MACHIAVELLIAN IRAQ

It pains me to even approach a war, especially one as horrific as our current one in Iraq, with a Machiavellian view, but I feel it is necessary. Probably the biggest difference between Democrats and Republicans in my lifetime, is that the Republicans view everything as Machiavelli would, while the Democrats only seem to do so when it can embarrass them. I have reluctantly concluded that if the Democrats wish to build on or even just maintain the power that they have just acquired, they must start being more Machiavellian, especially on big issues like the Iraq war. So with an ache in my heart, I hesitantly would like to give my Machiavellian analysis of President Bush’s request for an escalation of troops over in the Iraq.

First let me state the obvious. This escalation is nothing more than a political ploy by Bush to give the appearance that he has done everything possible to “win” this war before finally signaling for a reduction in troops and eventually a complete withdrawal. This is about as immoral a military strategy as a military strategy can be. Sending more brave men and women into harms way, just so you can cover your own ass politically. A true act of a coward.
So morally, it would be imperative that the Democrats do everything in their power to stop this escalation, which is the precise stance that Barack Obama has taken. On the Senate floor he stated that he would do everything in his power to block it. Ted Kennedy, the moral touchstone of the Democratic party, has introduced legislation that would require congressional approval of any increase in the troops in Iraq.
Morally, these are the correct steps to be taken, but I fear that the best political move requires that the Democrats not stop this escalation, that more troops are sent to Iraq. Here is my reasoning.
I believe that in 2008, the number one issue on voters minds will be Iraq, and the presidential candidate that can provide a solution to ending the war will win overwhelmingly. If the Democrats are successful in blocking this escalation, then President Bush, and the few allies he has left, will be able to claim that the Iraq war could have been won, if only he was able to put more troops in. If you think that this is insane talk, just realize that there are still many conservatives that believe that we could have won in Vietnam if only given a few more years.
What is important politically is that one of these people will be John McCain. Blocking this escalation give McCain an out, a plank to run on. “I was right, we could have achieved victory in Iraq, if the Democrats had not blocked the escalation.” Who knows who will buy this, but from a Machiavellian view point, why give it to him?
Especially when, if the Democrats do not block the escalation, then McCani is really in a difficult position. For if it is not blocked, and as nearly every military expert has predicted, it does not help matters in Iraq, then McCain’s credibility in Iraq is shattered. More importantly, it emboldens the Democratic candidates. They can argue that they tried to stop the escalation, but couldn’t, because of President Bush. Therefore, the only way for this country to do what is right in Iraq, is to have the Congress and the President on the same page, ergo, a Democratic President.
So while not blocking this escalation means more Americans being put in harms way, it will help the Democrats win control of the White House in 2008. As I stated earlier, one of the most immoral stances to take, but one of the most Machiavellian as well.