Guest opinion: We Need a new direction
Iraq: Congress Must Lead the Way
By Larry LaRocco, 4-25-07
 | |
|
It’s time for Congress to chart a new bipartisan direction for the war in Iraq.
The Bush Administration has made tragic blunders in Iraq. We must now demand that the Congress assert its Constitutional role and check the delusional policy of escalation adopted by President Bush.
As a veteran and parent, I believe the recent expansion of the war is not what most Idahoans want or expect.
Our government is based on a system of checks and balances among the three branches of government. During the course of the Iraq War, Congress has failed in its Constitutional duty of oversight. Instead, the Congress has been merely a rubberstamp for the Administration in a war that has rolled on without proper accountability.
The path to our eventual withdrawal from Iraq must now go through Congress in reasserting its Constitutional responsibility. The Congress should follow the lead provided by the Iraq Study Group. We should begin a withdrawal of our brave troops, re-deploy some troops within Iraq, and turn over military operations to the Iraqis.
Nine Republicans and nine Democrats, with many years of expertise, signed off on the historic, bipartisan Iraq Study Group report led by former Secretary of State James Baker and former U.S. Representative Lee Hamilton. The report stated, “Our political leaders must build a bipartisan approach to bring a responsible conclusion to what is now a lengthy and costly war. Our country deserves a debate that prizes substance over rhetoric and a policy that is adequately funded and sustainable. The President and Congress must work together. Our leaders must be candid and forthright with the American people in order to win their support.”
A debate in Congress on the war has finally begun. Positions remain polarized, but there is movement toward bipartisanship. A majority of the Congress must reject a failed policy and chart a way forward for a responsible end to the war.
We must chart a new way forward in Iraq that will provide a withdrawal timetable while protecting our strategic interests abroad and strengthening our security at home.
We need to make certain that the needs of our troops and their families are addressed at home as we rebuild our military’s infrastructure.
The next step is up to Congress, and the clock is ticking.
Publisher’s note:
Former Idaho Congressman Larry LaRocco is running for the U.S. Senate.
NewWest.Net/Boise will publish guest opinions from any declared Idaho candidate for federal office.
Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.
Comments
Right now the polarization of the war, politically, is costing us in terms of human life, economical stability, worldwide respect and many other areas. A clean withdrawl is no longer available to the US and never will be. Terrorism isn't something that can be stopped by military action. Terrorism is something that can't be stopped, period. No matter what governments do, what faith is practiced, what level of economics is being practiced, there will always be individuals and groups that feel that the status quo is so incorrect that violence is the only answer. Violence to change the status quo is a means that has been used not only by man, but by animals, which shows that violence and terrorism is part of our subconscious animal instincts.
To continue to listen to a Rudy Guilliani that leaving Iraq is somehow a "defeat" and that it will endanger America is ridiculous and should be rejected on the factlessness of his entire argument.
Unfortunately we have representatives that will only tow the party line, that will continue to cheer Bush and Guilliani, that refuse to accept that a "surge" is nothing more than an escalation of a plan that wasn't and isn't working.
So when will our representatives hear from you? Will they listen? If not, are they really that much of a representative?
Back in August of 1953, we helped overthrow the democratically elected government of Iran. Along with the British, we helped install the Shah, whose terrible domestic policies eventually helped lead to the Islamic Revolution, the Iranian takeover of the US embassy in Tehran and a general hated of all things American. Ironic, when prior to the early 50s Americans were generally held in high esteem in Iran. Some were even national heroes there!
So...in the late 50s we start training and equiping a guy named Saddam Hussien in Iraq. The CIA wanted him to assassinate some folks, but he wasn't very good at it. No matter, we supported his rise to power and sold him all kinds of awful stuff when he went to war with Iran. Donald Rumsfeld was one of the biggest promoters of US aid to Iraq and Saddam back in the early 80s. Of course, this did nothing to endear us to the Iranians. So, Saddam steps out of line and now we find ourselves in this mess. Gee...Do you think the Iranians are pleased at our failures in Iraq? Do you think they might be inclined to help keep things "stirred up"??
The disingenuous foriegn policies of the United States have caused us more grief in the last 50 years than any sane, thoughtful person could imagine. The trouble is, our foreign policies are now being dictated more by the defense and oil industries than common sense and high moral values.
Military force has its place, and its limits. The Iraq War is the consummate Bad Idea. Throwing money at a situation in the form of equipment, personnel and weaponry falls way short of the desired goal when that goal is to win the hearts and minds of a people. Instead of spending billions on fancy equipment, we might try some fancy, clever diplomacy.
As for leaving Iraq: During my military officer training we learned that knowing when to retreat and reassess the battle plan was the mark of superior leadership. Failure to recognize faulty plans and failed policies/procedures and act accordingly is criminal. Leadership best supports the troops by constantly assessing progress, good and bad.
Heck, any good football coach knows that!