Wednesday, January 10, 2007
President Bush Living in La-La Land
Listening to President Bush speak tonight, I couldn't help but wonder where he is living... Pleasantville? The Truman Show? La-La Land?
He (or his speechwriter and advisors) seem to have missed the most salient point. The sectarian violence in Iraq isn't about Sunni and Shii. Iraqi Sunnis and Shiis have historically gotten along well. It's about politics. It's about who supported America's strong man, Saddam Hussein back when he was still our buddy. It's about who supports the current American sponsored government, and who doesn't. It's about who cooperated with American troops and who didn't. That is the fundamental, root source of the conflict -- not concerns about sectarian theological differences.
As long as the US is involved, the conflict will escalate. The reprisals against collaborators will grow ever more intense. The stakes for those who are in power (more or less) will become higher and higher, as the guarantee of disruption and wholesale rebellion grows with each passing day they are seen as sell outs to the US occupation.
And, yes, that's what most of the world perceives it as. Not a war. Not a humanitarian effort to bring freedom to Iraq. But an occupation aimed as ensuring the US and Israel have access to Iraq's oil.
The resistence (otherwise known as terrorists in Bush's lingo) perceives themselves as trying to oust an invading and occupying army. Stepping up the number of troops on police duty isn't going to solve that problem.The longer we are there, the more intense the resistence will become.
President Bush did have one thing right. If we leave now, Iraq will descend into chaos. I'm pretty sure that is accurrate. What he didn't say, was that when we leave in a year, or two or ten, that chaos will no doubt be even worse, the attrocities even more horrific.
I don't see any hope of the US and the new Iraqi government transforming Iraq into some fairy tale democracy like Bush spoke of. That has to be done by the Iraqis, not imposed by the army of another country. The longer we are there, the longer it will take for Iraqi to achieve those dreams after we leave. ¶ 9:43 PM
He (or his speechwriter and advisors) seem to have missed the most salient point. The sectarian violence in Iraq isn't about Sunni and Shii. Iraqi Sunnis and Shiis have historically gotten along well. It's about politics. It's about who supported America's strong man, Saddam Hussein back when he was still our buddy. It's about who supports the current American sponsored government, and who doesn't. It's about who cooperated with American troops and who didn't. That is the fundamental, root source of the conflict -- not concerns about sectarian theological differences.
As long as the US is involved, the conflict will escalate. The reprisals against collaborators will grow ever more intense. The stakes for those who are in power (more or less) will become higher and higher, as the guarantee of disruption and wholesale rebellion grows with each passing day they are seen as sell outs to the US occupation.
And, yes, that's what most of the world perceives it as. Not a war. Not a humanitarian effort to bring freedom to Iraq. But an occupation aimed as ensuring the US and Israel have access to Iraq's oil.
The resistence (otherwise known as terrorists in Bush's lingo) perceives themselves as trying to oust an invading and occupying army. Stepping up the number of troops on police duty isn't going to solve that problem.The longer we are there, the more intense the resistence will become.
President Bush did have one thing right. If we leave now, Iraq will descend into chaos. I'm pretty sure that is accurrate. What he didn't say, was that when we leave in a year, or two or ten, that chaos will no doubt be even worse, the attrocities even more horrific.
I don't see any hope of the US and the new Iraqi government transforming Iraq into some fairy tale democracy like Bush spoke of. That has to be done by the Iraqis, not imposed by the army of another country. The longer we are there, the longer it will take for Iraqi to achieve those dreams after we leave. ¶ 9:43 PM
Comments:
<< Home
You hit the nail on the head with that one. How are 20,000 more soldiers going to turn Bush into a competent diplomat? We are just waiting for the next president to admit that Bush was a failure and stob the bleeding of our soldiers for a lost cause.
You said it just perfectly - Bush's "troop surge" will be a distraction for the rest of his term, and his successor will then have to detangle his mess and will be blamed for the "instability" when we finally leave.
Some of those poor troops are on their third tour- and they have been over there for an unmerciful length of time. But Bush promised the affluent that there would be no draft - (if they supported his war their kids would not have to go) - so to keep his promise he has to keep sending the volunteer army way past reason.
This is an unholy mess.
Post a Comment
Some of those poor troops are on their third tour- and they have been over there for an unmerciful length of time. But Bush promised the affluent that there would be no draft - (if they supported his war their kids would not have to go) - so to keep his promise he has to keep sending the volunteer army way past reason.
This is an unholy mess.
<< Home
