Who's Sorry Now?
It was a pleasant weekend for those of us who have been against the Iraq War from the beginning. The Washington Post had an article on the bitterness and regrets of those in the Bush administration who concocted and ran the war and have now left. Some of them have nightmares. Nothing like the nightmares of the prisoners of Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo or the Black Sites, but hey, a few nightmares are progress. Maybe they will have more, and then they will have mental breakdowns and they can experience electroshock therapy -- that would be a nice payback for them. In the New York Times magazine, there was an article about Kanan Makiya, an exiled Iraqi scholar who was a big cheerleader for the war, and who seems to have given Bush and Cheney a rationale that they could use as a cover for their real motives. At the end of the article, there's an interesting interview with Ali Allawi, who was the Minister of Finance in the Iraqi transitional government in 2005 and into 2006. Allawi was opposed to the war, but went to Iraq to try and put Humpty back together again. He failed. And, of course, there's Blackwater. Whoops. Americans have recently gotten a good look at our very own right wing death squad (paid for by us to the tune of 445,000 per soldier, per year), and we know there are more RWDSs where that one came from. And I loved the headline of David "the Pig" Brooks' op-ed in last week's Times, "The Republican Collapse" -- is there a lovelier phrase? I used to send letters to David Brooks asking when the New York Times was going to fire him. He never responded.
All the same, though, the emerging consensus (another vast rightwing conspiracy to my mind) is that everyone's intentions were good, if not great. Makiya, for example, knew all the horrors that Saddam Hussein had committed against the Iraqis and the Iranians, and just wanted to get him out of there, even if the odds, as he calculated them, against actually establishing a stable government were 20-1. He thought Ahmed Chalabi was going to be the Nelson Mandela of Iraq. And the same for Meghan O' Sullivan, who was about THIRTY when the fates of the Iraqis were put into her hands -- she just wanted to help. As for Karl Rove and that Permanent Republican Majority -- well, he didn't mean to hurt anyone -- really, the one who's been hurt here is Karl himself (also the refrain of Clarence Thomas).
What I see here, especially when you add in the Israelis and the Neocons and Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, is a perfect storm of opportunism, opportunism compounded of ignorance, greed, self-regard, power-lust, and sheer shallowness. "Opportunism" is when you use someone else for your own ends, thinking that you will pretend to give the other guy what he wants and in doing so, you will get what you want. I think the World Champion Opportunist Award these days goes to those Israelis who ally themselves with the American Rapture people, knowing full well that in Rapture theology, the wholesale conversion of the Jews is the prerequisite for the Second Coming of Jesus. These Israelis will work with people who anticipate another Holocaust -- who hope for it -- in order to get American money and arms for Israel. That is opportunism taken to a new level -- but not that new.
The Iraqi exiles thought they would use the American government and military to get their country back. The Neocons and Israel thought they would use the Americans to get rid of Saddam and remake the Middle East so that Israel would be more secure. Rove thought he would use "war" to entrench his power base. Cheney thought he would use the exiled Iraqis to get access to Iraqi oil fields and to establish an authoritarian presidency in the US. Bush thought he would use everyone to get a sense that he had both avenged his father and outdone him. Tony Blair thought he would use his alliance with Bush to press some of his own programs, like helping Africa and distinguishing Britain from Europe. Rumsfeld thought he would use the war to remake and outsource the army, thereby enriching his friends. Erik Prince thought he would use the American taxpayers to get rich and also to move toward an American theocracy. The religious right thought they would use the war and consequent "patriotism" issues to consolidate, fleece, and militarize their base. The Free Market theorists thought they would use taxpayer money to experiment with privatizing the Iraqi economy. The result is failure and recrimination, not to mention a refusal by almost every one of these people to take responsibility for what they've done. As they see it these days, bad things in Iraq just happened somehow.
Opportunism often looks good on the surface, but it is based on manipulation rather than relationship, and masks an absolute misunderstanding of human nature. What happened with the Iraq war was no mistake and no accident. It grew out of the failure of conservatives, from the time of Ronald Reagan, at least, to understand and accept the necessity of government in a complex and populous society, and therefore to think about what government could and should do. The more they refused to think about it, the less they knew. Reagan, with his smiling soothing phrases and his tone of benign condescension, served as an appealing front man for what the nasty and unlamented Lee Atwater himself called "ruthless ambitions and moral decay". Reagan Republicans thought of government as a mechanism for increasing their own power and wealth. They never accepted that the US has many different regions, ethnicities, and enclaves, all of which have equal claim to citizenship. From at least the 1960s, the Republican Party has worked actively to pit region against region, class against class, and ethnicity against ethnicity, and to reap profits therefrom. Men like Karl Rove came to think habitually in terms of propaganda, manipulation, and deceit.
