents. And then there is the complicity that all of us feel as citizens and eventual underwriters of this imperial disaster in the Middle East. Bush and the GOP-controlled Congress cut taxes after the United States invaded, but the final price tag of this war will be paid by none other than the American taxpayer, rest assured -- a bill to the tune of many thousands for each of us.
A little more than three years after the invasion, a wide majority of the country is now fed up with the Iraq disaster. By 61 percent to 35 percent -- the equivalent of an election landslide -- the public disapproves of George Bush's "plan for victory" in Iraq.
Unfortunately the outrage that we feel about the stories coming out of Iraq is not shared by many politicians in Washington. In Congress, virtually all Republicans still support the war and more than half the Democrats. Pro-war Democrats need to feel the heat, and Republicans need to hear from increasing numbers of their constituency that enough is enough. Already, long-time neocon and war-supporting Democratic Sen. Joe Lieberman is feeling the heat in Connecticut as his primary opponent Ned Lamont soars in the polls primarily on an anti-war platform.
But so far the two conflicting dynamics -- Bush's intentions to stay in Iraq indefinitely and massive public dissatisfaction with the occupation -- have yet to connect in a meaningful way. November's midterm congressional elections represents the first real opportunity to make Bush and the Republicans pay a political price for their unpopular stance.
But it won't be easy. The country is sharply divided, and in important ways, this is a regional war -- a war of red state districts and huge corporations with much of the vociferous support for the war coming from the South, Texas, and conservative states in the West. The Republicans have dominated the message on Iraq for years with the simple strategy that any dissent about "progress in Iraq" will be met with claims that it amounts to "cutting and running" or "not supporting the troops."
There are two vital approaches we must take to the 35 percent of the American public who still thinks Iraqis will eventually shower us with flowers and kisses. The first has been laid out in dramatic fashion by Democratic Rep. John Murtha, whose military credentials are impeccable. Murtha often leads quoting the poll that "72 percent of the American troops serving in Iraq think the U.S. should exit the country within a year." The unavoidable conclusion from this is that to support the troops is to support a pull-out from Iraq. Murtha has had the courage to challenge the war's prosecutors in the White House and Congress. "To all the Republicans who sit in their air-conditioned offices and talk of the courage it takes for them to keep young kids in harm's way -- I say enough," Murtha recently wrote in a fundraising letter on behalf of Democrats.
Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from War on Iraq! Sign up now »
EMAIL
PRINT
59 COMMENTS
