Democrats,
One of the most vexing issues for the party is that you have no single, coherent plan for the Iraq war. Good news: now you do. Please read on...
Our overly-simplistic competitors in the Republican party see the world in black and white: either fight until victory or cut and run. While this is definitely simple to understand, it's also unimaginative, and clearly a losing strategy.
Something you might want to share with your constituents is that Democrats are better at planning, so it's no surprise that you have a better plan:
End the Iraq War Without Cutting and Running
- End the Iraq War immediately because the original reasons for war are no longer concerns (no WMDs, Bin Laden isn't there, and global terrorism hasn't been stifled by us being there).
- Simultaneously with ending the war, immediately begin a rebuilding coalition with the UN and neighboring nations.
Why is this is a better plan? Because if history started today, and we found Iraq in the situation it's in right now, we all know we would not go to war with Iraq. Instead, if we saw a strategic country like Iraq with such internal instability, we would no doubt engage -- and lead -- the global community in establishing stability and rebuilding the country to make it a functioning nation.
So, should we approach Iraq based on what it is, or based on what we thought it was? It's a no-brainer: We should approach Iraq based on the situation on the ground today, not based on faulty ideas, notions, and decisions that Republicans have made in the past.
The Democratic Party is about the future (which is why you consider yourselves progressives), and the Democratic plan for Iraq calls for looking forward, not looking back. We will win in Iraq if we stop investing in our mistakes and start investing in the future.
With this plan, all Democrats have something simple, positive, and interesting to say when asked by the media what Democrats would do differently than this administration in Iraq. By having a single, coherent plan for Iraq, you can change the conversation about "pro-war vs. anti-war" Democrats into a clear, strong and consistent progressive approach to U.S. foreign policy.
This is the kind of plan the party needs in order to regain foreign policy legitimacy. Americans want choices, and it's your job to give it to them. Stop hedging and start leading by consistently communicating a responsible, progressive alternative to Republican incompetence.
Add OKR to your RSS reader
2 comments:
As usual, your comments are right on target, and would work well to frame the issue effectively for voters.
As one who has worked in the past to increase public support for the U.N., I think early on, in considering suggested government policies, we need to be clear about seeing the U.N.and its main players for what it is, not what we'd like it to be or could be ideally.
Likewise, we need to look country by country at Iraq's neighbors, and realistically gauge the policy needs of each and assess what "curveballs" some might throw into an attempt to rebuild Iraq. Some fear a broken Iraq more than others; there also may be some fears of a united, functioning Iraq.
In short, I think our tag line should be that WE see the world as it really is, and are willing to deal with it on that basis; the Republicans (specifically the neocons) are the unrealistic dreamers pretending to be realists. That's what got us into this mess in Iraq in the first place.
In order to be able to claim that, we really do need to look at the situation with open eyes and open minds, and realize what counting on the U.N. and Iraq's neighbors would actually entail.
Like the Republican you are a fan of Goebbels and make crappy propaganda. I wish you idiots on the internet would stop all this B.S. As for Iraq, I said long before we ever went in that we need to split it up into Kurdistan and the rest into a Shia state with the Sunni part devided into Syria, Jordan and Saudi Arabia so the Crusaders don't have to police anything. Split it up and get out! Oh and call it a victory. Should have been done in 3 months. We should have left right after killing Saddam.
Post a Comment