I realize it’s foolish to look for a magic-bullet argument that would effectively shut down the GOP attacks against critics of the war in Iraq, but for me, the fact that congressional Republicans have said and done the same things during previous wars that Dems are doing now should end the discussion. Game over, thanks for playing, see you next time.
This has come up before, but Nico raises a good one today. Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.) has a plan whereby only troops with adequate training and equipment can be sent to Iraq. Congressional Republicans have tapped Rep. Sam Johnson (R-Texas), a fellow Vietnam vet to help lead the attack against Murtha’s “readiness strategy.” During last week’s House debate, Johnson repeated most of the nonsensical talking points we’ve come to expect.
“Debating non-binding resolutions aimed at earning political points only destroys morale, stymies success, and emboldens the enemy.
“The grim reality is that this House measure is the first step to cutting funding of the troops…Just ask John Murtha about his ‘slow-bleed’ plan that hamstrings our troops in harm’s way.”
Except, as Digby noted, when President Clinton decided to send U.S. forces to Bosnia in 1995, Johnson announced, “I wholeheartedly support withholding funds… Although it is a drastic step and ties the President’s hands, I do not feel like we have any other choice. The President has tied our hands, gone against the wishes of the American people, and this is the last best way I know how to show my respect for our American servicemen and women. They are helpless, following orders. But we, we are in a position to stop this terrible mistake before it happens.”
What’s more, this phenomenon isn’t limited to 1995 and Bosnia.
When Republicans didn’t like the conflict in Somalia in 1993, the congressional GOP decided Congress had all kinds of authority to intervene, whether the president liked it or not. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), for example, on Oct. 19, 1993, argued that Congress had the power to force Clinton to begin an “immediate, orderly withdrawal from Somalia.” He added, “[I]f we do not do that and other Americans die, other Americans are wounded, other Americans are captured because we stay too long — longer than necessary — then I would say that the responsibilities for that lie with the Congress of the United States who did not exercise their authority under the Constitution of the United States.”
Strom Thurmond (R-S.C.) said Congress should “force the administration to find a way out of the quagmire.” Dirk Kempthorne (R-Idaho) said it was up to the Senate “to get the American troops home.” Slade Gorton (R-Wash.) said, “It is time to retreat now…. It is time to leave and for this body, it is time to debate this issue.” Alan Simpson (R-Wyo.) said, “I cannot continue to support … the continuing endangerment of Americans in the service of a policy that remains absolutely mysterious and totally muddled.”
For that matter, one could hear congressional Republicans, including McCain, making the same arguments about U.S. troops in Beirut in 1983.
There’s room for a serious debate here. Lawmakers can and should explore which course of action is likely to be successful in Iraq. But Republicans don’t seem to want to do that — to disagree with Bush, and to say so publicly, is borderline treason. It apparently doesn’t matter that these same Republicans, under nearly identical circumstances, said the same things Democrats are saying now. When Republicans criticize a war, want to bring the troops home, and consider cutting off funding for a conflict, they’re exercising good judgment. When Democrats criticize a war, want to bring the troops home, and consider cutting off funding for a conflict, they’re terrorist-sympathizing, troop-hating traitors.
It’s naive to expect ideological or intellectual consistency from these guys, but the next time there’s a floor debate on the war, I’d just like to see a Dem stand up and start reading Republican quotes during the conflicts in Bosnia, Kosovo, Somalia, and Beirut. If the GOP can explain why Republicans have the right to dissent and Dems don’t, I’m anxious to hear it.