Psyche, Science, and Society

Clinton supports the next war while Democrats punt on the current one

February 2nd, 2007

Not content with having supported the present catastrophe in Iraq, Hillary Clinton joins the propaganda chorus behind the next war [Hillary Clinton calls Iran a threat to U.S., Israel]:

“U.S. policy must be clear and unequivocal: We cannot, we should not, we must not permit Iran to build or acquire nuclear weapons,” the Democrat told a crowd of Israel supporters. “In dealing with this threat … no option can be taken off the table.”

Other reports indicate that there may be widespread Democratic support for an attack on Iran, just so long as its framed as necessary to “support the troops” in Iraq:

“Democrats on Capitol Hill are increasingly concerned that President Bush will order air strikes against targets in Iran in the next few months or even weeks. … [T]hey suspect Bush will order the bombing of Iranian supply routes, camps, training facilities, and other sites that Administration officials say contribute to American losses in Iraq. Under this scenario, Bush would not invade Iran with ground forces or zero in on Iranian nuclear facilities. But under the limited-bombing scenario, Bush could ask for a congressional vote of support…which many Democrats would feel obliged to endorse or risk looking like they weren’t supportive of the troops.

Meanwhile, the Democrats have surrendered without a fight, making it clear that they will do nothing to stop the President’s escalation in the current war:

On Wednesday, after returning from a trip to Iraq, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi sidestepped questions over whether she would try to scuttle Bush’s plan to increase the number of U.S. troops in Iraq, calling it “the one last chance” that the U.S. war in Iraq will “succeed”.

Likewise, Democratic Senate leader Harry Reid of Nevada said he would focus his energies on passing a bipartisan, symbolic resolution opposing the so-called “surge” — a move President Bush has already said he would ignore.

All of this is simply posturing for the 2008 elections while avoiding the only actions that could have any effect:

“Legislation is so that Congress has cover,” added Michael McPherson, executive director of Veterans for Peace. “The bottom line is that we want the troops to come home and we need it to be defunded. All the other stuff is just a game.”

How many more will die on all sides while the Democrats play their games?

Entry Filed under: Electoral Politics, Iraq, Middle East, Politics, War and Peace