After the elections of Fall 2006, when the American public showed a clear determination not only for ending the war but “impeachment” as well, many optimistic people around the world began waiting for quick and powerful moves from the Congress, as the first signals of “ending a dark era” in the United States. With the clear majority in the Congress, there were of course many things to be done and hundreds of thousands people who demonstrated in Capitol at the end of January were expecting much. But instead, we began to see a “vague” strategy from Democrats since they won the elections.

David Swanson, analyzes the present situation in U.S. politics and questions the political standing of some leading Democrats, like the DCCC chairman Rahm Emanuel. What are they doing right now? Are they “sincere” about ending the war or is what we have been seeing is the first steps of a “manoeuvre” for “Democratizing the War”? Swanson writes:

In the meantime, the Democrats’ strategy of letting the war continue, not thoroughly investigating the fraud that launched it, and not holding the war-makers accountable may prove not to be the electoral winner that Party figures like Emanuel expect. It might even prove a political equalizer and so a loser in 2008 or beyond. Every day that the Democrats don’t move to end the war in Iraq is another day in which that war, stretching ever on, can become the Democrats’ war. Only if they come to believe that the war’s unpopularity will work against them in the voting booths in 2008 or thereafter will they be strongly motivated to take the sorts of actions that might actually bring it to an end.

Looks like we have just arrived a point of a political “Gordian Knot” which is to prove that the Democrats are not the “right address” to end the war and reestablish a prestigious, powerful and “free” America. In their daily little world, some Democrats probably worry about being titled as “the party that lost the war in Iraq” and either reluctantly or deliberately want to continue to follow the “orders” of the “corporate elite” who see many benefits to keep the Neocon strategies in the Middle East or elsewhere around the world. Obviously, the Americans deserve and need a much better and courageous political alternative than the Democrats. Even now, 2008 is seen very dark and foggy.

clipped from
The shortest route to ending the Iraq war (and preventing additional wars) is almost certainly through Congress. Influencing the White House directly is unimaginable, and stopping the war through the courts unlikely. Clearly, Congress is the way to go. But what specifically can Congress do?
So, clearly the question before us is not just what Congress can do to end the war, but also how the American public can persuade a Democratic Congress to want to end the war. Most Republican members of Congress still follow White House orders like sheep, and leading House Democrat Emanuel is openly telling the media that he’d just as soon have the war still going on in 2008. The war has cost an estimated 655,000 Iraqi lives and over 3,000 American ones in its first 4 years, with the death rate increasing over time, so by a safe estimate Emanuel has just written off perhaps another few hundred thousand lives for the sake of an electoral strategy.

powered by clipmarks