Democrats are now threatening total cutoff of funds to Iraq - 3-Apr-07 - Generational Dynamics

According to Time Magazine and other news sources, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid intends to try to completely cut off funding for the Iraq war if President Bush vetoes the bill that sets a withdrawal deadline, as he's already said he would do.

I've been critical of CNN Baghdad reporter Michael Ware before, because he doesn't know what a civil war is, he doesn't know that there's a real civil war going on in Darfur, all he reports on are bombings and killings in Iraq, and he's contemptuous of anyone who disagrees with the Democratic party line.

So I was surprised on Monday to hear him give a very sober assessment of what would happen if Reid's threat came to fruition.

"Malveaux: What would happen if the US government pulled most of the funding out for US troops by March of next year?

Unshaven Michael Ware is interviewed by lovely anchor Suzanne Malveaux <font size=-2>(Source: CNN)</font>

Unshaven Michael Ware is interviewed by lovely anchor Suzanne Malveaux (Source: CNN)

Ware: It would be an American nightmare. If Congress decided to cut off the flow of finances, if America decides to stop paying for this war, and the fight grinds to a halt, then the people who will benefit will be the enemies that America has identified -- al-Qaeda and Iran, particularly.

Because there's no one else to pick up the mantle of the fight and carry it forward. Within Iraq there would be unimaginable bloodshed. And, as the former chief of central command, General Abazaid forewarned, there would almost certainly be regional warfare within the broader Middle East that, without a shadow of a doubt, would not only produce more terrorists, but that would ultimately, eventually blow back on the United States of America.

Malveaux: Could the Maliki government survive such a pullout from reducing those funds.

Ware: Not at all, not at all. If those funds are cut off, not only does it rip the carpet out from underneath the feet of the American troops here on the ground, but given that America is underwriting the Maliki government, certainly in terms of finances, it would see this brittle administration here in Iraq crumble as well.

Iraq

Iraq

Again, who would be the victor? No one but Iran. Iran already has much greater political influence here in this country than Washington does. So if the pot of money stops, there's nothing to stop Iran consolidating its power.

Now, while I understand the Democrats and their posturing like this on the finance issues in Congress reflects the mood of America, here on the ground it just means trouble and a nightmare end to this war.

Malveaux: But Michael, what about the alternative: There are some Democrats who say, maybe we should redeploy, put US troops outside of Baghdad and perhaps outside of the country, and they'll be ready to go if such a crisis happens.

Ware: This is not a new concept, this is not a new strategy. This is the policy of containment.

Pull back, seal what borders we can -- but let's bear in mind, Iraq's longest land border is with Iran, and there'll be no US troops on that border. There's no guarantee that Turkey will allow US troops on it's border, either. And Syria - do you think Syria is going to allow US soldiers and marines on its territory to police Iraq? I don't think so.

And you want to make it a precondition that the troops will move in IF something arises? There is no IF. And you'll see America's Arab allies, who have been screaming about the disaster they see here in Iraq, particularly Saudi Arabia, become much more overtly involved in this fight on the Sunni side."

Notice that Ware never uses the phrase "civil war," and does talk about al-Qaeda and Iran. Perhaps in the last couple of weeks he's become aware of the efforts by Iraqi Sunnis to expel al-Qaeda in Iraq that I've been writing about.

He makes the point that a pullout from Iraq is completely unrealistic, and explains the reasons in detail. He points out that there's no reasonable place for the troops to go, and that if they're going to go back "if something happens," then they're going to go back.

It's not surprising that Michael Ware's comments are much more sober than they've been in the past, given that he's spending to much time these days with the US commander, General David Petraeus. It wouldn't surprise me if Petraeus has decided to personally educate Ware and other American reporters who aren't totally hopeless.

In fact, I can't prove it, but I've been getting a sense that many newscasts have been moving ever so slightly in the direction of sobriety, as long as you don't listen to the Congressional loonies.

There seems to be a greater general realization that the Mideast is headed for a major regional war, and that the Palestinian issue is becoming increasingly serious. This is new.

Abdullah said that the Mideast "is pulling the region and the world towards greater danger. As public confidence in the peace process has dropped, the cycle of crises is spinning faster, and with greater potential for destruction." Abdullah's prediction is coming closer to fruition every day. (3-Apr-07) Permanent Link
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Donate to Generational Dynamics via PayPal

Generational Dynamics Web Log for 3-Apr-07
Democrats are now threatening total cutoff of funds to Iraq

Web Log Pages

	Generational Dynamics
	Forecasting America's Destiny ... and the World's

\| HOME \| WEB LOG \| COUNTRY WIKI \| COMMENT \| FORUM \| DOWNLOADS \| ABOUT \|

Generational Dynamics Web Log for 3-Apr-07 Democrats are now threatening total cutoff of funds to Iraq

Web Log Pages

Generational Dynamics Web Log for 3-Apr-07
Democrats are now threatening total cutoff of funds to Iraq