Views > November 1, 2005

Democrats: It’s the War

By Dennis Kucinich

Ending the war in Iraq is right for a lot of reasons. The war was unjustified, unnecessary and unprovoked. It is counterproductive, strengthening al-Qaeda and weakening the moral authority of the United States. It is deadly: Many Americans, and many, many more Iraqis, have been killed or injured as a result of the fighting. And it is costly: Well over $250 billion in taxpayer funds have already been spent, with no end in sight.

It is also increasingly unpopular. For all these reasons, plus the increased spotlight that Hurricanes Katrina and Rita put on how much the war is draining resources desperately needed at home, Democrats should clearly call for the withdrawal of troops from Iraq. If Democrats do not make this the centerpiece of their campaign in 2006, they risk repeating recent history, in which they failed to recover seats in the House and Senate.

National Democratic leaders have already tried, and tried again, to ignore the war, and it didn’t work politically. During the 2002 election cycle, when Democrats felt they had historical precedent on their side—the president’s party always loses seats in the mid-term election—the Democratic leadership in Congress cut a deal with the president to bring the war resolution to a vote, and appeared with him in a Rose Garden ceremony. “Let no light show” between Democrats and President Bush on foreign policy was the leadership’s strategy, and it yielded a historic result: For the first time since Franklin Roosevelt, a president increased his majorities in both houses of Congress during a recession.

Then, in 2004, with the president vulnerable on the war, the Democratic Party again sacrificed the opportunity to distinguish itself from Bush. Members avoided the issue of withdrawal from Iraq in the Party platform, omitted it from campaign speeches and deleted it from the national convention.

Why is it an unconscionable political blunder to sweep the war and occupation of Iraq under the rug? Because the war is one of the most potent political scandals of all time, and it has energized grassroots activity all over the country.

President Bush led the country into war based on false information, falsified threats and a fictitious estimate of the consequences. His war and the continuing occupation transformed Iraq into a training ground for jihadists who want to kill Americans, and a cause célèbre for stoking resentment in the Muslim world.

Bush’s war and occupation squandered the abundant good will felt by the world for America after our 9/11 losses. He enriched his cronies at Halliburton and other private interests through the occupation. And he diverted our attention and abilities away from apprehending the masterminds of the 9/11 attack. Instead, we are mired in an occupation which has already cost over 2,000 American lives and the lives of tens of thousands of Iraqis.

The issue of the war clearly distinguishes what is wrong with Republican rule. Republicans in Congress won’t extricate the United States from the quagmire the president has gotten us into. They have refused to investigate what role the White House played in manipulating pre-war intelligence. They refused to investigate the Downing Street memo. Democrats, on the other hand, mostly voted against the war: Two-thirds of House Democrats and half of Senate Democrats opposed the war in Iraq. Democrats can draw no clearer distinction with the president and the Republican Congress than over this war.

Every major poll confirms that the war is a loser for the president and his party. Consider one of the most prominent: The ABC/Washington Post poll, which has surveyed public opinion on the war regularly since March 2003. Responses to all pertinent key questions clearly show eroding support for the war. Support for the president’s handling of Iraq has steadily fallen; belief that the war was worth fighting has fallen; belief that the number of U.S. casualties are an acceptable cost of the war has steadily fallen; belief that the war has contributed to U.S. long-term security has steadily fallen, and support for keeping forces in Iraq has steadily fallen. There are no exceptions to this trend.

Right is on our side, and public opinion is trending our way. In 2006, Democrats must break from the past and run on the issue of quick withdrawal of all troops from Iraq. The stakes are high: Unless Democrats stand for ending the war in Iraq, this country will not leave Iraq, and Democrats their minority status in Washington, for a long time to come.

Of course, no party can win votes on the strength of one issue. Ending the war in Iraq must be at the centerpiece of a campaign that includes standing for national health care and preserving Social Security. This is the constellation of issues with which Democrats can take back the country.

• subscribe to print magazine

  First Name Last Name Home Address City State Zip Code Email

  2-year, 24-issues, $44.95 1-year, 12-issue, $24.95

• stay in touch with our email newsletter

  Subscribe to our regular weekly e-mail newsletter. It's packed with updates on recent and upcoming stories, events, campaigns and things every progressive should be informed about.

   

• email this article to a friend

  Your Name Your Email Recipient Email

  Personal message Thought you might be interested in this article from In These Times.

   

  Please help us prevent spam by verifying the word you see in the image above

  Send to multiple recipients. Just separate each email address with a comma.

