By Wyatt Earp | October 8, 2009
Believe it or not, I blame both sides of the aisle for this. General McChrystal has asked for new troops to complete the mission, and Washington is sitting on its collective hands. What’s the rush, guys? We only have our soldiers in harm’s way? Not that you care.
While real soldiers are fighting a real war in Afghanistan, politicians toss their fates around like a football. Leaving a meeting with the President at the White House on the subject, members of Congress made statements which don’t give me much confidence in their intentions. According to the Stars and Stripes, Harry Reid said that he “left the meeting believing that all lawmakers – regardless of party affiliation – will support Obama’s ultimate decision.” That kind of wording means that if some politicians don’t support the President’s decision, they’ll be ostracized.
John Kerry, of course, sees the war as a political opportunity instead of the lives of troops;
Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman John Kerry, D-Mass, said while the president deliberates his options lawmakers should be doing a “self-examination” of their own “to see how much they’re willing to put on the table, see what they’re willing to commit in terms of money and troops.” For his part, Kerry indicated he’d be reluctant to send more troops overseas without a clearer set of goals.
In other words, disregard the future of the troops, think more about the political implications of your decisions. He’d be reluctant because he gets his votes in Back-assachusetts. (H/T - This Ain’t Hell)
You would think that Kerry – who, as we all know SERVED IN VIETNAM – would have more regard for our troops than that. Of course, caring about soldiers goes against everything Kerry stands for, so instead, we have to listen to his politicization of their mission and their lives.
Vote them out. All of them.