For the last few years we’ve watched Democrats flounder around looking for a coherent message on what to do about the Iraq crisis. It’s really been disappointing to se ehow long it has taken them to take a critical stance, and to see the weakness of the political stances that they have been taking.
Here’s a political move that Democrats should have taken but did not. When public opinion began the slow descent in public support for the war, Democrats proposed “immediate” or within a year withdrawal plans. Led by , they rightfully drove home the urgency of the Iraq crisis, laid the ground work for the political shift away from support for the war, but then had little political effect at the time.
Here’s a smarter proposition. Why did Democrats not propose a resolution setting a maximum amount of time of further occupation in Iraq, but propose one that had an incredibly long window of time?
Let’s use the example of five years (instead of the actually proposed one). So, Democrats (in 2006) propose a resolution that all American troops will withdraw from Iraq by 2011.
Who could vote against such a limitation on our already long commitment to Iraq. Who could have gone home to their constituents and said that they supported five more years of war?
A five year window limitation could have created a broad consensus platform for all Democrats, even hawkish Democrats, to agree was the limit of their support. Republicans in turn would have likely been thrown into a bit of disarray over this vote, with many having to support it out of a fear of showing indefinite support for the war.
The vote on this resolution would have also helped frame all future debates about the war, as the long-term effort that it ultimately needs to be/should be/will be. It would have prevented Republicans, especially given that they had to vote on capping support until 2011, from talking about the end of the war being “right around the corner.”
The larger strategic result of this approach is that it would have also put Republicans on the defensive legislatively.
