The Surge in Absurdity
There is nothing easier than making predictions about the behavior of the Bush administration. Look for the eventuality in every scenario that completely lacks logic and it will be the course pursued by this president. Only the zealot can process what he says but the damage done by his blunt force instruments is impossible to ignore. So let us all now prepare for the report of Gen. David Petraeus.
Is there anyone in America who doesn't already know what Petraeus and the president are going to tell the public? Here's a guess from someone who lives a good chunk of continent away from the Beltway: Progress is finally being made; it's not as much as we want but it would be wrong for America to abandon the Iraqi people now just as things are starting to improve.
The president and Hillary and General Petraeus can all talk about the al Anbar Province but that doesn't change what is happening in the rest of Iraq. It does, however, gloss over a few important points about Anbar. Bush does not expect the American public to question why the Sunnis in Anbar are cooperating with US forces. But there are some obvious conclusions to be reached about the state of the war in Anbar.
The White House and the Pentagon have made much of the alliances between Sunni leaders and American forces. They have combined in an effort to push back al Qaeda insurgents in al Anbar. That may be only part of their motivation, however. It's just as likely that the Sunnis, who dominate Anbar Province, are seeking to keep the majority Shiites at a distance. Isn't it possible that American soldiers are being used to facilitate the initial steps of Iraq's Balkanization while they fight to keep the city of Ramadi and the wider province of al Anbar free from al Qaeda's control?
Saddam Hussein, of course, was a Sunni, and when he was deposed by the US invasion and occupation, his sect was essentially disenfranchised. The decades of oppression the dictator had visited upon the Shiites to the south and the Kurds to the north have made political reconciliation between the sects virtually impossible, regardless of how many purple fingers are waved in the air. Obviously, the Sunnis know that at least some of the majority Shiite population wants revenge and atonement for the torture and loss under Saddam. Many Shiites believe the Sunni are accountable, if only by religious association with the crazed dictator. The insurgents being fought by the US and Sunni alliance in Anbar undoubtedly include Shiite fighters among the insurgency. There seems to be ample evidence that the Sunnis are interested in securing Anbar Province, the city of Ramadi, and Central Iraq as their own territory. This can hardly be described as a military victory for the US.
Whether the US leaves Iraq tomorrow or ten years from tomorrow, the only variable in the outcome will be the number of dead Americans and Iraqis. It seems inevitable that the country will be governed in three distinct regions with political power emanating, as it almost always has, from the mosque and the politically connected clerics. The Sunni will control the central reaches of Iraq while the Shiites will rule the south with considerable involvement from Iran. To the north, the Kurds will try to maintain a semblance of order while avoiding Turkish influence. Yes, it's possible they will war against each other but isn't that already happening?
What's happening in Al Anbar does not present a very cogent argument that we are making progress. But it is a sign the Sunni have staked out a claim on their piece of the countryside and we are helping them to secure it. This hardly seems worth another American life. But the president who avoided Vietnam is now citing that war as an example of why we should not leave Iraq and his rhetoric is as much a proof of his evasiveness as are his missing Texas National Guard records. Mr. Bush talks about the Vietnamese "boat people" as evidence America ought not to have left South Vietnam. Has he not noticed the millions of Iraqis fleeing to Lebanon, Jordan, Iran, and Syria? Ultimately, the argument can be made that America's refusal to withdraw from Vietnam is what helped secure the population's determination to adopt a communist style government. Our lingering presence in Iraq is almost certain to turn the Iraqis away from democracy and insure an Islamist regime. Occupiers never win because the occupied will always outfight them and out-die them and outlast them.
Democracy only succeeds when it spreads itself. If the Iraqis truly wanted what we are trying to force feed them, they would have tried to get it themselves, the same way our founders did. Instead, they are fighting amongst religious sects, goaded on by al Qaeda insurgents who hope to take advantage of the chaos, and our president has sent our children into the middle of this madness. This is not our fight. And every Republican or Democrat who thinks the Iraqi conflict is important to America needs to offer up at least one son or daughter to carry a gun into the desert. If they can't make that commitment, then they are hypocrites and cowards.
Otherwise, bring them all home. And do it now.
Follow James Moore on Twitter: www.twitter.com/moorethink
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
An realpolitik scenario in the making -- here's a correction/addendum reference worth serious contemplation for all thoughtful Americans -- a potential "Suez moment for America"
... spelling the end of American military neocolonial hegemony in the world, particularly in the middle east ..., not for lack of high-tech weaponry, but brought down by the house-of-cards financial/economic infrastructure of close to a 10 trillion dollars national debt, and close to ONE TRILLION US DOLLARS in the Central Bank of China:
Contemplate the implications in this reference:
http://www
Let's cut to the chase -- Most of Huffpo readers and contributors are NOT qualified military strategists. So, what legitimate business do they have to discuss or debate the fine points and the merits or their lack in "the surge": (translated: "escalation")?
