There?s an interesting story in The Washington Times today about congressional criticism of the U.S. war effort in Iraq. One early proponent of the invasion, a Democrat, now is worried about its potential success:
“The direction’s got to be changed or it’s unwinnable, in my estimation,” said Rep. John P. Murtha of Pennsylvania, a Vietnam veteran and the widely respected top Democrat on the military subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee.
Naturally, supporters of President Bush?s current policy don?t agree:
?The real story here is there are those who see a political opportunity and are polarizing this,” said Rep. Steve Buyer, Indiana Republican and a lieutenant colonel in the Army Reserve, who said a war cannot be fought with 435 members of the House and 100 senators trying to micromanage strategy and troop levels. Rep. Sam Johnson, Texas Republican, who served 29 years in the Air Force and spent seven years as a prisoner of war in Vietnam, said seeing Mr. Murtha’s comments left him afraid that American politicians would abandon the troops the way they withdrew support for an American presence in Vietnam and left prisoners of war behind. ?We left them there in Cambodia and Laos, because of the quitters in the United States Congress,” he said.
My point today is not to offer an opinion about who is right, but merely to observe that the three speakers are veterans, have relevant military experience, but have come to diffierent conclusions. When anyone purports to speak for ?veterans,? for ?retired military,? or any other supposedly authoritative group, remember that opinions vary among them just as among any other group of Americans.