These were the people Makiya and Chalabi turned to for help against Saddam. These were people who were so cavalier that they didn't bother to read the reports of their own experts about how difficult the aftermath of the invasion would be. Allawi was smarter, though. He says in the Times, "Ahmad Chalabi, Kanan Makiya, all of these people became media stars, but their influence on decision making was next to nothing. I can't believe that a person like Wolfowitz or Cheney or whoever it was in the neocon cabal would allow themselves to be manipulated... They are far too cynical. They have their own agendas. And these agendas were boosted by Iraqis who seemed to be singing from the same song sheet. The Iraqis gave them credibility, gave them substance. But I don't think they were influenced by them."
Various rightwingers maintain that if the Iraq adventure had worked out, we would all be praising the Bush administration. What they don't understand is that it could not have worked out because of how it was conceived and the shallowness of the motives behind it. This was evident in 2003. In fact, it was evident in 2000. When the vote in Florida turned out to be rigged, or at least suspect, Bush and Cheney did, not what honorable men to, but what opportunists do -- they used intimidation (against the vote counters) and influence (on the Supreme Court, notably with Clarence Thomas) to seize what might or might not have been theirs by right (everyone who has read The Best Election Money Can Buy knows that Jeb and Katherine Harris also set up the Florida vote ahead of time, but I think it was in the counting that the real theft took place). Bush could have exerted himself both publicly and privately to make the vote count as scrupulous as possible. He did not. The apple was offered to him and he bit it. He never understood what elections represent in the US -- not seizure of power but acceptance of responsibility -- and so he has never understood his position or his job. His idea and Cheney's idea was that they were going to use their jobs to get what they could for themselves and their powerbase, just as they used the election controversy to get the job. They have surrounded themselves with people of like mind and those who don't think this way have left or been forced out.
The clusterf**k of opportunism that is the last seven years was bound to end in a cluster of fingerpointing and grievance. People hate feeling used and betrayed, even as they are using and betraying others. Remember when Bush expressed his annoyance at the ingratitude of the Iraqis? And have you noted the resentment of the religious right at being the last to know that nobody in the Bush administration actually cares about their agenda? Were the Republicans grateful to Katherine Harris? Nope -- they let her humiliate herself in front of the whole nation. Those Iraqis -- they sure don't show much loyalty to Blackwater. Even Alan Greenspan has done what he can to divorce himself from the very people he sucked up to five years ago.
Is it possible to have no sense of civic responsibility at all? Yes -- that's what Free Market theory, and the last generation of Republican culture is about. It elevates commerce and deal-making above every other human activity, and therefore glorifies opportunism. A generation of coaching by Free Market gurus has robbed Americans of the means of a decent existence.The reason we can't get out of Iraq is that none of the opportunists dares to admit why he or she wanted to make a war there in the first place, and so we, the American people, don't actually know what the goal was and can't ever judge whether it has been achieved. Though Cheney's goal was to secure the oil, he can't admit that to the Iraqis, who don't want to give up the oil. If the Iraqis' goal was to use our military to fight the battle and then take over themselves, they ceded that goal every time they flattered the Americans. If the Israelis consider their existence to be worth every American sacrifice of money, corruption, and human life, they dare not say so. If the military industrial complex really is happy to profit from death and destruction, do they actually pretend to their children that they are human? A lot of PTSD says they do. I could go on.
In order to gain power, the Republicans long ago (and knowingly, thanks, Mr. Atwater and others) handed the citizenry, and themselves, a bill of goods, a set of philosophical and economic ideas that were bankrupt. The citizenry, suckers that we were, bought it because it appealed to their worst selves. The price we have paid and will continue to pay in Iraq for this bad bargain is a steep one, and could break the bank. But if we don't understand how we got here, we could buy it again, because the politicians and the pundits still have it for sale.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
This administration has shown a moral bankruptcy unlike any other. The administration used Colin Powell and tossed him aside, similarly with Tony Blair, Kristine Todd Whitman, several generals, and countless others. Katherine Harris was used to steal an election and then shunted. All are diminished by contact with Bush. The administration had a rigid orthodoxy and only true believers were allowed into the inner circle. Once inside, they pushed Bush as a diety. His ego probably would not allow anything less. It is a failed and bankrupt administration and I hope historians give Bush his rightful place at the bottom of the list of presidents. He has earned it!
