Kerry on the offensive
The only remarkable thing about John Kerry’s speech attacking the
Iraq war on Monday is that it took him so long to make it.
The “historic’’ mistakes that Kerry accused President
Bush of making in Iraq have been glaringly obvious for months.
But even if Kerry’s fiery denunciation is tardy, it ensures that
Iraq will, as it should, be the battleground on which the campaign is
fought.
He eloquently described the misery of daily life in Iraq, which has turned
American soldiers into objects of loathing. The message that Kerry is
belatedly trying to convey is that the bungling will only be perpetuated
and intensified if Bush is re-elected.
Whether the solutions that Kerry proposed would really allow U.S. soldiers
to depart Iraq within four years is another matter. Kerry was on solid
ground in demanding more training of Iraqi security forces, but he dodged
the question of rooting out the insurgents whose control over key cities
in the Sunni heartland makes the idea of a January election a farce.
His call for persuading more world leaders to provide money and troops
is a wonderful thought, though it’s unlikely that countries like
Germany and France would go along with it. But these are forgivable sins
compared to Bush’s. It’s not the job of a challenger to spell
out exactly how he would remedy a foreign policy fiasco.
So far, Bush’s strategy has been to ignore the message and condemn
the messenger.
He immediately sought to deflect Kerry’s criticism by dubbing him
a serial flip-flopper. Kerry has provided plenty of ammunition; just last
month he said he still would have voted to give the president the authority
to invade Iraq even if he had known that the country had no weapons of
mass destruction.
His positions on the war have until now been vague, even contradictory;
if his current stance is a flip-flop, then it’s a welcome one.
After so many months of dithering, Kerry’s new stand brings to mind
Dr. Samuel Johnson’s quip about a dog walking on its hind legs:
“It is not done well, but you are surprised to find it done at all.’’
Kerry’s stand poses enormous risks for his political prospects because
it opens him up to the charge of once again preaching defeatism, as in
the Vietnam War.
But Kerry may simply be discovering that it’s better to challenge
than coddle your opponent when you’re running for the presidency.
—This editorial appeared in The Los Angeles Times
|
