How many lives is the Dem. wait and see strategy worth? (revised to conform to requirements - sorry)

[Exiled in America]

Post has been revised per moderator instructions. General rants that included profanity are often allowed when they were not specifically targeted against individuals or specifically directed at DU as a whole. But things are getting more heated and we're moving into another election cycle, so I appreciate that a little tighter mod enforcement may be happening and try to respect the rules.

So, edited to remove profanity. As a democrat who is incredibly disillusioned and heartbroken with the state of the national party, I think this is a fair question that question needs an answer
___________________________________________


I want an answer to this question.

For all of you who have done nothing but apologize for democrats in congress at every turn - who defended their failure to stick to their guns on troop withdraw, who refuse to put impeachment on the table - how many soliders lives is it worth?

Is your son or daughter serving in combat duty in Iraq?

Are you?

I want you to stand before the mothers of dead or mutilated sons and daughters who have died since this congress refused to defund this war and demand that troops come home and explain to them how "its all strategy" and how the democratic congress is doing such a good job.

I want you to tell those mothers that their dead son was "just the cost of doing business." I want you to tell those mothers that their dead daughter was "necessary to keep our power dry for when it quote, 'really matters.'

Then -

I want you to get on a plane, and I want you to fly to Iraq. And I want you to visit the families of some of the tens of thousands of Iraqi dead and explain to them why "these things take time." I want you to sit their at the graves of the slaughtered and rattle off a list of all the amazing things this democratic congress has accomplished.

....and if you aren't willing to do those things, then I really don't feel that your opinion has any legitimacy. And I think you ought to have to answer the question, how many lives is a "conservative" (meaning play it safe, take things slow, wait and see, try not to rock the boat too much) approach to the war and national public policy worth?

To me, this is the equation missing in the discussion. We know that Republicans and this administration and displayed blatant disregard for the cost in human lives of their policies. But I what about the blatant disregard for the cost in human lives coming from Democrats unwilling to take a stronger stand? What about the blatant disregard of those who defend them?

I think these questions deserve and answer.

[The Magistrate]

1. Thank You, Sir: Much Appreciated

[bigtree]

2. so we can't disagree on the effectiveness of different strategies

without labeling the one we disagree with as a 'disregard for human lives?' Apparently you are satisfied that your strategy is 'strong' and the ones you disagree with are not.

I don't like these blanket condemnations which assume one advocate cares more about lives lost than another advocating the same end to the occupation.

And the crap about those who defend the approaches you apparently disagree with having 'blatant disregard for lives' is just plain bullshit.

[MonkeyFunk]

4. agreed

especially when the outcome of some actions is certainly unclear.

Impeaching now won't end the war.

Only impeaching and convicting both Bush and Cheney simultaneously might do that, but the chances of that happening are nil.

Impeaching and acquitting Bush will embolden him.

We can't operate on the assumption that if the House just impeaches, Bush and Cheney will leave office. That just isn't true. There aren't the votes to convict ONE of them in the Senate, much less both.

[LittleClarkie]

5. Indeed. I'm not "defending Congress at every turn" just looking at the situation as it stands

Nancy's statement that if she weren't the leader she'd be pushing for impeachment herself tells me something.

The Dem's are not together on this issue. The Progressive Caucus is not enough, and there are more Blue Dogs than we'd like to admit. Nancy has to represent them as a whole, and form a concensus, and set an agenda that she knows most of them will vote for.

And now people are talking about voting Dems out. How about getting more PROGRESSIVE Dems elected.

I think there are those who support impeachment but understand it's a slow, serious process and that chanting "NOW, NOW, NOW" doesn't do much. I can understand keeping up the pressure with phone calls and letters and demonstrations.

But the histrionics of the OP I don't understand. Shouts that Pelosi is going against the Constitution, when impeachment is an option and not a demand, I don't understand.

Would going after impeachment and failing spectacularly be such a good idea? Are the investigations by themselves enough, even if they don't lead to anything? Will those who are pushing for impeachment be happy if the attempt is made, but impeachment doesn't ensue? Will they be happy that the Dems fought at least? Or will they shout that much louder that the Dems are losers?

I have a hell of a headache. I hope some of that made sense.

[JohnShadows]

3. I don't know the exchange value between a political career .....

... and a life, so I can't really answer.