Shifting war rhetoric

OPINION:

As Gen. David Petraeus comes to Capitol Hill today to testify before Congress on the current environment in Iraq, it’s important to note how the Democratic presidential candidates — especially front-runner Sen. Barack Obama — will construe our now self-evident progress in Iraq.

Sen. Hillary Clinton and Mr. Obama, along with Democratic leadership in Congress and even some Republicans, have previously shown a disregard for the progress our nation has made in Iraq and the consequences of abandoning this important battlefield.

Mr. Obama’s history on Iraq contains multiple mixed messages. His statements before the war mirrored those of the staunch anti-war voting bloc needed to guarantee his seat in the U.S. Senate. And now, running for president, he once again sides with fringe groups like MoveOn.org. But amid those stances, he has dabbled with reasonable policy.

The Iraq war was imminent in 2002, when then-State Sen. Obama was preparing to run for an open seat in the U.S. Senate. In order to win, he would need the support of Chicago liberals whose city was among the first in the country to approve an anti-war resolution. At the time, Mr. Obama even asked his campaign manager about the political ramifications of opposing the war before delivering his now famous speech.

In 2003, Mr. Obama said he would have opposed funding for the war had he been serving in the U.S. Senate at the time it was debated. However, this stance conflicts with his statements and actions in the years following, as he has both supported and opposed troop funding.

During the run-up to Mr. Obama’s election to the U.S. Senate, his Iraq views changed yet again. In 2004, he said he didn’t know how he would have voted on the Iraq war, and later claimed there was “not much of a difference between” his position and that of President Bush.

It wasn’t until 2005, eleven months after becoming a U.S. Senator, that Mr. Obama made his first major foreign policy speech on Iraq. By then, many other Democrats had already made the points Mr. Obama was delivering.

The following year, Mr. Obama warned against an immediate withdrawal of troops from Iraq, saying on the Senate floor, “A hard and fast, arbitrary deadline for withdrawal offers our commanders in the field, and our diplomats in the region, insufficient flexibility to implement that strategy.” He also made clear that a congressional edict to withdraw troops without taking into consideration the realities the troops were facing on the ground, could plunge Iraq “into an even deeper, and, perhaps, irreparable crisis.” These stances reflect a senator at least grappling with the facts at hand.

Yet today, faced with a nasty Democratic primary, the senator adamantly calls for an immediate withdrawal, in his words, “Not in six months. Or one year. But now.” Another example of Mr. Obama’s shifting rhetoric on the war came in 2007, when he introduced legislation to withdraw combat troops by March 31, 2008. He did so despite admitting that once American troops left, insurgents could simply return to Iraq. By abandoning the battlefield, he would be enabling radical Islamists, who were waiting in the wings to take over the country if we left before empowering Iraqis to defend their own country.

As his record and rhetoric on Iraq demonstrates, Mr. Obama’s position today is not in tune with the realities of the current war in Iraq. America deserves a president who will move this country toward victory, not regress to defeat. Our country deserves a president who understands the larger, and global, implications of the current war and has the experience to make continued progress in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The testimony on Capitol Hill today will provide a glimpse into the presidential perspective of all three candidates, and all of America — especially her veterans — will be watching with a discerning eye. Pointed questions are fine, but political pandering and posturing have no place in the Iraq war debate.

Pete Hegseth served in Iraq with the 101st Airborne Division and still serves as a captain in the Army National Guard. He is executive director of Vets for Freedom. David Bellavia served in Iraq with the 1st Infantry Division and is nominated for the Medal of Honor for his actions in Fallujah. He is a founder of Vets for Freedom.