Accountability
I saw a bumper sticker, driving into work on Friday, that caught my eye. The bumper sticker said ""Support our troops by holding their leadership responsible! " Now we all know that the intended meaning is to hold the President and Secretary of Defense responsible for all of the "failings" in Iraq . Well, that got me to thinking. What if we DID hold our leadership responsible for their failings?
What if we held the leadership in the media responsible for failing to report all of the good things that are happening in Iraq? Minnesota Senator Mark Dayton was just in Iraq and he told local reporters about all the good things that Minnesota soldiers are doing in Iraq - building schools, rebuilding infrastructure, saving lives...Why is the media nor reporting any of that? What if we held the media leadership responsible for publishing leaked intelligence that probably cost some of our soldiers their lives. How many lives have been lost because the New York Times published details of secret surveillance tactics that were intended to track the terrorists that killed over 100 soldiers in Iraq last month?
What if we held the Democratic leadership in the House and the Senate for their rhetoric and actions? What would the Democrats that are running for office under a plan of "phased redeployment" say if the Generals on the ground came to them and asking for more soldiers on the ground? Would they listen to the in theatre Generals or would they still insist that we take troops OUT of Iraq?
Then I remember what happened the last time that the Democrats were in charge. The year is 1993, the place - Mogadishu Somalia. Then President Clinton sent an expedition into Mogadishu to help the Somali government fight off militia forces loyal to a rival Somali war-lord. The troops were sent into the streets of Mogadishu and right into a trap. The soldiers on the ground called DC - BEGGING for help from the 10th Mountain Division which was stationed in "nearby" Pakistan". The 10th Mountain was never called and as a result 80 American soldiers were injured and 18 were killed! If President Bush is "responsible" for the deaths of 3000 troops in Iraq, then President Clinton is equally responsible for the deaths of the 18 soldiers that lost their lives that day. Yet you will never hear that coming out of the Democrats.
All I am saying is that we need to take a look at the Democrats history when going into the election on Tuesday. There is a lot of history that says that they will NOT do any better in Iraq - and may even make things worse (if they "responsibly redeploy"). The decision is ours to make.
What if we held the leadership in the media responsible for failing to report all of the good things that are happening in Iraq? Minnesota Senator Mark Dayton was just in Iraq and he told local reporters about all the good things that Minnesota soldiers are doing in Iraq - building schools, rebuilding infrastructure, saving lives...Why is the media nor reporting any of that? What if we held the media leadership responsible for publishing leaked intelligence that probably cost some of our soldiers their lives. How many lives have been lost because the New York Times published details of secret surveillance tactics that were intended to track the terrorists that killed over 100 soldiers in Iraq last month?
What if we held the Democratic leadership in the House and the Senate for their rhetoric and actions? What would the Democrats that are running for office under a plan of "phased redeployment" say if the Generals on the ground came to them and asking for more soldiers on the ground? Would they listen to the in theatre Generals or would they still insist that we take troops OUT of Iraq?
Then I remember what happened the last time that the Democrats were in charge. The year is 1993, the place - Mogadishu Somalia. Then President Clinton sent an expedition into Mogadishu to help the Somali government fight off militia forces loyal to a rival Somali war-lord. The troops were sent into the streets of Mogadishu and right into a trap. The soldiers on the ground called DC - BEGGING for help from the 10th Mountain Division which was stationed in "nearby" Pakistan". The 10th Mountain was never called and as a result 80 American soldiers were injured and 18 were killed! If President Bush is "responsible" for the deaths of 3000 troops in Iraq, then President Clinton is equally responsible for the deaths of the 18 soldiers that lost their lives that day. Yet you will never hear that coming out of the Democrats.
All I am saying is that we need to take a look at the Democrats history when going into the election on Tuesday. There is a lot of history that says that they will NOT do any better in Iraq - and may even make things worse (if they "responsibly redeploy"). The decision is ours to make.
posted by The Lady Logician at
7:49 PM
3 Comments:
There are some good things being done in Iraq and they are being reported. But the violence there has taken a terrible toll. That has to be reported too. Really, there's a civil war going on in Iraq despite the administration's efforts to avoid that term and spread disnformation.
By
Anonymous, at 9:24 AM
Oh, I forgot to mention in my earlier post that your "source" ChronWatch is a real hatemongering right wing looney tune site!
Have a nice day!
By
Anonymous, at 9:41 AM
Hate mongering eh????? And what would you call groups like CAIR? Or the Daily Kos? Maybe you prefer John Aravosis?
Can you really say, with a straight face, that anything good about Iraq is being reported? Talk to the troops that have been there. They will tell you that the violence - while there - is NOT the overwhelming event that the press would have you believe.
By
The Lady Logician, at 7:12 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home