
                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: WEDNESDAY, April 3, 1991                   TAG: 9104030496
SECTION: EDITORIAL                    PAGE: A-7   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: CAL THOMAS
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Medium

DEMOCRATS TO PAY FOR GULF ERRORS

DEMOCRATS' nearly unanimous opposition to initiating military action in the Persian Gulf War, and the certainty that Republicans will use that opposition in 1992 to go after their majorities in Congress, has Democrats exhibiting symptoms of shell shock before the political war even begins.

In a new Los Angeles Times Poll, 51 percent of those surveyed nationally would prefer to be represented in Congress by a Republican. Included are traditional Democratic groups such as blacks, Latinos, women and low-income Americans.

The Democrats are trying to reduce collateral damage from numerous speeches and votes on the Senate and House floors opposing President Bush's decision to fight. Some Democrats and their editorial apologists denounce the "politicizing" of the anti-war votes. They also say that the victory was an "American victory" and not a victory for Republicans. They say President Bush ought not to get all the credit.

Does anyone doubt that if the war had gone badly, Democrats would be blaming President Bush and calling for his defeat in the next election?

Anthony Lake, who teaches international relations at Mount Holyoke College, wrote in The New York Times, " . . . we should be But Democrats, now trying to hide behind "conscience," as if it were a proper defense for bad judgment, set the debate's terms early on. Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell said during the debate over the war resolution, "The essence of democracy is accountability, and if immediate war occurs, that resolution and those who voted for it must share that accountability."

Surely Mitchell meant to set up Bush for a very big political fall in the event the war had gone badly, with the tens of thousands of casualties he and others predicted. But, following Mitchell's logic, accountability also means strong dividends for funds wisely invested.

Accountability for Democrats might start with Minnesota's Sen. Paul Wellstone, who predicted the country would be "torn apart."

Sen. Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts called on the Senate to "save the president from himself" and predicted the war would not be "quick and decisive," but would produce "3,000 casualties a week, with 700 dead, for as long as the war goes on."

Delaware Sen. Joseph Biden dismissed estimates of low casualties, questioning "the reliability of such predictions," and then making his own prediction that the allied coalition would not hold together during a war."

North Carolina Sen. Terry Sanford charged that going to war demonstrated "a lack of real courage" and that war would "guarantee . . . almost certain loss of many American lives." That will play nicely in TV commercials, should Sanford seek re-election next year.

There's plenty to use against Democrats who remained obstinate after the war, too. Rather than admit they were wrong, many kept up the attack or said "we'll never know" whether sanctions "might" have worked.

Illinois Sen. Paul Simon went even farther. On Feb. 5, after victory was secured, Simon groused over the success of the sophisticated weapons that helped keep casualties low: " . . . expenditures for . . . exotic forms of destruction make no more sense today than they did on Jan. 14 . . . ."

Mitchell is right when he says "the essence of democracy is accountability." Fair is fair. That's why the Persian Gulf conflict will, and should, be replayed during the 1992 political season. Los Angeles Times Syndicate

Keywords:
POLITICS

by CNB