I've been asked a number of times about what position I take regarding President Bush's plan for a "troop surge" in Iraq.
My position on this question is that we should do what our commanders on the ground think should be done to achieve victory in Iraq.
If they need or want more troops, then send more troops. If they think more troops will not be helpful, then don't send more troops.
It's been reported that during the Vietnam War President Lyndon Johnson made selection of bombing targets from the Oval Office. That's not a strategy I want to see us using in Iraq.
I don't want to see the war on terrorism micromanaged by the press or public, or even President Bush for that matter. War is not a democracy, we don't get to vote on what terrorist strongholds get bombed on which days. Our military leaders are best qualified to make the decisions on military tactics that will win this war, and we ought to be giving them our unwavering support.
There are different schools of thought in this country about how best to win this war, and the debate among these camps is a legitimate one and usually healthy and productive.
What is not helpful is the debate that is coming from the political left, who focus not on how best to win in Iraq, but on how best to attack the war effort for their own political gain.
It's a despicable thing to see the likes of Sens. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., and Joe Biden, D-Del., openly talking to the news media about their efforts to politically undermine the war effort for political gain as they did this week. Their comments were made regarding a resolution condemning the Bush administration's request for more troops in Iraq.
One could argue that these senators were just displaying conviction for their views, except neither Schumer nor Biden is willing to propose congressional action to stop Bush's plan. They instead are motivated by an insatiable quest for free media coverage that further stokes public opinion against the war in Iraq.
You'll recall that in November 2005, House Republicans tired of the anti-war speeches being given by Rep. Jack Murtha and his allies in Congress. The Republican leadership said "put up or shut up" and introduced a resolution calling for the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq.
The Democrats revealed their spots as the measure went down to defeat 403 to 3. They didn't want to actually be put on record as backing up their political rhetoric; they just wanted to rant and rail against the mission our troops were serving on, without having to face any consequences themselves.
But now that Democrats control Congress, things must be different, right? After all, the Democrats have now taken control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate, so now they don't have the excuse as to why they didn't need to have an alternative plan.
What will they do differently to WIN in Iraq?
Democrat Sen. James Webb, who gained fame for his work writing fictional stories about a father's oral copulation of his son, offered this explanation of the Democrats' plan in the war on terrorism:
We need a new direction. Not one step back from the war against international terrorism, not a precipitous withdrawal that ignores the possibility of further chaos, but an immediate shift toward strong, regionally based diplomacy, a policy that takes our soldiers off the streets of Iraq's cities, and a formula that will in short order allow our combat forces to leave Iraq.
When you strip out all the meaningless empty words of Webb's "formula" for a "shift toward strong regionally based diplomacy," you're left with the root of what the Democrat's plan for Iraq is: "our combat forces to leave Iraq."
Notice no talk of victory, because the Democrats don't have a plan for victory.
Instead what they have a plan for is giving nasty, negative speeches for the television cameras that will be broadcast around the world and shown in places where America's enemies will celebrate the further weakening of American resolve.
This political posturing to undercut the war effort while we have almost 150,000 U.S. troops on the front lines in Iraq infuriates me, and it should be a lesson to President Bush.
The leaders in Congress will not be swayed by his pleas for bipartisanship and unity in addressing the situation in Iraq.
They, like the terrorists themselves, will exploit any weakness they sense.
It's time to give our troops whatever they need to secure the peace in Iraq, and continue to back the heroic men and women fighting the war on terrorism in Afghanistan, the horn of Africa and elsewhere around the globe.
Surge? No surge? I say do what it takes to win, and ignore those who stand in the way of victory.