One of the shames of the last Democratic primary is how quickly and completely Joe Lieberman was ignored and summarily booted out.
One of the shames of the current administration is that a Democratic senator, writing in an OpEd yesterday, and speaking on many news shows throughout the day, enunciated more clearly and much more forcefully the progress being made in Iraq, and why premature withdrawal would be disastrous than has ever been uttered by the president.
None of these remarkable changes
would have happened without the coalition forces led by the U.S. And, I
am convinced, almost all of the progress in Iraq and throughout the
Middle East will be lost if those forces are withdrawn faster than the
Iraqi military is capable of securing the country.
The leaders of Iraq's duly elected
government understand this, and they asked me for reassurance about
America's commitment. The question is whether the American people and
enough of their representatives in Congress from both parties
understand this. I am disappointed by Democrats who are more focused on
how President Bush took America into the war in Iraq almost three years
ago, and by Republicans who are more worried about whether the war will
bring them down in next November's elections, than they are concerned
about how we continue the progress in Iraq in the months and years
ahead.
Here is an ironic finding I
brought back from Iraq. While U.S. public opinion polls show serious
declines in support for the war and increasing pessimism about how it
will end, polls conducted by Iraqis for Iraqi universities show
increasing optimism. Two-thirds say they are better off than they were
under Saddam, and a resounding 82% are confident their lives in Iraq
will be better a year from now than they are today. What a colossal
mistake it would be for America's bipartisan political leadership to
choose this moment in history to lose its will and, in the famous
phrase, to seize defeat from the jaws of the coming victory.
Lieberman goes further than Bush ever had, in saying that although the US has made some mistakes, there is no blind "stay the course" non-action:
Does America have a good plan for
doing this, a strategy for victory in Iraq? Yes we do. And it is
important to make it clear to the American people that the plan has not
remained stubbornly still but has changed over the years. Mistakes,
some of them big, were made after Saddam was removed, and no one who
supports the war should hesitate to admit that; but we have learned
from those mistakes and, in characteristic American fashion, from what
has worked and not worked on the ground. The administration's recent
use of the banner "clear, hold and build" accurately describes the
strategy as I saw it being implemented last week.
We are now embedding a core of
coalition forces in every Iraqi fighting unit, which makes each unit
more effective and acts as a multiplier of our forces. Progress in
"clearing" and "holding" is being made. The Sixth Infantry Division of
the Iraqi Security Forces now controls and polices more than one-third
of Baghdad on its own. Coalition and Iraqi forces have together cleared
the previously terrorist-controlled cities of Fallujah, Mosul and Tal
Afar, and most of the border with Syria. Those areas are now being
"held" secure by the Iraqi military themselves. Iraqi and coalition
forces are jointly carrying out a mission to clear Ramadi, now the most
dangerous city in Al-Anbar province at the west end of the Sunni
Triangle.
Why haven't we heard this from the president? While Bush and his acolytes have been insisting that their original plans have been working (which no one believes) and insisting that the Iraq campaign has been virtually trouble-free (which is a bald-faced lied) Lieberman honestly and simply tells us, finally, what's going on in Iraq and what further needs to be done.
I have not changed my opinion about the Iraq campaign, but I have lost just about all sympathy for the Bush Administration. Not because there hasn't been significant progress, but because the president is on the brink of forfeiting Iraq, and thereby the larger war, by failing to speak straight and actually lead.
We will hear another highly-touted speech from the president. He will have to do much to outdo Lieberman, and I see no reason to think that he will. But it is a shame, Mr President, that while you are ducking to locked doors, trying to avoid questions, a Senator from the opposition party makes a better case for your policies than you do.