Theodore Roosevelt, one of our greatest presidents, once said, "It is not the critic who counts."
Rather, admonished Roosevelt, "the credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, and comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly."
Right now, our commander in chief and those he commands are daring greatly and our brave warriors are paying with blood, sweat and tears. Yet, many in Congress prefer to sit in the arena stands and offer scorn rather than support.
For a half-century, the Middle East has been a cauldron of brutality, war and despair. The instability has threatened the globe and reached our shores with a stark awakening on Sept. 11. It is for this reason that our involvement there is so important.
Yet, as our efforts in Iraq encounter fierce resistance from a determined and evil enemy, support among politicians at home has waned. Instead, many of my colleagues prefer to support a nonbinding resolution that expresses disapproval of the president's plan to reinforce our troops in Iraq.
Voting for such a resolution is not leadership; it is criticism -- criticism without offering alternative solutions. While this resolution may be legally toothless, it is full of meaning.
Voting to condemn the president's plan is a vote of no confidence in the mission that we have told our troops to carry out. It is also a smack to the face of Gen. David Patraeus, just days after the Senate voted unanimously to support his leadership of our troops in Iraq. "Godspeed General," said one of my colleagues, before introducing the very resolution that would undermine his authority.
This is not leadership. We were elected to make tough decisions and that requires understanding what our choices are.
However, I am afraid the critics do not acknowledge the real choices before us. We have only three: continue the unworkable status quo, admit defeat and withdraw or renew our strength until we win.
I can respect my colleagues who disagree with the president's strategy, but only if they exercise leadership and support an alternative solution, one that proposes a serious path to victory or announces defeat and ends our involvement immediately. If you do not support sending reinforcement to Iraq, then have the courage to introduce legislation blocking that action. While I believe this is shortsighted and wrong, at least it would be genuine leadership.
My hope is that senators would stop trying to look to the past in order to lay blame, and remember that the United States is locked in a struggle larger than Iraq. It is a struggle of security, hope and freedom versus insecurity, despair and fear. Congress should understand the stakes and demonstrate real leadership. This is not President Bush's war, it is freedom's war and we all share responsibility for the outcome.
Almost 100 years later, Roosevelt is still correct. The critic "who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better," is destined to be relegated to that terrible place "with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat."
There is only one policy worthy of the blood and sweat of our troops: a policy that completes our mission with dignity, honor and victory.
Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C, is a member of the Foreign Relations Committee.
