Condescension

The argument that the right has put forward stating that the current debate in Washington over the surge is somehow injurious to our force's morale smacks to me of the most insidious elitism and condescension towards those troops. More than John Kerry's botched joke, the idea that the act of discussing and debating the best course of action in Iraq somehow undermines our support of our armed forces is more than a bit offensive. This is Peter Pace, yesterday:

A top Pentagon leader weighed in yesterday on the war debate and appeared to undercut the argument advanced by the White House and many GOP lawmakers that a congressional debate challenging the Bush plan would hurt troop morale.

"There's no doubt in my mind that the dialogue here in Washington strengthens our democracy. Period," Marine Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, testified before the House Armed Services Committee. He added that potential enemies may take some comfort from the rancor but said they "don't have a clue how democracy works."

If you believe that open debate, reasonable discussion, and the effective interplay of three branches of government is inimical to the prosecution of the war, then what is the alternative? The latitude that any tyrant enjoys, I suppose. To assume that our troops are incapable of understanding that our government needs to constantly scrutinize the progress or lack thereof in this war is to infantalize them.

Keep in mind, this is not Carl Levin's quote above, it is Peter Pace's.