Why is it that politicians who are desperate to regain power, who don’t have a focused message, and whose party has no unified platform, retreat to the promiseland to invest in commitments they can’t keep?
Politicians of all stripes make this mistake. Today, it’s the Democratic Party’s turn.
The Democrats have promised that if they are reelected in 2006, they will ‘eliminate’ Osama bin Laden and ‘ensure’ a responsible redeployment of U.S. forces from Iraq.
In the position paper to be announced Wednesday, Democrats say they will double the number of special forces and add more spies, which they suggest will increase the chances of finding al-Qaida’s elusive leader. They do not set a deadline for when all of the 132,000 American troops now in Iraq should be withdrawn.
“We’re uniting behind a national security agenda that is tough and smart and will provide the real security
George Bush has promised but failed to deliver,” Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said in remarks prepared for delivery Wednesday.His counterpart in the House, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said the Democrats are offering a new direction — “one that is strong and smart, which understands the challenges America faces in a post 9/11 world, and one that demonstrates that Democrats are the party of real national security.”
The Democrats fundamentally misunderstand the war on terror. To them, terrorism is encapsulated in one person – Osama bin Laden. By promising to find and kill bin Laden, the Democrats push the notion that if you get rid of the man, you rid the world of terrorism. Of course, this position falls flat on its face when you consider there are terrorist cells throughout the world who disagree with bin Laden and act unilaterally even though they consider themselves members of al-Qaeda. Just consider Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. There are global terrorist factions who rally around and take orders from this man. What are the Democrats going to do when Zarqawi replaces bin Laden?
Removing bin Laden is a one trick pony approach to fighting terrorism. It’s a law enforcement solution which might work if we’re talking about cleaning up a neighborhood by taking out the guy who runs the crack house down the street. Unfortunately for the Democrats, terrorism can’t be localized like this. There are other neighborhoods and thousands of guys who run crack houses. There are other countries and a million terrorists.
When Democrats talk about a withdrawal from Iraq, its not about bringing troops home and preventing further death. It’s not about freeing the Iraqi people from U.S. occupation. It’s not about “playing nice” in the hopes that the French, Spanish and the Russians like us again. To Democrats, a withdrawal from Iraq is about stopping terrorism. They believe a redeployment of troops to other parts of the world sends a message of peace which will soften the hearts of terrorist groups and lessen the risk of further attacks. By pushing this ‘solution’ the Democrats do nothing to disprove the fact that they completely misunderstand the terrorist mentality.
This election year posturing by the Democrats further substantiates their national security weaknesses. Republicans owe it to voters to expose this weakness and show that it is wrong for America.
One Trick Pony Meets The Last Helicopter
Bill Nienhuis writes:The Democrats have promised that if they are reelected in 2006, they will ‘eliminate’ Osama bin Laden and ‘ensure’ a responsible redeployment of U.S. forces from Iraq.Bill responds:Removing bin Laden is a one trick pony approach to…
Democrats’ Policy Statement: “Our Plan? We Still Hate George Bush”
Here come the no plan Democrats shouting that they have a better plan, but offering nothing but more Bush bashing and insane promises again. For a while now Republicans have laughed at the Democrats while they insist that they have…
“By pushing this ‘solution’ the Democrats do nothing to disprove the fact that they completely misunderstand the terrorist mentality.”
Actually, I don’t believe the movers and shakers in the Democratic party believe this. They are not _that_ stupid.
They just think (hope) we are.
I should have added, (this is what happens when you don’t complete your thoughts before you post), that their position follows naturally from a mindset that bases it’s position on polls which may or may not be accurate rather than personal conviction.
I have a lot of problems with our current president. But I admire him greatly because it is my belief that he acts from personal conviction instead of being a weathervane.
I see the Democrats have a new push word—and one that applies to them for a change: “smart.” Their last push word was of course “incompetent.”
Let’s face it. With Congress on a (seeming) spend thrift rampage, it pretty hard to promise much more that what is already on the agenda.
The Democrats old fallback about promising the moon offers as a slip side, one more chance to make Republicans look fiscally sound. Universal healthcare offers the flip side of a bailout for GM, Ford, United et al .. come on the Dems in bed with big business .. it’s a nightmare scenario.
But when their proposal offers “secure borders” .. yeah it’s in there .. and meanwhile Hillary is busy fanning the flames of xenophobia on the ports deal one day and then bashing immigration control the next day, it becomes obvious that Janus isn’t the only woman with two faces (and that’ not mentioning what her spouse is busy doing).
Hi,
You have some weird background, which is making your page come across as all black, i.e. totally unreadable.
Vodkapundit thinks you’re worth reading. that brought me over here. The weird background means I’m leaving, never to return. (Note, I’m running Mozilla, so it’s not my browser’s “fault”.)
In the future you might want to assume that people show up to read your text, not to look at your “pretty background”, and adjust thigns accordingly.
Vodkapundit thinks you’re worth reading. You are. You nail this one. The Dems still don’t comprehend the magnitude and complexity of the WOT. The irony is that they have no intention of going after OBL. It would require taking offensive action in Pakistan (probably), something they’re unlikely to do.
Your formatting is just fine. And I will return.
Hey Greg – Sorry you won’t be back to read this, but FYI, all you need to do is hit refresh a couple of times and Firefox (ie Mozilla) will fix the page. I’m aware of the issue. It seems to only hit some Mozilla browsers but not all. I use Firefox and I never have the problem.