• Reader Comments

  Yes this is the guy to follow. Maybe he should run for president. . .  :)

  “Republicans in Congress won’t extricate the United States from the quagmire the president has gotten us into.”

  Nor will Democrats (half of which were for the war). Nor will they cure cancer. Some issues just take time and energy and patience (and perhaps luck as well).

  If we are really going to decide issues primarily by popularity, perhaps it is time to go to a direct democracy? Use the Internet to allow us all to vote on everything. (Which i think would be an utter and complete disaster.)

  Posted by wolf on Oct 31, 2005 at 1:11 PM

  Kucinich is the reason Democrats lose. Let’s face it he’s saying nothing but “I told you so.” What’s his solution? Withdrawal and turn it over to the Iraqis. What’s the administration’s stated position? Turn it over to the Iraqis and withdraw. Undoubtedly, the Dems will add “when Iraqis are able” which makes it identical to the Republican position. There is no difference because neither is willing to leave it in the hands of slaughtering factions. Both hold the standard of civility and democracy for success. Neither can admit that Iraqis don’t have what it takes for a liberal democracy.

  The Democrats can sound different but so what? In 2000 Bush ran against Clinton’s policy of regime change in Iraq and against nations-building. Bush became Clinton. The Democrats will talk about withdrawal and promise to do things differently next time but they will become Bush.

  Posted by JasonPappas on Oct 31, 2005 at 1:44 PM

  In September, I attended Lynn Woosely’s hearing on setting an exit strategy for Iraq. One after another, experts testified that there will be little difference in the consequences if we pulled out of Iraq today or ten years from now. We’ve created a mess that won’t be improved no matter how many of our kids we cast on the sacrificial alter! Our troops signed up to defend us and now it’s our job to stand up and defend them, because they are not dying and getting maimed in Iraq to defend us.

  It’s time we had politicians with the courage to take a stand against the never ending occupation of Iraq. The solution starts with the determination that we need to end this war. All I hear from our leaders is that it’s an impossible mess. So are they suggesting that we stay there forever? Thank you Dennis Kucinich - you are the reason the Democrats will win this time, and I intend to be right there with them.

  Posted by jeeni on Oct 31, 2005 at 7:10 PM

  This guy’s got a lot of nerve.  After betraying his followers at the convention and being AWOL from the antiwar movement, he gets on his soapbox here like nothing happened.  Zero credibility and another lesson for those who don’t believe that democratic primaries are where progressive politics go to die.

  Posted by citizensf on Oct 31, 2005 at 9:42 PM

  One Liberal recently lost the Presidential election for flip-flop-flip-flop, among other things, but Kerry has nothing on Kucinich.  The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 was passed unanimously in the Senate, and the vote in the House was 360 - 38.  President Clinton signed it into law.  Removing Saddam from power has been a matter of United States law since 1998.  Among the reasons given for this law was that Saddam had WMD and was a threat to the USA.

  Dennis Kucinich voted for the Iraq Liberation Act. 

  From the time of ILA 1998 to the start of hostilities against Iraq in 2003, there were MANY quotes about the danger of Iraq’s WMD, including quotes from Clinton, Gore, Kerry, Daschle, Pelosi, Reid, Kennedy, Levin, Rockefeller, and that jerk from Delaware, I never can remember his name.  Kevin Drum, not your basic conservative, did an extensive internet search and concluded that no national American politician ever said that Saddam did not have WMD before the start of hostilities. 

  So here is a challenge for you.  Kucinich and all the Democrats now say that President Bush lied about the WMD in order to go to war.  But in ILA 1998, these same Democrats said that Saddam did have WMD, and they continued to say the same thing up to the time the war started.  So, can anyone find an authentic quote dated before April 2003 from a recognizable Democratic politician that Saddam had no WMD?

  (Interestingly, Drum’s research revealed only two names of people who suggested that there were no WMD before 2003: Vladimir Putin and Scott Ritter.  Coincidentally or not, Putin and Ritter were both recipients of Oil-for-Food money in the current UN scandal.)

  Posted by scorp on Nov 1, 2005 at 9:30 AM

• extended discussion >>>Continued...

  Discussions with more than 5 comments are continued on our special discussion page to encourage continuity and ease of use. There are currently 659 posts.

Member Login

Also by Dennis Kucinich

• Democrats: It’s the War
  
• Power to the People
  
• Greed Fuels Energy Crisis