A "Statesman" who believes that the War In Iraq is unnecessary and truly a lost cause will vote to cut off funding for the war - no matter what the political consequences are.
Dennis Kucinich has done just that:
Democratic leaders are poised to give President Bush another $120 billion ($120,000,000,000) for the war, more than enough money to keep our troops in Iraq through the end of his term and enough money to expand the war into Iran. Democratic leaders want to fund the war while saying they oppose the war. They are promising to use the war as a campaign issue against Republicans in 2008.
We do not have time to discern whether the leaders who say they are for peace yet vote for war are motivated by sincerity, self-deception or duplicity.
A "Statesman" who believes that the War in Iraq is necessary and not yet lost will forcibly advocate his support of the troop surge - no matter what the political consequences are.
John McCain has done just that:
“What struck me upon my return from Baghdad is the enormous gulf between the harsh but hopeful realities in Iraq, where politics is for many a matter of life and death, and the fanciful and self-interested debates about Iraq that substitute for statesmanship in Washington. In Iraq, American and Iraqi soldiers risk everything to hold the country together, to prevent it from becoming a terrorist sanctuary and the region from descending into the dangerous chaos of a widening war. In Washington, where political calculation seems to trump all other considerations, Democrats in Congress and their leading candidates for President, heedless of the terrible consequences of our failure, unanimously confirmed our new commander, and then insisted he be prevented from taking the action he believes necessary to safeguard our country’s interests. In Iraq, hope is a fragile thing, but all the more admirable for the courage and sacrifice necessary to nurture it. In Washington, cynicism appears to be the quality most prized by those who accept defeat but not the responsibility for its consequences.There is no "3rd Way" in Iraq.
“Before I left for Iraq, I watched with regret as the House of Representatives voted to deny our troops the support necessary to carry out their new mission. Democratic leaders smiled and cheered as the last votes were counted. What were they celebrating? Defeat? Surrender? In Iraq, only our enemies were cheering. A defeat for the United States is a cause for mourning not celebrating. And determining how the United States can avert such a disaster should encourage the most sober, public-spirited reasoning among our elected leaders not the giddy anticipation of the next election. Democrats who voted to authorize this war, and criticized the failed strategy that has led us to this perilous moment, have the same responsibility I do, to offer support when that failure is recognized and the right strategy is proposed and the right commanders take the field to implement it or, at the least, to offer an alternative strategy that has some relationship to reality.
“Democrats argue we should redirect American resources to the ‘real’ war on terror, of which Iraq is just a sideshow. But whether or not al Qaeda terrorists were a present danger in Iraq before the war, there is no disputing they are there now, and their leaders recognize Iraq as the main battleground in the war on terror. Today, al Qaeda terrorists are the ones preparing the car bombs, firing the Katyusha rockets, planting the IEDs. They maneuver in the midst of Iraq’s sectarian conflict, sparking and fueling the horrendous violence, destroying efforts at political reconciliation, killing innocents on both sides in the hope of creating a conflagration that will cause Americans to lose heart and leave, so they can return to their primary mission – planning and executing attacks on the United States, and destabilizing America’s allies.
Only Washington politicians believe in deadlines, timelines, troop caps and non-binding resolutions.
And only Statesmen deserve to be President.
We're just saying.