Presidential Politics and the Capitulation Bill
May 24, 2007News & Politics
This post originally appeared on MyDD
There's so much going on it's hard to track all of it, but I would be remiss if I didn't mention John Edwards and his impressive speech today on the war on terror. AJ at Americablog says what I think is about right.
The speech was perhaps most notable for what it did not include: absent was the reflexive bellicosity that conventional Democratic beltway wisdom has long insisted is necessary to project "strength" on foreign policy and national defense. There was no talk of "keeping all options on the table," no insistence that the Middle East only understands strength, and no blind endorsement of plans that deserve significant debate (such as increasing the size of the military).
Edwards rejected the "war on terror", rightly identifying it as a political frame, and slammed the Bush doctrine of preventive war. He also clearly identified how the current administration is hurting the military, both in the field and at home, offering a persuasive alternative model for the civil-military relationship.
There's so much going on it's hard to track all of it, but I would be remiss if I didn't mention John Edwards and his impressive speech today on the war on terror. AJ at Americablog says what I think is about right.
The speech was perhaps most notable for what it did not include: absent was the reflexive bellicosity that conventional Democratic beltway wisdom has long insisted is necessary to project "strength" on foreign policy and national defense. There was no talk of "keeping all options on the table," no insistence that the Middle East only understands strength, and no blind endorsement of plans that deserve significant debate (such as increasing the size of the military).
Edwards rejected the "war on terror", rightly identifying it as a political frame, and slammed the Bush doctrine of preventive war. He also clearly identified how the current administration is hurting the military, both in the field and at home, offering a persuasive alternative model for the civil-military relationship.
