Civil war, shmivil war
Once again, we witness the great delusion of Bush and his fellow bubble-dwellers. Consider, via Think Progress, what two leading generals have had to say recently about what's going on in Iraq:
John Abizaid, Commander of the U.S. Central Command: "I believe that the sectarian violence is probably is as bad as I’ve seen it in Baghdad in particular, and that if not stopped, it is possible that Iraq could move toward civil war."
Peter Pace, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff: "I believe we do have the possibility of that devolving to a civil war."
In other words, things are really bad and civil war is a possibility. (Some of us have argued that there is already civil war in Iraq, but that's a separate matter.)
The problem is not with the generals but with the occupant of the Oval Office, the man still calling the shots. How can he lead through the fog of denial? Here's what he said about Iraq: "You know, I hear people say, Well, civil war this, civil war that. The Iraqi people decided against civil war when they went to the ballot box. And a unity government is working to respond to the will of the people. And, frankly, it’s quite a remarkable achievement on the political front."
Well, it is remarkable, in a way. And whatever my criticisms of the war, I do want to see a democratic Iraq. The problem is that the conduct of the war, as well as of the occupation, has been so poor, and much of this can be traced back to the utter lack of preparation that accompanied U.S. forces into the country back in 2003. However well the military handled itself, the decision-makers back in Washington didn't seem to know what they were getting themselves, and their country, into.
The war may or may not be justifiable in and of itself, but the conduct of the war has been a failure. The simple fact is that the U.S. is largely occupying a country where sectarian violence, as well as violence against the occupying force, rages in spite of, and to some extent because of, the occupation. And the problem with Bush is not just that he's made some bad decisions, and may yet make many more, but that he doesn't even seem to understand the nature of the problem in Iraq. Yes, it was wonderful to see those millions of Iraqi voters courageously, defiantly going to the polls. And I have no doubt that many Iraqis, perhaps a large majority of them, have "decided against civil war" and object to the ongoing sectarian violence. Surely many of them just want to live in peace.
But the reality is the violence -- and that violence amounts to civil war or at least to a state approximating civil war. America's leading generals understand this. Iraqis understand this. Observers around the world understand this. George Bush, the Boy in the Bubble, evidently does not.
Simply put, Bush has never really gotten it.
And it is that ignorance, willful or otherwise, that has turned a dubious war to begin with into the devastating debacle that it has become.
(See also Crooks and Liars, which has the video. Steve Soto has more, as does Atrios.)
John Abizaid, Commander of the U.S. Central Command: "I believe that the sectarian violence is probably is as bad as I’ve seen it in Baghdad in particular, and that if not stopped, it is possible that Iraq could move toward civil war."
Peter Pace, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff: "I believe we do have the possibility of that devolving to a civil war."
In other words, things are really bad and civil war is a possibility. (Some of us have argued that there is already civil war in Iraq, but that's a separate matter.)
The problem is not with the generals but with the occupant of the Oval Office, the man still calling the shots. How can he lead through the fog of denial? Here's what he said about Iraq: "You know, I hear people say, Well, civil war this, civil war that. The Iraqi people decided against civil war when they went to the ballot box. And a unity government is working to respond to the will of the people. And, frankly, it’s quite a remarkable achievement on the political front."
Well, it is remarkable, in a way. And whatever my criticisms of the war, I do want to see a democratic Iraq. The problem is that the conduct of the war, as well as of the occupation, has been so poor, and much of this can be traced back to the utter lack of preparation that accompanied U.S. forces into the country back in 2003. However well the military handled itself, the decision-makers back in Washington didn't seem to know what they were getting themselves, and their country, into.
The war may or may not be justifiable in and of itself, but the conduct of the war has been a failure. The simple fact is that the U.S. is largely occupying a country where sectarian violence, as well as violence against the occupying force, rages in spite of, and to some extent because of, the occupation. And the problem with Bush is not just that he's made some bad decisions, and may yet make many more, but that he doesn't even seem to understand the nature of the problem in Iraq. Yes, it was wonderful to see those millions of Iraqi voters courageously, defiantly going to the polls. And I have no doubt that many Iraqis, perhaps a large majority of them, have "decided against civil war" and object to the ongoing sectarian violence. Surely many of them just want to live in peace.
But the reality is the violence -- and that violence amounts to civil war or at least to a state approximating civil war. America's leading generals understand this. Iraqis understand this. Observers around the world understand this. George Bush, the Boy in the Bubble, evidently does not.
Simply put, Bush has never really gotten it.
And it is that ignorance, willful or otherwise, that has turned a dubious war to begin with into the devastating debacle that it has become.
(See also Crooks and Liars, which has the video. Steve Soto has more, as does Atrios.)
posted by Michael J.W. Stickings at
7:52 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home