Terrorists For Troop Withdrawal

If the cartoons in the Daily News weren't bad enough (well-meaning, but dumb), they have nothing on the stuff in Rupert Murdoch's NY Post. This little gem was in yesterday's paper-



This cartoon is idiotic on so many levels, one doesn't know where to begin. Mostly, it portrays those who want to see our troops brought home safely and swiftly as a bunch of clueless hippies (I suppose that 'sentimental' fool John Murtha should be included too) opposed to democracy in Iraq. That is such an insult to the honest, intelligent arguments made for withdrawal and to the over half of Americans who have strong concerns about our presence in Iraq. Secondly, a cheap (and ugly) shot at Cindy Sheehan is unnecessary for the artist's main point and was only added for that extra punch.

The main premise of the cartoon- the presence of Zarqawi in the rally- is meant to reiterate the White House talking point that withdrawal supporters are terrorist supporters... that our goal (withdrawal) is the same goal of the terrorists.

This displays a great ignorance of the reality of Iraq, which is the opposite. The terrorists may want us gone (or dead, I doubt they care either way), but Zarqawi most definitely does not. Just like our actions in the '80s inadvertantly helped facilitate the rise of Saddam and bin Laden, so too have we made a random terrorist like Zarqawi into a star. Our presence in that region is what fuels the insurgency (both the genuine Iraqi dissidents and the outside Al Queada forces). We are the best recruiting tool Osama (remember him?) and Zarqawi have ever had. Our invasion, but more specifically our presence as a occupying force with no sign of leaving and plans for permanent basing, allowed them to give truth to their rallying statements that the Great Satan U.S. wants to rain down its imperial fires onto the Muslim holy land. It doesn't matter if we believe that is true, what matters is that they do. And every month we stay there perpetuates it further.

Obviously, the interests of the Iraqi people must be factored in (after all, they're in this mess because of us), but they by and large want us to leave. No matter the situation, no country wants to be occupied. As President Bush said, "Of course they don't like being occupied. I wouldn't like being occupied either."

While the Iraqi security forces likely are not ready to handle the situation on their own, we can't (and shouldn't) hold their hands forever. At some point, their fate will be their own, and if we are to believe the White House (we are, aren't we?) they are making "great progress". Still, President Bush will not predicate our departure upon the Iraqis or when his generals (who he doesn't listen to anyway) say so. That decision is/was always going to be made when it's politically convenient for Bush. If his approval ratings hit 30%, or the Republicans look like they might lose the '06 elections, expect to see convoys of returning troops on every TV station.

Regarding the talking point that withdrawing now (or ever?) would make us less safe here at home, that is nothing but hot air. Our safety was not threatened by Iraq before we invaded (nuke heading our way in 45 minutes!), and I do not believe it will be threatened after we withdraw either. If the President's assurances that we are making Iraq a full-fledged democracy capable of securing itself and its borders are to be believed, then surely we have nothing to worry about, no?

This cartoon, and its argument, is an insult to intelligent people in America and in Iraq.

Finally, for more Post fun, check out today's Letters page. There's one letter accusing Murtha of treason, another questioning if Murtha will be in the next Michael Moore film, another accusing the 'liberal media' of ignoring pro-war representatives, and (because they had to), a letter noting that maybe Bush should've had a victory strategy before he invaded. Fair and balanced, as always.