Cheney vs. the Peaceniks
|
Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
|
Friday, August 19, 2005; 12:18 PM
With President Bush kicking back at his ranch, the task of nipping a nascent antiwar movement in the bud fell to Vice President Cheney yesterday, and he went at it with his typical gusto.
To the extent that Cindy Sheehan and other supporters of an Iraqi pullout aim to start a national conversation about American options in Iraq, Cheney made it very clear that as far as he's concerned, that conversation only extends this far: Are you with us or are you against us?
The text of Cheney's speech at a convention of veterans in Springfield, Mo., was distributed to the White House press corps in Crawford, lest anyone overlook it.
Casting the war in Iraq as a battle in the same great tradition as the Revolutionary War -- and as a natural response to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks -- Cheney likened any retreat from the administration's current policies to "turn[ing] over the future of mankind to tiny groups of fanatics committing indiscriminate murder, enslaving whole populations, oppressing women, imposing an ideology of hatred on an entire region, and arming to create death and destruction on an unbelievable scale."
And the only thinkable way to honor the wounded and the dead in Iraq is to fight to the end, he said. "Every man and woman who fights and sacrifices in this war is serving a just and noble cause. This nation will always be grateful to them, and we will honor their sacrifice by completing our mission."
It was not, in a nutshell, a detailed, reasoned response to the increasingly forceful call for troop withdrawal.
Cheney, for instance, didn't discuss the administration's current military strategy, or the lessons learned since the invasion. He didn't describe in any detail either the current tactical situation or the mission objective. He certainly didn't discuss the merits and drawbacks of alternative approaches, or acknowledge the desire of many Americans to start bringing the troops home now.
What he did -- very much in keeping with previous White House strategy -- was try to marginalize any opposition to the war as being deeply unpatriotic.
Because that's much easier than arguing for the war on its merits.
The Coverage
Peter Baker writes in The Washington Post: "Vice President Cheney declared yesterday that the United States 'will not relent' in the war in Iraq and will hunt down insurgents there 'one at a time if necessary,' implicitly rebutting escalating pressure on the Bush administration to bring U.S. troops home.
"Addressing a friendly audience of combat veterans a day after antiwar candlelight vigils were held around the nation, Cheney cast victory in Iraq as 'critical to the future security of the U.S.' and said the country should not lose its resolve to defeat the militants. . . .
"Cheney's speech represented the first high-profile White House response in the past week to gathering antiwar demonstrations galvanized by Cindy Sheehan, the mother of a soldier killed in Iraq. . . .