Free Market theory and/or Opportunis
My fellow Americans, we live in a fascist state.
Blog on.
Why distract yourself with speculative reasoning when the ANSWER on Iraq INVASION has been in front of your face all this time??
The purpose of Iraq INVASION is for Bush-Cheney to spend down all USTaxpayer money out of USTreasury and shovel it into pockets of their ULTRA RICH CORRUPT CORPORATE PROFITEER WELFARE QUEENS privatizing this "war". And capturing oil fields for Big Oil's profits.
It's about THE BOTTOM LINE, stupid.
Always look for the answer to: WHO'S MAKING THE MONEY?
Amen
darker, absolutely! Before bush even had the 2000 nomination, I knew three things: He would win by dirty tricks, he would start a war, and oil prices would go sky high.
When an electorate can be fooled as easily as this one has been since Nixon, what hope is there? Most people still don't realize that this country is being controlled by fascists working for global corporations. Democracy is a joke.
"A pleasant week" ?!
I was against this war, but I find this kind of smugness over such a disaster discomforting.
Why is it discomforting coming from a critic of the War from its inception as an idea??
Why is not the "smugness" of the various Republican apologists, from Bush- Cheney, through Limbaugh, Hannity,O'Riley to "Pay- me I'll say anything" Williams discomforting?
Why is it that you Republicans and Republican sympathizers and Wannabees always say " do as I say, not as I do'/. read gary Hart's " Interview with Cheney" on this Blog and you'll see what I mean about your attitude.
i never bought their crap. not for a second.
i even looked into political assylum in france.
i am tired of people writing and saying that "everyone" wanted "something" done after September 11th, and THAT is how "we" all got caught up in the moment. i NEVER wanted either war, and i knew what ALL nations besides ours knew: you cannot hunt down "terror." you cannot hunt down and destroy that which is like the fog.
so long as this nation exists in a state of willful ignorance and hypocrisy, practicing a passive-aggressive imperialism, and supporting butchers--so long as they help us to get never-ending lobster-fests (at Red Lobster), and the cheapest gas in the world (besides Bandar Bush and his subjects)--there will be people desperate enough to spend years among us waiting for the best opportunity to use commercial aircraft as missiles.
what we do now does not just send ripples into the future, it sends tsunamis.
I'm late reading this but need to comment:
most sadly, this is one of the best articles I've ever read.
Ms. Smiley, you should submit this to every newspaper and blog in the country.
I suppose I can say I was opposed to the Iraq war since before the beginning, having commented with considerable apprehension to a friend about 30 minutes after the plane hit the second tower on 9/11, that the one sure result of this would be a move to topple Saddam.
But it was hardly a "pleasant weekend" for me, with the war dragging on and no very likely chance we'll be out of it by the end of this decade, no matter who wins next fall.
American liberals foolishly misconstrue vindication with victory, no matter how many times they have the football pulled away from their feet. They think that proving they were right is enough to win them some political advantage. Their opponents, thick-headed though they are, do not make this mistake.
So while I agree with most of the points in this article, I take very little pleasure in it. I sense in all this self-congratulation the germ of another John Kerry campaign. Who's sorry now? If we let another presidential election slip out of our grasp, we will be.
Don't mean to do something and say you are sorry then I'll believe it. But make plans and deliberately do something like invading IRAQ on false premise --I can't accept sorry as an excuse just because it failed to materialize as it was supposed to. May they all rest in hell.
"....Vario
Yes, and if Hitler had won the war we'd all be speaking German and saying that the Jews really did have go to, for the good of all mankind. But that still wouldn't make what Hitler or Bush did right.
I am not up on novels, i.e., I do not read many novels! I'm sorry! I didn't know anything about you Jane Smiley until now.
Ms. Smiley...
The further I got into your analysis the more I thought you must be a professional psychoanalyst - and a rather brilliant one at that.
May I say, wow? "WOW!"
And thank you.
Ms. Smiley -
You've summed up the Bush administration and this horrible war in probably the most precise way I've seen so far. I LOVED your description of the
"perfect storm of opportunism, opportunism compounded of ignorance, greed, self-regard, power-lust, and sheer shallowness. "Opportunism" is when you use someone else for your own ends, thinking that you will pretend to give the other guy what he wants and in doing so, you will get what you want."
