Feingold: Middle East Crisis is Bush's Fault!

A pattern is emerging here.

Dems are trying to present a causal relationship between the turmoil in the Middle East and President Bush's Iraq policy.

Russ Feingold joined his Party Chairman Howard Dean in placing the blame on President Bush.

Maquoketa, Iowa -- On a two-day political trip to Iowa, Wisconsin Democrat Russ Feingold broadened his long-running critique of the Iraq war, saying that the chaos in Iraq has emboldened U.S. enemies to attack Israel, and that it may end up fueling far broader conflict both inside and outside the Middle East.

"We have bought ourselves a world of woe," Feingold told a small group of Democrats at a downtown cafe, citing the escalating conflict along Israel's borders as further evidence of what he called the "tragic error" and "disaster" of invading Iraq.

"What we have done by becoming mired in Iraq, and by deciding to change the balance of power in that region, is enable Iran and Syria to be much more open in tormenting Israel, the United States and our allies," Feingold, a longtime supporter of Israel, said in an interview Sunday. "They don't have any restraints on them. They know that we're tied down. They see a window of opportunity being created by the fact that we are stuck in Iraq."

And what is Feingold's solution to being "mired in Iraq"?

He's pushing to set an arbitray date to withdraw American troops, to tell our enemies, "We're leaving now, so plan accordingly."

That shows incredibly poor judgment on Feingold's part.

Doesn't he realize that bugging out by his chosen date of July 1, 2007, doing a full-scale withdrawal, might just enable Iran and Syria to "be much more open in tormenting Israel, the United States and our allies" because such a retreat would be viewed as a sign of weakness?

Moreover, Feingold is suggesting that the U.S. military is incapable of dealing with a conflict broader in scope than the war in Iraq.

Simply put, that's ludicrous.

Syria and Iran don't see an "opportunity" because we are in Iraq. If they see any opportunity, it's a direct result of the lack of support that Dems like Feingold are giving the president.

The Dems have fought hard to weaken him. Feingold even tried to get the Senate to censure the President.

Day after day, for years now, they've bashed his every move.

I think it's the divisions among American elected officials that may be seen as a possible "window of opportunity" for thug nations like Syria and Iran to exploit. If there's a "window of opportunity" perceived by these hostile nations, it's because the likes of Feingold, John Kerry, Dick Durbin, Ted Kennedy, etc., have created that impression.

Luckily, those retreat and defeat Dems are in the minority.

In terms of our military, we can handle multiple threats on multiple fronts. Our military isn't the issue. The poisonous political climate is.

...As he reminded his audiences [in Iowa], he is the only potential candidate who voted against authorizing force in Iraq in 2002 and was the first to call for a pullout date.

I hope Feingold keeps reminding all Americans of that. He's the retreat and defeat poster boy.

In an interview with reporters at the outset of his trip Saturday, Feingold said his decision about whether to run for president will hinge to some degree on how the war issue plays in the 2006 elections. "The elections are going to tell me whether the positions I've taken really resonate," Feingold, who is not on the ballot himself, said of the congressional midterms.

Right.

Feingold is not on the ballot, but Herb Kohl is.

Anyone heard from him lately, about anything?

In front of groups ranging from 20 to 50 people, Feingold's core political message - that Democrats need to get a backbone and "stand up" for what they believe - played well, as did his Senate record of opposing Bush policies unpopular with many voters in the party: the war, wiretapping, the Patriot Act, trade deals, No Child Left Behind, the Medicare prescription drug plan.

I wonder if Feingold persuaded anyone to support him.

Maybe his support by a paltry 3% among likely caucus-goers will increase by a few tenths of a percent.

"I have had the experience of standing up on some issues, and finding out although it's a little scary at times," it feels "good" to be vindicated later, Feingold told the same crowd in Dubuque. He cited his vote against the Patriot Act in 2001.

Voting AGAINST the Patriot Act may be seen as a good thing from the perspective of the radical Left.

Red Staters aren't likely to see it that way.

"I also found that even though there weren't that many of us that voted against the Iraq war, it felt pretty good later on to realize that that was one of the worst deceptions of the American people that we can remember," Feingold said.

How has Feingold been vindicated?

Is he saying that we lost and no progress was made?

Is he saying that the Iraqi people would have been better off if Saddam Hussein were still in power?

Is that Feingold's idea of vindication?

With the latest Middle East crisis exploding over the course of Feingold's trip, he defended Israel's right to protect itself and blamed the conflict on Hezbollah, Iran and Syria.

He said he did not share one charge made by some critics of U.S. foreign policy, that the Bush administration has forsaken the role of "honest broker" and had tilted too far toward Israel over the Palestinians.

Instead, he argued that the Iraq war was harming Israel by emboldening its enemies. "There were some of those who support the state of Israel, which I do, who said, 'You know, this war in Iraq will be good for Israel.' Guess what? It wasn't"...

Guess again...

Is the prospect of a stable, democratic Iraq good for Israel?

Of course.

Feingold is being awfully short-sighted.

Feingold said Sunday in Maquoketa:

"The idea of turning Iraq into just sort of chaos opened up the deal for Iran and Syria, who are actively interested in destroying Israel. They're having a field day," he said.

In the "World According to Feingold," Bush's Iraq policy is responsible for the current crisis. He's saying Bush is to blame.

Here's a newsflash, Russ:

The turmoil between Israel and its neighbors didn't begin with the war in Iraq.

Care to explain the wars and the unrest that have plagued the region for all the decades before Bush took office, January 20, 2001?