War and elections now joined

Everyone is talking about the elections yesterday, particularly the Connecticut Democratic primary. At dailykos "Koss" blogged today about the winners and losers in the Connecticut Democratic primary. Democracy for America (led by Jim Dean) says, "Thank you, Ned." John Aravosis, at AMERICAblog, linked to the coverage in all the main newspapers at his site. TPM Cafe - Election Central included a table of links to the latest poll results. (Better look quickly, as I was unable to find a permanent link to the entire table). It feels like a growing tide of opinion making itself felt more strongly against the war in Iraq. That emerging strength of the voices of opposition makes me feel just a bit more optimistic this morning than I did yesterday.

Reuters News Service headlined Lieberman's loss - "Lieberman loses tough battle over war." And I do believe it was largely over the war, though Lieberman had clearly become disconnected from his constituents. New and unalligned voters came out in large numbers to vote in the primary, I think because they felt strongly enough to go to all the trouble of voting. Here is a quote from an article, by John Whitesides, Political Correspondent:

HARTFORD, Connecticut (Reuters)
- Connecticut Sen. Joseph Lieberman narrowly lost a Democratic Party showdown to
a relative unknown on Tuesday, sinking under a tide of voter anger over his support for the war in Iraq and President George W. Bush.
Six years after he was the Democratic vice presidential nominee, Lieberman fell in a tight Senate primary battle to wealthy businessman Ned Lamont, who had called him a cheerleader for Bush and urged voters to send an anti-war message to the country.

Wars in the mid-east are front and center in the headlines.

• Aljazeera's headline today is "Arabs warn of Lebanon 'civil war'" - To quote,

  The Arab League has said that any United Nation resolution that does not demand an immediate withdrawal of Israeli troops from Lebanon could lead to a civil war there.

• The New York Times headline put it this way, "Anti-U.S. Feeling Leaves Arab Reformers Isolated." To quote NEIL MacFARQUHAR,

  Published: August 9, 2006. DAMASCUS, Syria, Aug. 8 —
  Moderate reformers across the Arab world say American support for Israel’s battle with Hezbollah has put them on the defensive, tarring them by association and boosting Islamist parties.
  The very people whom the United States wanted to encourage to promote democracy from Bahrain to Casablanca instead feel trapped by a policy that they now ridicule more or less as “destroying the region in order to save it.”

The Associated Press headlined Iraq - "Bombings, shootings kill 33 across Iraq." I find it very disconcerting and disheartening that since the turn of the century war and elections have been linked. These two opposing ideas for settling differences. How could the methods have become so entangled as a result of our administration's gross mismanagement and failure to plan for unintended consequences ? Well, to come to think of it, there have also been two U.S. elections since the turn of the century, as well! Quoting from an article By QASSIM ABDUL-ZAHRA, Associated Press Writer

Tue Aug 8, 6:42 PM ET BAGHDAD, Iraq -
A series of bombings and shootings killed at least 33 people Tuesday, most in the Baghdad area, as more American soldiers patrolled the streets of the capital in a make-or-break bid to quell sectarian violence. . .
A U.S. statement said about 6,000 additional Iraqi troops were being sent to the Baghdad area, along with 3,500 U.S. soldiers of the 172nd Stryker Brigade Combat Team and 2,000 troops from the U.S. 1st Armored Division, which has served as the theater reserve force since November. . .
The general priorities are to bring stability to the key neighborhoods where there is sectarian fighting," the top U.S. commander in Iraq Gen. George W. Casey Jr., told reporters in Tikrit. "You'll see us starting there and then gradually expanding across the rest of the city."

Newspapers jumped on General Abizaid's warning last week about possible civil war in Iraq. There are no good military options left in Iraq. Two leading US senators, a bipartisan duo, say that the country is already in civil war. Quoting the 8/7/06 AFP article,

WASHINGTON (AFP) - There are no good military options for the United States in Iraq, two top US senators said, describing the country as in the midst of a civil war and suggested that Washington convene a high-level diplomatic conference involving regional powers.
However Republican Chuck Hagel and Democrat Christpher Dodd, both senior members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, gave few further details on the proposal.
"A cold hard assessment that Iraq is not going to turn out the way we were promised it was and, that's a fact," said Hagel, interviewed on the CBS show "Face the Nation."
"This is a civil war," said Dodd. "I don't believe that US military people can play referee in that kind of situation."
Both Hagel and Dodd referred to testimony in Congress Thursday by General John Abizaid, the top US commander in the Middle East, who said that Iraq could slide into civil war if Iraqis do not take decisive action to stop it.

The entire mid-east region seems to be on the brink of war unless the U.N. can do something quickly. It occurs to me that the United Nations does not have something called a "War-making Force." (That, unfortunately, has been the U.S.' role.) The U.N. does have a history of sending out "Peace-keepers." They need to get on the ball.
Tags: Democrats joe lieberman lieberman ned lamont Middle East ned lamont Iraq election politics News