Thomas Oliphant: When should troops return?

[paineinthearse]

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/08/23/when_should_troops_return/

THOMAS OLIPHANT
When should troops return?
By Thomas Oliphant, Globe Columnist | August 23, 2005

WASHINGTON
SENATOR RUSS Feingold has shattered a taboo as far as the war in Iraq is concerned. That taboo involves talk about ''completing the mission." No more. Says Feingold, ''It's time for senators and members of Congress, especially those from my party, to be less timid while this administration neglects urgent national security priorities in favor of staying a flawed policy course in Iraq. ''We need to refocus on fighting and defeating the terrorist network that attacked this country on Sept. 11, 2001, and that means placing our Iraq policy in the context of a global effort rather than letting it dominate our security strategy and drain vital security resources for an unlimited amount of time."

Feingold is a Democrat, comes from a state (Wisconsin) that has reelected him twice, is the guy who, along with John McCain, banished soft money from its pernicious role in federal elections, and could easily end up running for president three years hence. He was not a supporter of President Bush's Iraq war resolution three years ago but sought other means of bringing things involving Saddam Hussein to a more effective head. During the deceit-dominated run-up to the invasion at a time when the Democrats narrowly ran the Senate, he presided over a Judiciary Committee hearing to remind Americans that presidents are not supposed to go to war on their own authority under our system of government.

Now Feingold has become the first senator to put a specific date next to his call for a road map designed to complete the undefined US mission in Iraq. That is an oversimplification. Feingold is a notoriously precise speaker, and it's worth letting him make his own case. A great many conflicting signals have been coming out of the military and the Bush administration about the war in recent weeks --specifically the duration of our involvement and the size of our deployment over time.

In what he acknowledged was an effort to ''jump start" a national discussion, Feingold proposed setting a specific goal for bringing US forces home. His suggested date: the end of next year. Equally important is his call for a detailed road map to that moment. Feingold emphasizes that his suggested date should not be put in concrete, that there could be factors or events that make it sooner or even a bit later. This is the kind of discussion that Bush has avoided. But it is now going on all around him -- among some of our allies, within the military, and at the catalytic encampment of critics near his Texas ranch that has hit a nerve with a frustrated public.

more..........

[rodeodance]

1. so far his challenge has been a dud. Wish it were NOT-we need a real

discussion--not shouting at each other--or name calling!



.....Politically, Feingold's initiative is delightfully disruptive. Until now, the Democrats' Big Four possible factors in 2008 -- John Kerry, John Edwards, Joe Biden, and Hillary Clinton -- have concentrated on a critique of the status quo and a variety of suggestions for a more effective reconstruction and security effort. By now, however, it should be apparent that Bush is again turning a deaf ear.

Already, officials are talking in terms of a military presence in Iraq of at least 100,000 troops for the next four years. Surely the United States can do better than that. The real meaning of Feingold's challenge is to see who will step forward to insist that we do better than that.

Thomas Oliphant's e-mail address is [e-mail]

[paineinthearse]

2. This is recent, Congress is in recess

Watch Russ take the "point" position when Conress come back after Labor Day.