Why do so many intelligent people unquestioningly get suckered into debating the merits of "the surge" -- a military strategy/tactic to achieve a political policy objective?
Why are we the people not getting to the bottom of this adventurous policy, and ask the REAL IMPORTANT FUNDAMENTAL POLICY QUESTION, in whose outcome and implications we all have a huge stake:
"WHY ARE THE FREEDOM-LOVING AND MORALLY JUST PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TACITLY OR ACTIVELY SUPPORTING A POLICY OF COLONIAL OR NEO-COLONIAL AGGRESSION AND OCCUPATION ON ANOTHER NATION?"
Would a conservative, a brilliant military strategist and a patriotic American like Dwight D. Eisenhower have supported or condoned this military adventure in Iraq?
... Let's look at the facts: When President Nasser of Egypt nationalized the Suez Canal, a strategically vital resource claimed by Britain and France, those two countries launched a coordinated military invasion of Egypt, in 1956. What was President Eisenhower's response to that colonial aggression? Not only did he not support nor countenance that military adventure of America's allies (members of NATO), he personally threatened the British prime minister that if Britain did not withdraw their troops forthwith, he would sell off the British Pound on the currency markets, ... and consequently would bring its value down to essentially nothing. What did British Prime Minister Anthony Eden do? He withdrew British troops, and thus ended the colonial misadventure!
That's a worthwhile historical lesson all intelligent Americans in and out of power should learn in debating ethically based international policy making and strategically sound policy management.
Let's learn from history:
http://www
http://en.
http://www
http://new
http://www
How many lives and how much treasure, both Iraqi and American, will we allow George Bush to sacrifice to his god of good and evil for 'greatness'? He might have been more specific. His 'sacrifice' has been answered: he is the greatest disappointment to hold the office of President in the US. Disempower the tyrant, now.
What kills me about the analogy is the despicable media's parroting of the position. The US had 545,000 troops in Vietnam, used more bomb tonnage over Vietnam than was used in all of WWII and over 55,000 young American men and women were killed along with several million Vietnamese. The number of people maimed has never been calculated. Nowhere in the MSM have these numbers been referenced. They just try to make it sound as if Bush's cynical, dishonest point about Vietnam is as legitimate as anyone else's.
Our invasion of Cambodia directly resulted in the genocidal takeover of Cambodia by the Khmer Rouge. It was our "enemy", the Vietnamese, who finally drove out the genocidal Khmer Rouge.
And Bush, who was of fighting age at the time, as was Cheney, Perle, Wolfowicz, and many other initiators of this war, supported the war to the last drop of other people's blood (as Hillary does now) while ducking the battle over their ideas.
For him to intentionally misstate that our leaving was an error is a lie as big as the lies he told to get us into Iraq. He and Cheney should be simultaneously impeached/removed just for the lies he told about Vietnam.
I haven't been able to figure out how the Sunnis were ever going to fit in to this new Iraqi government. How does one group " share power" or "money" with other groups. Would an oil deal that is advantageous to Sunnis direct money to just the Sunni? Wouldn't that be analogus to our government directing funds to a particular ethnic group. Democracies try to distribute tax revenues to all in an equitable way, from roads to libraries. I think as Noam Chomsky said before the U.S. invaded, that it would take another strongman like Sadam to hold Iraq together, otherwise I think a three state solution is the only alternative.
I am torn by my heartache over the death and maiming of American soldiers who signed up to defend OUR country and instead are being blown apart defending this fool's errand. I think Bush and company deserve to fail, but I can't be happy because it is our soldiers and Marines who are doing all the true suffering.
I would like to see us just get out. Let the Chinese sign contracts with the Kurds and Shia to pump oil, and they can send a chunk of their million-man army to protect the oil wells for a while.
What an excellent and clear thinking post. The up coming surge spin laid to waste for all to see. Bravo!
I'm still waiting for Bush to apologize for invading Iraq in the first place. After all, with all the evidence he used to justify the war being flat out wrong, he should admit he was wrong....w
If George admits ANYTHING, it would be the first time in human history that a psychopath like George admitted any wrongdoing!
Can anyone take even a half-way objective look at George and not say that THIS M*THERF*CKER IS CRAZY AS A BADGER!