Amazing, and so on the mark.
And, surprisingly, you're one of the few writers I've seen to date who states one of the most obvious reasons this administration ever invaded Iraq -- to avenge Saddam Hussein's mistreatment of Poor Georgie W's Daddy. Georgie wanted to settle the score for pappa, and he had the entire US military and most of its citizens behind him. How pathetically obvious. Why did it take Congress years to figure it out? I got it the very night the first bombs started flying into Baghdad. Shock and awe my a$$. Oil for Dick, Revenge for George, Vast Wealth for Erik Prince, ad nauseum...
Thank you for that article. It accurately and succinctly sets out all that is wrong with the current power base in the U.S. I hope by opening up peoples' eyes to the truth something can be done to rectify things.
Sorry if my comment appears twice.
Smiley's piece here is a strong example of her sharp eyes and clear analysis. She continues to "speak truth to power".
"Who's Sorry Now?" was written in 1923, music by Ted Snyder, lyrics by Bert Kalmar and Harry Ruby. The last two lines are a good tag for Smiley's piece:
You had your way, now you must pay,
We're glad that you're sorry now.
Jane Smiley, you just keep zinging hardballs like this one right in there.
The problem with the declarations of evil, conspiracies with Israel, and "gangsters and killers" talk, is that, correct or not, it is contrary to the American ideal of itself. The voters will reject that rhetoric. They are looking for positive leadership in a sea of fear, corruption, and mis/dis information. Who will win the competition for ideas? Yes, this leader will have to overcome the forces of the economic status quo. Yes, the public needs to see the "assault on reason" for what it is. More importantly, the voters need to see: integrity; the strength to provide leadership on a world stage; and the vision and wisdom to know the difference between "evil doers" and "bad ideas" that have gone from bad to evil. Is that leader on the stage yet? If so, the voters are anxiously waiting.
I apologize for not actually replying to the posted comment, but.......
This country is fucked, the simple truth and I hope I don't get kicked off for this.
The Dem's or Rep's care only for the money, face it, until we come up with a viable alternate to the mainstream, we the people are history and say hello to fascism. Sorry, but that is the way it is, you can post and call your representative until you are worn out, but until you make your voice heard in a real way and I will let you decide what I mean, we the free people of this country are done.
"what every you heard.....
And whom do you think you kid?? American voters "reject rhetoric"?? " looking for positive leadership"?? "..competi
Are you serious, or is this John Stuart and COlbert making fun under a pen name??
You are supposedly refering to the goddamn same people who voted for Bush, who listen to Limbaugh, Hannity, O'reilly and Ann Coulter;
Are you suggesting that they, or any of them have or has the ability to apply the intellect required to be as you suggest.
Is Joke you making!!
Uhhh, Barrister, you're obviously not American.
Here, go to school:
campaigns (basics of advertising)
http://www
voting in America
http://www
We are indeed about to buy it again with the planned invasion of Iran. As a nation, too many of us are unwilling to make the slightest sacrifice to hold a completely corrupt government accountable.
We won't be a free people for very much longer.
You're right in saying that "We won't be a free people for very much longer." Vote for Hillary and we'll get a Marxist society faster than anyone could have ever imagined. You'll have to get her permission to wipe your own ass and beg for toilet paper because she'll have all of your money.
We'd have to go a very long way to get to a Marxist society, since we are in such a corporatist society. You obviously have no clue what Marxism is about if you think Hillary is going there. She is most likely the most right winger of all the Dems going for president.
Oh, and if you look at who has the money now, it sure isn't the left wingers.
JackAss
You call the European and Canadian Societies "Marxist"?
They who enjoy a better standard of Education, Health, Housing etc. etc. for EVERY CITIZEN than we do??
You reallly bsuck
Of course that's what happened to you during Bill Clinton's presidency. It sounds like that administration even furnished you with a free lobotomy.
What money?
"The citizenry, suckers that we were, bought it because it appealed to their worst selves. The price we have paid and will continue to pay in Iraq for this bad bargain is a steep one, and could break the bank. But if we don't understand how we got here, we could buy it again, because the politicians and the pundits still have it for sale."
That really says it all. If we the greedy and opportunistic people refuse to give up our "American way of life" or even admit our addiction , there is no doubt that we WILL buy again (no way that we are going to give up our SUV's and limitless kids). And the very planet itself will have to take care of it for us. It won't be pretty.
No one to blame but ourselves.
Thanks again, Jane, for a brilliant analysis.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
