Representative John Murtha (D-PA) seized headlines today with his call for an immediate withdrawal of American forces from Iraq. This should not come as a surprise to anyone. While the Usual Suspects in the media fall over themselves in their frenzied attempt to paint this as a bombshell, and Rep. Murtha as a committed hawk whose support for the Bush administration and the war in Iraq remained resolute until now, the facts clearly indicate the opposite. Facts don’t lie. This is no bombshell.
While many critics of the war in the news media would like to frame Murtha’s comments as revelatory, as an abrupt policy reversal—the truth betrays them. Murtha’s been whistling his tune for quite some time—over three years if you really want to know.
It started thirty-six months ago. Prior to the commencement of the Iraqi campaign that successfully removed Saddam Hussein from power and ignited democracy’s flame in a darkened region, Murtha was already on the record criticizing President Bush and questioning the war.
In an interview he gave during that time, Murtha professed serious reservations about going into Iraq, despite his vote authorizing the use of force like so many of his jittery colleagues who would now like nothing more than hightailing it out of Iraq before finishing what we started. He said a key reason for his questioning a second Iraqi war was strategic. He worried that it would cost the United States not only money and lives, but important allies as well. They are his words.
A year and a half later—in May of ’04—Murtha was at the microphone again, only this time he had Democratic House Leader and tireless critic Nancy Pelosi by his side.
Murtha didn’t mince words and cut to the chase in his criticism and rebuke of the Iraq campaign. Perhaps you’ll note that Murtha raised the possibility of cutting and running back then. That was a year and a half ago.
Murtha has been holding the white surrender flag in his hand for quite some time. The fact that the flag is now hoisted high above his head is not news. Not by a long shot.
Now for all this talk the Usual Suspects eagerly point out about Murtha serving in Viet Nam and the fact he’s one of the House's most influential Democrats on military issues. It goes without saying that Rep. Murtha should be applauded for his service to our country in Southeast Asia. That’s a no-brainer. However, Mr. Murtha is not the only member of Congress with military experience under his belt. And yesterday’s attack on the Vice President’s failure to serve in the military during the Vietnam era, like he was the only one who served, only muddies the water.
Yesterday Murtha sarcastically quipped, "I like guys who've never been there to criticize us who've been there,” Murtha said. “I like guys who got five deferments and never been there, and send people to war, and then don't like to hear suggestions about what needs to be done.''
Well maybe Mr. Murtha would like to hear from someone
who has been there. Mr. Murtha is not the only member of Congress who has proudly served our nation that has something to say about the war in Iraq. Nor is he the only expert on military matters in Congress who has earned a Purple Heart and a Bronze Star. Apparently Mr. Murtha has overlooked a scrappy navy pilot serving on the Senate Armed Services Committee who also likes to speak his mind. A certain senator whose plane was shot down over Vietnam and spent five long years as POW in the Hanoi Hilton. And when the North Vietnamese discovered he was the son and grandson of admirals, and was offered a chance to go home, refused to leave his brothers behind, rather than break the military code that POWs be released in the order that they are captured.
Mr. Murtha has forgotten John McCain.
Senator John McCain is not in the Chicken Little crowd. Not by a long shot. McCain is firmly on the record in favor of seeing our mission in Iraq through to completion. He boldly said so just last week—at a time when many of his timid colleagues on Capital Hill began pandering in lemming-like fashion to fickle polls.
While Mr. McCain may be right in suggesting specific policy changes to our campaign, he was crystal clear in his emphasis that America needs to see this mission through to victory.
In a speech given last week, Mr. McCain said the following:
"America, Iraq and the world are better off with Saddam Hussein in prison rather than in power. Does anyone believe the stirrings of freedom in the region would exist if Saddam still ruled with an iron fist? Does anyone believe the region would be better off if Saddam were in power, using oil revenue to purchase political support? Does anyone believe meaningful sanctions would remain or that there would been any serious checks on Saddam’s ambitions? The costs of this war have been high, especially for the over 2000 Americans, and their families, who have paid the ultimate price. But liberating Iraq was in our strategic and moral interests, and we must honor their sacrifice by seeing this mission through to victory."Senator McCain’s speech is long, but it absolutely deserves a read. You can read it in its entirety by clicking on this
link.
I will repeat what I’ve been saying all along. We must avoid—at all costs—succumbing to the weak-kneed pleas by members of Congress who would rather lay down our arms in defeat, than seeing our historic mission to completion. As Senator McCain forcefully put it:
“We must get Iraq right because America’s stake in that conflict is enormous. All Americans, whether or not they supported American action to topple Saddam Hussein, must understand the profound implications of our presence there. Success or failure in Iraq is the transcendent issue for our foreign policy and our national security, for now and years to come. I would submit that the stakes are higher than in the Vietnam War.”And don’t forget to turn the volume down when the Usual Suspects rear their beaks on your televison screen.