This is NOT a close call. George belongs in a loony bin before he completes his destruction of this country!
an "aw shuckstering momentito"
Iraq will have a democracy. The Shiite mob will rule. And I mean rule.
This, courtesy of what was once a Constitutional, representative republic.
Here's a solution- get those damn corporations making bank to supply their own army. If Hallaburton and the Saudi's want Iraq- then hire more mercenaries. sick of our money & childrens blood being devoured for the benefit of the multinational conglomerates. As soon as we out this Administration there should be a new form of Corporate "head hunting"- Murdock, Murray and the other power & greed machines.
Cave Adsum
Now do you still in believe that the Iraqis
turned out in record numbers to vote LOL.
What an absurdidity. Fact is hardly anyone
showed up and the containers, white see thru
plastic showed they were mostly empty.
With all of this confusion in Iraq, who is stealing the oil?
I would like for you to pretend that you are Lord Voldemort, looking for The Prophecy. You will find it hidden at Wikipedia, filed under "military industrial complex." The prophet was a man who was a supreme commander in the United States Army =before= he became Commander in Chief: Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower.
Repeat after me: "IKE WAS RIGHT ... IKE WAS RIGHT ..."
He prophesied, correctly, that "the untoward influence of the military industrial complex" (a word which he coined that day) would consume everything, and it certainly did.
This is NOT a war about Sunnis, Shiites, or Soapsuds. It is a war about good ol' Do-Re-Mi.
Repeat: "Just follow the MONEY .. Just follow the MONEY .."
You read that the government is "spending several million dollars a DAY on this war." "More than $1 'T'rillion so far." Okay, pop quiz: who GETS that money? Who controls that company, sits on its board? Is it the (Senator | President | Representative) himself, or his son's nephew? Maybe his old frat-buddy? No matter, it's not a long distance.
And then... there's the ultimate prize: The Oil. More than $12 'T'rillion worth, maybe MUCH more. Let the Soapsuds fight with the Sushibars for their paltry 15% and you whisk the rest away... tax-free, royalty-free, scot-free.
Think like they do: "we need more troops, LOTS of 'em." Fire up the draft, and while you're at it, triple that order for uniforms, food, weapons (ahh, weapons), bodybags, coffins...
"Oh, Gold. Precious gold. My precious-s
Be afraid. Be very afraid.
How many generations has this swindle been going on?
If the American people (the great majority) don't recognize that they are being taken for suckers, then the swindle will continue.
How many Americans thrilled when US Veteran Ronald Reagan was pricking them with his movie one-liners -- while Ronnie was giving it to them right up their collective a**-holes!
Not having learned anything from the Ronnie or Richard Nixon debacles, here we are 25 years later with a sizeable part of Americans swallowing the same kind of swill from George.
I tell you these conscienceless demagogic warmongers have one hell of a lot of 'Murkens by their patriotism - on a downhill pull!
But, I predict that the next one who comes along to pull this same wool over 'Murken eyes will be a LOT more charismatic and a LOT more presentable than George. The next son of a bitch will make George look like ... John Kerry.
Make no mistake, the Iraqi warlords joining us to root out al-qaeda militants are not our friends. For them, joining forces with us is an alliance of convenience. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. The Bushies are interpreting the sudden offers of cooperation as progress, that the Iraqis are now on our side. But that's naive.
As soon as the foreign terrorists are gone, the warlords will turn on us. They don't want us there. We're just the lesser threat at the moment.
Thanks for more information about the dynamics being played out in al Anbar Province. We can always smell the rat when Bush speaks but do not always know all of the aspects of its DNA.
Shamelessly, yet again, shamelessly, our bumbling commander in chief goes before veterans on this day, attempting to resell his historically tragic blundering invasion into the middle of the Arabian Peninsula by misrepresenting what is happening in al Anbar Province. So totally predictable. So totally and predictably hypocritical.
Today, as he stood before those veterans he added another element to his usual mischaracterization of everything having to do with the Iraq war. He crassly attempted to invoke hippy hatred by claiming that the Vietnam War would have had a different outcome if we in the peace community had not opposed it. After years of refuting a comparison to that Asian blunder of huge proportions because it too was a morass of death and futility, he brazenly and falsely draws a comparison for his own unethical purpose of demonizing another group of people, the peace activists in his own country.
Can Bush use gross misrepresentation of the situation in al Anbar and demonization of the peace community in his own country to sell us his reformulated snake oil? The only thing that will slow him down is bloggers on the internet where the truth resides.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
