The War & the (Probable) Sad Delusions of Obama Supporters

But almost two years after the Democrats took control both the House and Senate, where are we?

the surge has changed [the entire narrative about the war] over the course of the last 12 months. As initially conceived, the surge was intended to make a space for political reconciliation among the Iraqi people that would, in the president's words, "hasten the day our troops begin coming home." But after a year in which the Iraqi government has, with the possible exception of the new agreement on de-Baathification passed over the weekend, failed to enact and implement the crucial political benchmarks spelled out when the president announced his strategy, the advocates of the surge now argue that we cannot withdraw now lest Iraq fall back into chaos. (Christopher Preble, Redefining Success in Iraq).

While the surge has improved the security situation in Iraq, Mr. Preble argues:

The surge was [also] successful in one [other] sense: it took sufficient steam out of the "get out now" movement to effectively halt congressional efforts to force a troop withdrawal. It also allowed Sen. McCain to resurrect his moribund campaign. "Thank God [Iraq]'s off the front pages," the leading proponent for the war told reporters on board the Straight Talk Express.

Second, Obama is right-headed on Iraq, but . . . does anyone really think he'll really be able to do anything? Samantha Power, before she was unplugged from her role as a top Obama foreign policy advisor, described Sen. Obama's plan to withdraw combat troops from Iraq within 16 months as a best case scenario. Power added, He will, of course, not rely on some plan that he’s crafted as a presidential candidate or a U.S. Senator.

So, on the issue of Iraq, it all comes to down to a previous post on this blog: Mr. Obama, Where's the Beef?

Interestingly, the International Committee of the Fourth International (ICFI), i.e., the World Socialist Organization probably has it right:

In a debate last September, Clinton, Obama and former senator John Edwards all refused to commit themselves to withdrawing all American forces from the occupied country by the beginning of their second term—in 2013. Edwards, in an evident attempt to reverse his fall in the polls, has since shifted his position, claiming earlier this month in an interview with the New York Times that he would withdraw all US troops from Iraq within his first year of taking office. Even then, he added, “We obviously would keep troops there to protect the embassy in addition to the quick reaction forces.”

The reactionary character of the debate within the Democratic primary contest, combined with the increasing claims by the Republican camp of “success” for the Bush administration’s military surge, only confirm that once again the two-party system will present the American people with no genuine alternative in 2008 and that the substantial majority of the American people, who support the withdrawal of American troops and an end to the war, will find themselves politically disenfranchised.

Finally, Justin Logan, associate director of foreign policy studies at the Libertarian Cato Institute, sums it up this way:

Today, Senator McCain chortles about staying in Iraq for 100 years. The American people shrug their way to the next Britney Spears story. The sad fact is that until the American people demand more from their political leadership, there is no hope for a meaningful change in policy. In all likelihood the tenth anniversary of the Iraq war will come with U.S. troops patrolling Iraq. Perhaps that anniversary will precipitate a genuine change in policy.

So -- who will save us? Obama? I think I'm with Mick Arran who acknowledges the poetry and idealism of Kyle E. Moore's canticle to Hope and Change but in the end sees it as sad "grasping at straws" reaction to just how bad it is out there:

The fact that it’s both wrong-headed and at the same time amounts to little more than wishful thinking and generational warfare shouldn’t undercut the importance of having these sentiments out in the open where they can finally be addressed.

If by "addressed" what Mr. Arran means taking off the rose-colored glasses and really looking at what Obama has to offer, then I couldn't agree more.