Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - Non-binding resolution

dc_dux · 02-20-2007, 09:52 AM

I'll try one more time to explain my perspective, not representative of anything more than my own opinion.

There are a small number of Dems who may want to "cut off funding for the troops and end the war this minute". IMO, they do not represent the majority of Dems who dont want the US to fail in Iraq, but honestly believe the Bush way is not the only way or best way....just as there are also Repubs who believe that another surge is the not best way forward.

They cannot force Bush into further discussions of options or acceptance of a different approach without impinging on his "war powers" other than through public opinion. The non-binding resolution provides an opportunity for open debate on the war policy.

Solutions like the Iraq Study Group, the Biden proposal, the Obama proposal, the Murtha proposal all offer different ways forward...some with an emphais on redeployment others with a greater focus on diplomacy and political options, particularly addressing issues like the fact that he Iraqi parliament rarely meets anymore and even less frequently attempts to deal with the crucial political issues of minority (ie sunni) rights...or that the powers in the region who have a stake in the outcome are not engaged in pursuit of a solulion.

Some may think public debate is dangerous., but it has been absent for more than four years. I believe it is a valuable exercise in democracy and only the first step toward what will hopefully result in a "better way foward" and one that may result in our own military and strategic best interest (consider such issues as the many DoD, GAO, and other readiness reports that express serious concern that continued mutliple redeployments further overextend our military capabilities and dangerously so) as well as make clear to the leaders of Iraq and the region that our fronting of their war is not endless.

(I again point to the example of Bosnia......we locked the leaders of the failed state together in a room in Ohio and told them that the US and NATO cannot provide a military solution...and dont come out until you agree on a political solution that gets our troops out of the firing line of your civil war. Three weeks later, we had the Dayton Accords...hardly perfect, but a reasonable way forward).

Our democratic process may move slowly at times, but it seems to me that deliberation is better than rushing ahead blindly and stubbornly when there are many military and foreign policy leaders who belive such a course is doomed to failure.

02-20-2007, 09:52 AM	#15 (permalink)
dc_dux Location: Washington DC	I'll try one more time to explain my perspective, not representative of anything more than my own opinion. There are a small number of Dems who may want to "cut off funding for the troops and end the war this minute". IMO, they do not represent the majority of Dems who dont want the US to fail in Iraq, but honestly believe the Bush way is not the only way or best way....just as there are also Repubs who believe that another surge is the not best way forward. They cannot force Bush into further discussions of options or acceptance of a different approach without impinging on his "war powers" other than through public opinion. The non-binding resolution provides an opportunity for open debate on the war policy. Solutions like the Iraq Study Group, the Biden proposal, the Obama proposal, the Murtha proposal all offer different ways forward...some with an emphais on redeployment others with a greater focus on diplomacy and political options, particularly addressing issues like the fact that he Iraqi parliament rarely meets anymore and even less frequently attempts to deal with the crucial political issues of minority (ie sunni) rights...or that the powers in the region who have a stake in the outcome are not engaged in pursuit of a solulion. Some may think public debate is dangerous., but it has been absent for more than four years. I believe it is a valuable exercise in democracy and only the first step toward what will hopefully result in a "better way foward" and one that may result in our own military and strategic best interest (consider such issues as the many DoD, GAO, and other readiness reports that express serious concern that continued mutliple redeployments further overextend our military capabilities and dangerously so) as well as make clear to the leaders of Iraq and the region that our fronting of their war is not endless. (I again point to the example of Bosnia......we locked the leaders of the failed state together in a room in Ohio and told them that the US and NATO cannot provide a military solution...and dont come out until you agree on a political solution that gets our troops out of the firing line of your civil war. Three weeks later, we had the Dayton Accords...hardly perfect, but a reasonable way forward). Our democratic process may move slowly at times, but it seems to me that deliberation is better than rushing ahead blindly and stubbornly when there are many military and foreign policy leaders who belive such a course is doomed to failure. __________________ "The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire Last edited by dc_dux; 02-20-2007 at 10:21 AM..