Zarqawi
and Lesser-Evil Politics
by
Joshua Frank
by Joshua Frank
If you are
looking for an alternative to the Bush agenda, you aren't going
to find it inside the Beltway. While President Bush makes a covert
slog around Iraq to tout the death of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and the
other deadly performances of our armed forces, the Democrats back
home are doing exactly the same.
In a radio
address on June 10, the Democratic leader in the Senate, Harry Reid,
praised Zarqawi's death.
"This week,
America received good news from a place we don't often hear about,
Iraq. First came reports that our military tracked down and destroyed
al-Qaeda terrorist Zarqawi," Reid said. "He was a cold-blooded murderer
who got what he deserved. With his death, America continues to serve
notice to those who would do us harm: you can run, you can hide,
but you'll meet a just fate."
In November
2001, Bush emphasized similar rhetoric about bin Laden and al-Qaeda.
"We're smoking them out," Bush remarked. "They're running. And now
we're going to bring them to justice … we'll use whatever means
necessary to achieve that objective – and that's exactly what we're
going to do."
Sen. Hillary
Clinton praised the killing of Zarqawi as well. "I hope that this
will be a blow to the insurgency in Iraq and affords an opportunity
for the new Iraqi government to build on this success and provide
greater security and stability for the Iraqi people."
Both the Republicans
and Democrats would have us believe that Zarqawi was a brilliant
terrorist mastermind, whose death comes as a giant setback to the
resistance movement in Iraq. But if Nir Rosen, Robert Fisk, Patrick
Cockburn and others are correct, Zarqawi's death will make little,
if any, difference in the long run – for all-out ethnic civil war
is fast engulfing the battered land. The United States is being
defeated and its occupational grip is weakening. Zarqawi's departure
from the scene won't change that.
The fact that
U.S. presence in the country is becoming less and less significant
still doesn't mean our troops will be coming home any time soon.
The Republicans won't bring them back, nor will their alleged opposition.
Both parties will stay the course and keep the U.S. military there
for the foreseeable future.
A few popular
Democrats are calling for the exit of troops from Iraq, including
past presidential disappointments John Kerry and Al Gore. Sen. Kerry
wants to pull troops out of Iraq by year's end, which of course
he's qualified by writing that only "troops essential to finishing
the job" would remain. Such a bogus position won't end the war.
Gore, however, will not even back Kerry's tepid plea.
"I
would pursue the twin objectives of trying to withdraw our forces
as quickly as we possibly can, while at the same time minimizing
the risk that we'll make the mess over there even worse and raise
even higher the danger of civil war," Gore recently told ABC News.
"It's possible that setting a deadline could set in motion forces
that would make it even worse. I think that we should analyze that
very carefully. My guess is that a deadline is probably not the
right approach."
As
if the approach we are currently taking is making the situation
any better. Iraq is becoming more bloody and chaotic by the day.
The "war on terror" will carry on in its misguided and illegitimate
direction as long as Democrats and Republicans continue to call
the shots in Washington. The soft murmurs of dissent we are now
hearing from a handful of Democrats amount to little more than a
coordinated bluff. It's an election year, remember?
That is the
reality the antiwar movement better grapple with if it wants to
end this crazy war.
June
16, 2006
Joshua
Frank [send him mail]
is the author of Left
Out!: How Liberals Helped Reelect George W. Bush, just published
by Common Courage Press. You can order a copy at a discount through
Josh’s blog.
Copyright
© 2006 LewRockwell.com
Joshua
Frank Archives
|