The essence of Kerry’s Iraq policy
An insightful critique of Kerry’s Iraq policy from, of all places, USA Today. The editorial makes a very simple point. Kerry’s whole theme, repeated ad nauseam, is that he will get other countries (France, Germany?) to contribute troops, and this will take the burden off us and make us stop seeming the bad guy. But, USA Today says, even if Kerry could persuade France and Germany to help us, the very few troops they have to send would make no essential difference in the mission of our 140,000 troops. So there’s no there there. Even liberals recognize Kerry’s hollowness.
It further strikes me that Kerry’s non-existent alternative prior to the war itself (we couldn’t go to war, he said, unless France and Germany supported it, but the problem that he refused to face was that France and Germany DID NOT SUPPORT THE WAR, so his alternative policy was non-existent) is exactly the same as his non-existent alternative for the postwar reconstruction (we can only “do it right,” Kerry says, with the assistance of Germany and France, but the reality he refuses to face is that even if France and Germany were willing to lend assistance, such assistance will not be forthcoming in numbers sufficient to make a difference). So that’s Kerry’s leadership. He traffics in chimeras, on the basis of which he furiously denounces what Bush is actually doing.
One of the consequences of this dearth of serious thinking on the Democratic side is that Bush doesn’t get the real criticism that is desperately needed. So there’s no debate. We have an incredibly inadequate, largely fraudulent policy on Bush’s side, and no substantive criticism of it coming from the Democratic side, just hate-inspiring, empty attacks and transparent opportunism.
In any case, with even a left-liberal opinion organ like USA Today recognizing Kerry’s emptiness, I can foresee a small but not insignificant number of liberal editorialists announcing: “Bush’s policy for the reconstruction of Iraq and the war on terror is woefully inadequate, but Kerry’s is non-existent. At least Bush offers some leadership. Therefore we endorse Bush.”