Potential Starting Point for the Marginalization of the Democrat Party

From the AP:

The American military's continued presence in Iraq is fanning the flames of conflict, and signals the need for a new detailed timeline to bring the troops home, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy said Thursday.

Just three days before the Iraqi people go to the polls to elect a new government, the Massachusetts Democrat said America must give Iraq back to its people rather than continue an occupation that parallels the failed politics of the Vietnam war.

. . . .

"There may well be violence as we disengage militarily from Iraq and Iraq disengages politically from us, but there will be much more violence if we continue our present dangerous and destabilizing course," said Kennedy. "It will not be easy to extricate ourselves from Iraq, but we must begin."

. . . .

Now, Kennedy said, the United States and the insurgents are both battling for the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people and the U.S. is losing.

It may be unremarkable that Senator Kennedy is advocating a leave-and-let-them-drown strategy, but if other Democrats get into the car with Senator Kennedy (note: yes, I know these are cheap metaphors at the expense of Senator Kennedy), then this will be a significant moment for the Democrats. It may mark the beginning of a Democrat party that takes an until-now unimaginable position: Let's go home and let the terrorists win this one. If this becomes a widespread Democrat position, this may mark the start of the long-term marginalization of the Democrat party.

To be fair to Senator Kennedy, his solution involves having the U.S. withdraw and then having the United Nations come in to help the Iraqi government "take shape and draft a constitution." This seems well reasoned, except that a U.S. withdrawal would likely be followed not by a constitutional democracy, but by a tyrannical regime run by Saddam loyalist and terrorists. Would the U.N. help that government "take shape and draft a constitution"? Would it be a proud moment for Senator Kennedy and the Democrat party when the current Iraqi government is executed (constitutionally, of course) by the new, U.N.-supported Iraqi government?

There may be a more cynical reason for supporting the Kennedy Solution: the 2006 mid-term elections. Perhaps having the U.S. leave Iraq in defeat, as Senator Kennedy suggests, would hurt Republican candidates and help Democrats in the mid-term elections. The converse, however, may also apply. If the U.S. is succeeding in Iraq on Election Day 2006, advocates of the Kennedy Solution will have a difficult time explaining their support for a U.S. surrender.