Friday, October 07, 2005
That's some war plan Brownie drew up!
John McCain, backed by fellow Vietnam vet Colin Powell, has forwarded legislation that would codify long-standing military regulations against torture (proven to be an ineffective interrogation technique, one, regrettably, that's been used by more than just some West Virginia private hung out to dry by spineless superiors).
However, our naked emperor says he will use his veto power --- for the first time since he took office --- to block the McCain amendment, arguing that it would restrict the president's ability to prosecute the war in Iraq (something he's prosecuted pretty poorly to this point). Besides, what would John McCain know about torture?
So Bushie can overlook billions of pork barrel spending (and politically cynical entitlements enacted solely to attract votes) but forbidding torture is something he just can't abide. Now here's a man who speaks for God!
You'll notice that those opposing the torture restrictions have, by and large, never served in the military (sorry for borrowing one from the MoveOn.org crowd, but protecting the Alabama coast line is not military service). They are the same crew who chose to ignore the Powell doctrine --- better to deploy too many troops than not enough --- when formulating their battle plan against Iraq. Of course, Powell (whose recent retreat from the national stage is no coincidence) has something that most of Bush's inner circle doesn't: first-hand experience.
I supported the Iraq War because I believe --- naively, perhaps --- in the domino theory, which, many forget, led to Communism's tidy (and relatively bloodless) demise in the late 1980s. If your neighbors are free, chances are you'll demand the same. I just wish we had someone competent enough to handle such a nuanced, but necessary, foreign policy.
If only the Democrats would provide an occassional solution. Instead, they follow the predictable, and politically expedient, route of merely stating the obvious. Even the far right wing is starting to reach the conclusion that Bush is haplessly inept. We get it! Now offer those of us in the middle a reason to trust you.
Regrettably, the Dems seem incapable of providing any alternatives outside of not being George W. Bush. Abandoning Iraq before the job is complete may be an alternative, but it's one that would set us back decades in the Middle East. Would democratically inclined Arabs ever trust us again?
It's well past time this country stopped settling for less than average (and that's not just in politics ... we seem content with the bare minimum in every facet of modern life). At this point, I'd settle for mediocrity. Someday, that prince will come. Or am I just hopelessly naive?