Arizona Senator John McCain has staked his presidential
aspirations on his ‘independent’ thinking on Iraq, going against the
clear American desire to leave that beleaguered country. On March 27,
2007, Mr. McCain had this to say about the proposed resolution to
attach a timetable for withdrawal to a bill funding continuation of the
war:
“Supporters of this provision say they want a date certain for a
U.S. withdrawal from Iraq. But, Mr. President, what they have offered
us is more accurately described as a date certain for surrender, with
grave consequences for the future of Iraq, the stability of the Middle
East and the security of Americans at home and abroad.”
Mr. McCain saw the situation in Somalia far differently. On October 19,
1993, he said the following: “There is no reason for the United States
of America to remain in Somalia. The American people want them home, I
believe the majority of Congress wants them home, and to set an
artificial date of March 31 or even February 1, in my view, is not
acceptable. The criteria should be to bring them home as rapidly and
safely as possible, an evolution which I think could be completed in a
matter of weeks.”
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky also seems to suffer
not only from memory lapse, but from a misunderstanding of
Congressional duties as well. He was clearer on some of those duties in
1993 than he is today. At that time he supported a Congressional
amendment introduced by Senator Robert Byrd to limit military spending
for troop deployments in Somalia, as a means to end U.S. involvement
there. Said he: “The only issue here tonight is how we leave and, in my
judgment, the Byrd amendment better defines the proper exit for the
United States in this most unfortunate experience in Somalia….”
On January 10, 2007, while Congressional Republicans tried to hold on
to some semblance of credibility following their loss of the House and
Senate, Mr. McConnell said the following in response to Democrats’
musings about different ways of ending the war: “I think it is
inappropriate for the Congress to try to micromanage, in effect, the
tactics in a military conflict. I don't think Congress has the
authority to do it.”
It is puzzling that a U.N. sanctioned deployment of approximately
30,000 American forces must be ended as quickly as possible, but a
mostly-independent one, involving close to 150,000 American soldiers
and condemned by much of the world, must be continued. How much party
politics plays in the opinions and statements of America’s political
leaders, to the detriment of American soldiers and foreign citizens,
can only be guessed.
Even those without so much history in U.S. government do not stray far
from hypocritical statements. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has
been pilloried by Republicans for her recent trip to Syria. It must be
remembered that the non-partisan Iraq Study Group recommended
engagement with that nation, in order to resolve the situation in Iraq.
Mr. Bush’s remarks on Ms. Pelosi’s trip are what one might expect: he
said that sending delegations ‘doesn’t work’ and is
‘counter-productive.’ Former Massachusettes governor Mitt Romney,
another presidential-candidate wannabe and a self-described ‘Washington
outsider,’ said this: “Washington is a broken place right now,
dysfunctional in some respects, which has been evidenced by the trip by
Nancy Pelosi to Syria….” The opinions of Mr. Bush and Mr. Romney might
have some credibility, if not for the fact that three Republican
Congressmen met with Syrian President Bashar Assad in Damascus a few
days earlier. Republican representatives Frank Wolf of Virginia, Joe
Pitts of Pennsylvania and Robert Aderholt of Alabama all met with Mr.
Assad on April 1, believing that opportunities for dialogue with Syria
are vitally important. Was their visit also ‘counter-productive’ and
indicative of Washington’s dysfunction? If so, why were Mr. Bush and
Mr. Romney silent about it?
While politicians of both parties volley high-sounding words back and
forth across the political net, American soldiers and Iraqi citizens
are dying. Non-binding resolutions will not prevent these tragedies;
only acts by Congress that require nothing close to the courage of
American soldiers and Iraqi freedom fighters will stop this war. Yet
there is little to indicate that many members of Congress have the
strength of conviction to accomplish this life-saving task. And so the
tragedy continues.
Robert Fantina is the author of
Desertion and the American Soldier: 1776 - 2006
Writings 
One need not look far to see Republicans wringing their hands at the latest Democratic attempt to end the ill-conceived and ill-managed, endless U.S. war against Iraq. Cries of ‘cut and run Democrats’ are heard everywhere, with the implication that only GOP representatives recognize the need to ‘support the troops.’ This, apparently, is best done by having a war for them. 
Subscribe to this comment's feed
