President George Bush has at last found a place he can bomb with no opposition. On the down side, it's from 65 years ago, but still, a win is a win.
Touring the Auschwitz death camp last week, the president is quoted as saying, "We should have bombed it."
You have to admit, it's a noble thought. The only concern, with American troops spread thin with a real war, is that the president's love of bombing might get him to also attack an historic one. On the upside, of course, as long as Mr. Bush is thinking about bombing targets from the past, perhaps his mind will be distracted long enough away from Iran that the world will remain safe.
Still, as loopy as some may see the president focusing on what historical locations to bomb, there actually is logic to it. After all, we know that Mr. Bush keeps telling us repeatedly whenever yet another new scandal comes up that "History will judge" his administration. It makes perfect sense therefore for him to consider getting involved in an historical war.
And, of course, it makes even further sense, since history has little meaning to the Bush administration and neocons anyway. When the White House was criticized for ignoring the Presidential Daily Briefing titled, "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.," their explanation for dismissing such a warning of utter immediacy was that it was an "historical document." And then there was the White House official so unconcerned with the incontrovertible attributes of time that he told New York Times reporter Ron Suskind, "We create our own reality."
When the immediate is seen as historical, when you believe you can create whatever fantasy you want, it's the next step to send a bombing raid on the past.
It explains, as well, neocon William Kristol ignoring 800 years of documented history to refute that Sunni and Shia can't get along in Iraq, blindly stating that "there's been almost no evidence of that at all."
While some people might be concerned about President George Bush continually obsessing about bombing, they are missing the larger point. With the president actively involved in present-day bombing, and with his well-known penchant for preemptive bombing against the future, the fact that he is also focused on bombing the past means that the Bush administration now has the whole bombing landscape pretty much covered. Let someone try to attack us now -- from any direction -- we're protected!
And it's hard to deny that a Shock-and-Awe attack against the Nazis has a certain comfort to it. Sure, of course, it's 65 years ago, but there really isn't a statute of limitations against bombing Nazis. If you can get on a WWII battlecruiser, wear your vintage flight flack jacket and goggles, and emblazon a "Mission Accomplished" banner that the mission you've accomplished is wiping out the Nazis, there is no bad time to do that. None.
There are also several benefits to bombing a no-longer-existent historical target. First, there's almost no chance you will get attacked back. Second, you won't have to call up any new troops and simply re-deploy a few National Guard yet again to send into the past. Third, you don't have to worry that still not providing body armor will become an issue. Fourth, there's no problem when you don't fund veteran's health and welfare benefits. And finally, it won't cost you two trillion dollars. (Given the Bush administration's track record, it should only be $800 million, tops.)
The only concern with our sending bombing runs today to attack Auschwitz 65 years ago is that John McCain will say we should stay there for 100 years.
(Not to worry. Happily, that means only 35 additional years of fighting into the future.)
So, hats off to President George Bush for at last coming up with a bombing target we all can agree on. Well, okay, everybody but Rudy Guiliani. It's impossible to try to frighten people with what might happen when it already has.
Unless you're a neocon. Then you can make your own reality.