Monday, December 05, 2005

Lies of the Democrats

Lies of the Democrats:

  1. The Democrats like to pretend that Clinton was more moral than Bush, because Clinton didn't attack Iraq. He resisted entreaties by the neocons, which makes him smarter than Bush, but we already knew that. In fact, it was Clinton [corrected from my slip of 'Bush'; thanks to kei & yuri from the comments] and Blair who were behind the no-fly zones and the immoral application of sanctions against the Iraqi people, resulting directly in the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children (on being specifically asked about it Madelaine Albright said "Yes, we think the price is worth it"). Bush has killed 100,000 or so Iraqis. Does that make Bush five times more moral than Clinton?

  2. The Democrats are screaming loudly that they were lied to by Bush who hid from them CIA qualifications about Bush's case for war. This is true. However, there can be do doubt that the Democrats wanted to vote for war. Bush actually did them a favor by giving them an excuse to vote for the war the military-industrial complex supporters of the Democrats insisted upon. The kicker is the closed-door Senate session when the Bush Administration presented its 'evidence' that Saddam had killer drones capable of attacking the Eastern Seaboard. This is laughable, but was swallowed whole by Democrats eager to attack Iraq.

  3. Some Democrats would like to pretend they present an alternative to the Bush Administration on Iraq, but I don't see it. Even Murtha's famous position is merely to redeploy American troops out of the direct line of fire of the insurgents, and keep the ragheads in line with aerial bombardments (Juan Cole's original suggestion) and some kind of 'Salvador option' (i. e., the use of paid Iraqi death squads). Since the Americans are already using aerial attacks and death squads in Iraq, these new solutions will certainly not work, and troops will be required until the Americans are ready to give up those precious Iraqi bases. When the Republicans, as a kind of political theater and bluff, presented a full withdrawal resolution, the Democrats (with three noble exceptions), voted it down, proving, as the Republicans knew, that the Democrats work for the same military-industrial complex that the Republicans work for. You will hunt in vain for any prominent Democrat to take any kind of moral position on Iraq.

The fact is that there is no opposition to the war party in the United States. When someone like Juan Cole advocates an essentially immoral position intended solely to maintain American control over oil while reducing American casualty rates, with no real regard for the Iraqi people, and all the main Democrats are far to the right of Cole, you know there is no hope. All the Democrats are doing is posturing, trying to pretend that they an alternative to the Republicans. They aren't.