Terrorisim is a Crime not a war. Bush, it is time to drop the war metaphor!
Here is a nice article that makes the case that the war is over, and points out that the name "War on Terror" is simply political manipulation by the Bush administration. I would like to point out that Kerry not only supported most of the same offensive measures for the anti-terrorism initiative, but also used fear of terrorism as a campaign tactic. It is my belief that the Democrats are no more innocent than the Republicans regarding media manipulation for political good.
I think it's time to send them all home…
September 15th, 2006
I started making this argument as soon as I heard about the attacks because I knew there would be calls for blood to repay blood. I think we did the right thing in going into Afganistan to remove the Talban led govenment which offered safe harbor to people who wished to do harm. However, we could have stopped there, using covert methods of routing out these people, their hosts, and sponsors. I made this argument again prior to the 2004 presidential election because it was clear to those with their eyes open that the invasion of Iraq had little to do with the so called "war on terrorism". It is a sad testament to our American society that our favorite metaphor for bringing about allegedly desired change is "war".
The only outcomes I see from our invasion of Iraq, in terms of politics, are: Iraq is no longer in a position to help keep Iran in check, our military has been wrecked, our economy kept afloat on an ever increasing sea of debt, and by our actions, there are more recruits than ever for joining terrorist organizations that wish to do harm to American and European interests. The business with Iran is particuarly disturbing since Iraq, under Saddam Hussein, kept a superb check on Iranian power and influence.
Candidate Kerry did make statements about treating the crimes committed against us as crimes, but he was inconsistent and vague, as he was with most every issue mentioned during his campaign.
There have been Democratic attempts to change things being done and decided in our capitol, and some Republicans, though most of them are recent arrivals at the party. Because of the stranglehold the two parties have created, when one party controls the executive and legislative branches, ain’t much gonna get done to remedy problems till the electorate gets sick of it and votes one branch to the other party. Sending most incumbent legislators back home for good doesn’t sound bad to me because new blood might be helpful. I think the most helpful thing at this juncture would be for the legislative branch to revert to Democratic control, if only to slow down and more closely examine some of what the executive branch has been doing the past several years. I am torn over the idea of impeachment; not so much because I don’t think it is warranted, but because of the divisive effect, the cost, and relatively light punishment it will likely render if successful. If I had to choose right now, I’d say I’d like to see the Republicans lose both the US House and US Senate, and that they not pursue impeachment unless they find direct, incontrovertible evidence that they can quickly and inexpensively use to remove the president and have him subsequently tried in a court of law. I don’t see the latter happening, but I couldn’t let it go altogether.