What is difficult to understand, is why the Adminstration remains so steadfast, unwilling to give reasonable consideration to opposing views and positions. Originally, the war was going to be left to the generals. Which is good, since this president has not been in harm's way in any military action or campaign, and neither has his vice president. However, the Secretary of Defense broke with the tradition of re-nominating the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs because he was not as supportive of the war as the president had hoped. I agree the president should have advisors in whom he/she can repose his/her faith and confidence, but if the conduct of the war is to be the job of the professionals in uniform, why is anyone who takes issue with policy quickly minimized and out of the picture?
How can Congress act? If they attempt to force a policy showdown with the Administration over the war, they run the very real risk of being perceived as not supporting the troops, as the Administration is artful in using the veto. Unfortunately, the president and his Adminstration were left virtually unchecked for the first six years of his term, with the rubber stamp Congress, lead by the indicted former House Majority Leader from the president's home state of Texas, Tom Delay. I just hope Speaker Pelosi and Leader Reid can find a way to bring a competent and reasoned voice to the discussions and moderate their chambers so that a bi-partisan debate can be undertaken and reasoned and rationale solution to Iraq can be found.
4 comments:
Post a Comment