Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

If GOP Wins, Bush Requests More Troops to Iraq, If Dems Win, Baker Moves M

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
Demeter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 05:58 PM
Original message
If GOP Wins, Bush Requests More Troops to Iraq, If Dems Win, Baker Moves M
http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/contributors/468

Brent Budowsky: Election: If GOP Wins, Bush Requests More Troops to Iraq, If Dems Win, Baker Moves Major Policy Change

Submitted by BuzzFlash on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 5:22am. Guest Contribution

by Brent Budowsky


The truth is: the Iraq War has reached a penultimate inflection point and the outcome of the Congressional elections will determine the policy. This is tragic, but true.

The decision about whether to wage war, should never be made for political reasons, but in 2002, it was.

The commander in chief should never use a war for domestic partisan purposes, but since the beginning, George Bush has.

The policy of whether to continue a war should never be tied to an election result, but now, it is.



The problem is: President Bush, Vice President Cheney, and Secretary Rumsfeld and if they can succeed winning another election, with another two years of unchecked power, heaven help us. If they win another election despite every failure and catastrophe, their arrogance in the past will be mild compared to what will follow...The policy will not be changed because they learn from mistakes; they dont. The policy will not be changed because they see the results and realize alternatives are needed; they won't. The policy will not be changed because they realize how wrong this is; they can't.

What is necessary to change to policy, is to change the Congress, to re-establish checks and balances, to restore Congressional roles in war powers, to re-create Congressional oversight that has been catastrophically negligent by a Republican Congress acting supine to a Republican President.

The Jim Baker initiative presents one great danger and one great opportunity. Make no mistake, Baker is a tough partisan and a tough operative, but make no mistake, Baker is one of the smartest guys to set foot in Washington in generations. He never wanted this war. He does not want it now. He knows we need an exit strategy.
The danger: that if Republicans appear to be on brink of defeat in November, Baker springs an October Surprise peace initiative right before the election, which saves the GOP, then disappears right after the election, when Bush thinks he has triumphantly won again and refuses all compromise with the new Republican Congress.
The opportunity: that if Democrats win the election and regain control of Congress, Baker makes his move, backed by a new Democratic Congress, backed by many Republicans in it, backed by General Casey and the commanders, backed by a grateful nation, and our long Iraq nightmare ends.

The stakes in this election are enormous.



Brent Budowsky served as Legislative Assistant to U.S. Senator Lloyd Bentsen, responsible for commerce and intelligence matters, including one of the core drafters of the CIA Identities Law. Served as Legislative Director to Congressman Bill Alexander, then Chief Deputy Whip, House of Representatives. Currently a member of the International Advisory Council of the Intelligence Summit. Left goverment in 1990 for marketing and public affairs business including major corporate entertainment and talent management. He can be reached at brentbbi@webtv.net .

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 06:14 PM
Response to Original message
1. why did Baker fight to get the Tard in office then?
Did he not know what he was going to do?

I have a feeling he, Papa Bush, and others of that ilk let their crazies run wild, hoping to reap the profits, but hedging their bets BY letting the crazies do it, so they could say they went off the reservation if things go south, which they have.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Sep 01st 2014, 02:57 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC