A friend sent me a good piece from the conservative Weekly Standard questioning the Senate Democrats' strategy on the Iraq War. I had been wondering the same thing. This is not a story saying that the Democrats' strategy is bad for the country. It says that their strategy is bad for themselves. I had been thinking the same thing. What is the purpose of a nonbinding resolution opposing the surge? What do they hope to accomplish? Embarrass the president, I guess, or maybe force the Republicans into defending the war. I can see no gain in the Democrats' strategy. They are betting their chips on failure. They should be saying to Bush, You're the commander in chief, you decide on the strategy, we'll support you as long as it is showing signs of success. Likewise, it was a mistake for Hillary to talk prematurely about capping the number of troops in the surge. Let Bush be the commander in chief. Let him take the risk. If he wins, the Democrats win. If he loses, the Democrats win.
- 1 week