Senators Chris Dodd and John Kerry met Army Captain Brian Freeman in Iraq about a month ago. Freeman was killed during that stunning January 20 raid in Karbala. Kerry and Dodd both say his death has increased their determination to oppose the administration’s new last plan. My question is, “Why?”
Why would it take the death of someone they’d actually met, and admired, to rouse the Senators to a higher pitch of opposition? Why weren’t the previous 3,000 US military deaths sufficient? Why wasn’t the first one sufficient? Why weren’t the previous tens of thousands of Iraqi deaths sufficient? Ten percent of Iraq’s population is either dead or gone. Why wasn’t that enough?
“This was the kind of person you don’t forget,” Dodd said yesterday. “You mention the number dead, 3,000, the 22,000 wounded, and you almost see the eyes glaze over. But you talk about an individual like this, who was doing his job, a hell of a job, but was also willing to talk about what was wrong, it’s a way to really bring it to life, to connect.”
These guys were elected to represent people. Why do they relate to people as an abstract concept until someone they’ve met dies? How good can they be at their jobs if they’re unable to personalize what they do? What if the guy had been a jerk?
Equally to the point, what are they going to do about it?
It was not just Freeman’s death that deeply troubled and provoked the two senators, but the way he died, in an apparent betrayal by Iraqi allies. In the days after Freeman’s death, Dodd drafted legislation to cap the number of troops in Iraq. Last week in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Kerry backed Dodd in a failed effort to attach the legislative cap to the nonbinding resolution of opposition.
And both men are demanding that the Senate push the confrontation with Bush further. Kerry has resurrected his call for legislation setting a date certain for the withdrawal of troops.
“The notion of sense-of-the-Senate resolutions, what the hell does that mean?” Dodd asked yesterday. “Is that all you got?”
Capping the number of troops: will that prevent the next impressive guy from getting killed? Is that all you got, Senator? Setting a date for withdrawal, which the administration is certain to veto if passed and to ignore if the veto is overridden: is that all you got, Senator?
Why did Brian Freeman have to die to get you off your ass? What will it take to get you all the way to your feet?
Why?
a. Those politicians feel comfortable speaking against teh Iraq war now. But not that comfortable. Not yet.
b. The election is over.
c. Polls say, “not showing enough fatherly concern”
d. Polls say, “need to love the troops more.”
e. Any of the above.
But they are so darn concerned, like when Kerry tossed the keys Bush’s way and was SHOCKED that he took it out for a drive in a way Kerry hoped he would not in 2003.
What more do you want? Like really. They, like HC, used the right “judgement” possible at the time. Judgement for what, well different story.
While I don’t disagree with the point you are making here Weldon I do think you are being too harsh. Sadly, the Senators have behaved much like the Generals in command. They were looking first at their career path and only in a small way at the consequences caving would cause. Do I admire the way they have performed? Of course not. But the real enemy has been the Bush administration that bullied people around with flat out lies then the threat of retaliation if they did not cave.
Public opinion was against a war in Iraq, with 30 million people worldwide protesting one weekend against the invasion. But stories about mushroom clouds mesmerized Americans into supporting the war as they disbelieved what the UN inspectors were finding. There are plenty of people who lacked courage to fight against this barrage but I still believe that you are being too harsh. Otherwise, good write-up.
I don’t know, Dallas. It was bad enough that they didn’t recognize the disaster ahead of time, but that their ultimate awakening comes four years later and only by virtue of Freeman’s death strikes me as inexcusable. And I still don’t understand why anyone thinks that anything short of removing Bush and Cheney from office will solve the problems posed by Bush and Cheney. They’ve spent years making clear that they don’t care what Congress says, and I have no idea why people such as Kerry and Dodd refuse to take them seriously.