Stoopid Stuff

What Conditions?

McCain keeps echoing the party line. We can withdraw our combat troops from Iraq, but only dependent upon "conditions on the ground". How many thousands of times have we heard this statement? And yet, has anyone ever sought to discover exactly what conditions would have to be extant "on the ground" in order for our troops to come home?

Nope. No one asks. And I think I know why. They already know that the answer, to whatever extent there even is an answer forthcoming, will be vague and utterly free of definitive data. If you are using some set of conditions that are not yet met to support your position that the US military must stay in Iraq in large numbers, the last thing you want to do is describe the conditions under which you would support withdrawal. Because what would you then do if those conditions were met? It's much better for a disingenuous warmonger to hold out hope that at some point, some vague and as-yet undescribed set of conditions will be met and the occupation can end.

This is exactly the same ridiculous dodge they use when they throw around the term "Victory". They love to insist we have to win in Iraq. And it goes utterly unchallenged. Intellectually, everyone listening from either side of the debate knows that the only victory that could possibly be won occurred in the spring of 2003 when American forces routed the Iraqi armed forces, captured Iraq's capitol and deposed their leadership. Criminal or not, pointless and wasteful though it might be, that was victory. You can easily understand this by looking up the meaning of victory in the dictionary.

You cannot "win" an occupation. You can describe a set of goals the occupation is supposed to accomplish and if and when those goals are met, you can say your occupation has been successful. But staying until victory is a mindless, meaningless phrase and should be challenged.

As long as no one in the media or the political opposition holds their feet to the fire and forces them to drive a stake into the ground and say clearly and definitively what conditions on the ground would allow American combat troops to come home, they are essentially complicit in extending this stupid, criminal occupation. When all the warmongers want is the keep American military power on the oil fields, their best political strategy is to refuse to state under what circumstances they would bring those soldiers home. Because that allows them to shake their heads and say "nope, not there yet" and it just grinds on.

It seems to me with his mindless repetition of the phrase "withdrawal based on conditions", John McCain is providing a gigantic opportunity for anyone who questions the value of an ongoing American military occupation of Iraq to insist he describe those conditions. Indeed, to allow him to repeatedly make the statement without clarifying what it means amounts at the very least to journalistic malpractice.

It's a stupid, mindless, dishonest position. It's an easy question. Anyone?

posted by mikey @ 11:28 AM