Friday, July 29, 2005

Dennis And The Department Of Peace

If Dennis Kucinich had his way about it, I have no doubt the Tigris River would soon all but erupt in flames, much as did the Cuyahoga River when he was the boy mayor of Cleveland in the early seventies. Sure, Dennis means well. In fact, I would say that in a lot of different ways, he was the best candidate running for president during the democratic '04 primaries. He was right on most of the major issues. Civil rights and minority protections, Pro-Choice, Pro-Labor, Pro-environment, Pro comprehensive health care reform, almost everything you want to mention. He was a true democratic liberal, unabashed and unapologetic, which was very refreshing. Unfortunately, like most democrats, he doesnt' seem to have a clue that his party, and most in it, are indeed clueless when it comes to the need for a strong military and a strong national defense and homeland security. Which meant that he had about as good a chance of winning the election as a minnow had of surviving in the Cuyahoga, circa 1972. Then, he seems to have decided, well, "let me go ahead now and cut my damned throat and get it over with" by coming up with the most preposterous proposal I have yet to hear advocated-the Department of Peace.

Yeah, that's what I thought. The Department Of What? To do what? Another bureaucracy, another cabinet level department full of pencil pushers to advocate for world peace, it would seem. Hey, Dennis, a heads up. We seem to have one of those already, I think it's called THE STATE DEPARTMENT, numbnut. I mean, the last time I checked, they seem to function out of the need to try to work out solutions to problems through diplomacy before there is a need to go to war. In fact, they are frequently at odds with the Defense Department due to this very fact. The two serve to balance each other out, which they are supposed to do. Okay, so a great many of the times they don't do that good a job. But would creating yet another carbon copy under a different name really accomplish anything but confusion? I don't think so.

But Dennis failed to learn from his dismal performance at the polls, and now is at it again, this time co-sponsoring legislation in the House of Representatives, bi-partisan at that, to push for an agreed timetable of troop withdrawal from Iraq, which is of course impractical as hell. It won't work, which isn't the problem, the problem is, nobody's going to go along with it. But to be fair, I might have a solution that Dennis and his allies might want to consider.

How about all you guys lobby NATO to join us in earnest in supporting the up-and-coming (hopefully) democratic
government of Iraq, as it goes about the business of drafting a new constitution and setting up a government in which all parties have a voice, and in which certain civil and legal rights are guaranteed, and the rule of law prevails? A government in which there will be free and fair elections? You don't really have to encourage our NATO allies to send troops to Iraq, though that would certainly be nice. Just encourage them to help us in training the Iraqi Army, which can then that much sooner go about the business of defending their own country, with hopefully no need for any help from us or from anyone else.

That way, the Iraqi government can stand on it's own two feet, may be a resounding success, and the American troops can actually come home sooner-much, much sooner-than would otherwise be practical. That is what you realy want, isn't it now? For the troops to come home? And our presence there as occuppiers be ended? Isn't that what the Europeans want, and for that matter, the Iraqi's themselves? Isn't that what everybody wants, in reality? Well, the quicker the government is firmly established, and their military is up to par, the sooner we can do this. Otherwise, were we to leave too quickly, without these conditions being met, the country would doubtless quickly descend into chaos and civil war, eventually followed by a return to dictatorial rule, either by a Saddam style Ba'athist resurgence, or by an Iranian style Islamic fundamentalist theocracy.

Now you wouldn't want that to happen, Dennis, would you now? What kind of Department Of Peace would encourage a scenario like that?