No Surrender

Thursday, February 21, 2008
Yesterday, I explained why, although I voted for Barack Obama in the New York primary, I have only tempered enthusiasm for his candidacy as well as Clinton's although I hope that one of them will be elected President. Today, I want to explain why I have very little enthusiasm for Obama's Iraq policy. He favors a quick withdrawal of US troops and an end to US participation in military activity. His policy reflects not only his own quite justified opposition to the war, but also the disenchantment with the war on the part of a majority of US voters. The problem with this view is that it appears to be the same thing as surrender. After all, one way of surrendering in a fight is to stop fighting and get the hell out of there. McCain has accused the democrats of wanting to surrender. Now in Obama's behalf, I must say that his policy is not exactly surrender. In answer to the question what he would do if the situation in Iraq went from bad to worse as troops were being withdrawn and US intests were threatened, he said that he would not let this happen. So he has qualified his policy, and this is enough to differentiate it from surrender. However, because it looks like surrender and may even have the consequences of surrender, it is vulnerable to McCain's criticism. Moreover, I think that if the American people feel that they are faced with the alternatives of surrender or continuing the war, then, no matter how much they dislike the war and no matter how wrong-headed getting into the war was, they still might prefer continuing it. And if they do, McCain might be able to defeat Obama or Clinton. I think that the democratic candidate must explain three things: he (or she) must explain very clearly how his Iraq policy differs from surrender and how he will preserve US interests in the Middle East and how withdrawal from a country that the policies of the Bush administration has ruined is not dishonorable. In think that Obama more than Clinton may be able to provide these explanations because of his extraordinary rhetorical skills and power of persuasion. I think the election depends upon these skills.
clandesm@aol.com