Showdown

The SOTU speech received the usual partisan responses. What could the Pres say under the circumstances? He acknowledged the takeover of the House and Senate by mentioning issues that are agreeable to both Dems and Reps. Then he launched into his defense of the decision to send additional troop to Iraq. In all the rebutals the theme was the unreliability of the Iraqis to show up. Benchmarks are supposed to measure if the Iraqis are living up to our expectations.

After four years of fighting the Pres is still talking about the need to train Iraqi troops to lead the fight against the insurgents. The "surge" is supposed to give the Iraqi government breathing room to do what it was supposed to do in the first place.
Sending our troops in first to see if the Iraqis will "step up" is dumb to begin with. How about the Iraqis showing up in sufficient numbers first, and then bolster their forces to tip the scale if necessary?

Those against the escalation argue that it has little chance of working and if it does where does that leave us? Our presence at this time is ludicrous because it puts us on one side of a civil war. We can't be an impartial referee when we have the aim of bolstering the Shia dominated government. We make demands on this ineffective body as if it could implement them while at the same time claiming that the government is sovereign.

We have been sold a bill of goods concerning the "failure" in Iraq. All sorts of dire consequences are predicted if we withdraw from the civil war. Agreed there are dire times ahead, but this is so regardless of our withdrawal. General involvelment of neighboring countries such as Iran and Syria is already a fact. So, they will continue to exert influence but not cause a conflagration worse then is occuring now.

Finally, the Pres keeps insisting on victory. There is no victory such as he envisions short of exterminating everyone he doesn't like. That is not likely. However if the Shia dominated Iraqi government is consolidated it is most likely to ally with Iran. Then where are we? Bush has opened a can of worms that is beyond recall. 9/11 was a much greater coup for Bin Laden than he could ever have imagined. Bush has played into his hand at every turn and Bin is taking all the tricks. There is a lot to be said for staying in a cave. Now if we could find one for Bush.

What the hell, even the Patriots lost an important game.

 

Viewing Bryce Canyon- 2005

 

Super Bowls and Surges

The Patriots did it again. They pulled out another win on the way to a SuperBowl game. It has been very exciting to follow this team as they muddled their way thru this season. When it comes to "playoff time" they seem to rise to the occasion and defy all odds.

Speaking of defying odds, the "Current Occupant", as Garrison Keiler calls Bush, once again has exhibited his inimitable stubborness and decided Iraq needs one more "surge". After three plus years of under manning the troops and leading us into a seemingly bottomless quagmaire, his deliberations with his "Selected" confreres has allowed him to conclude that perhaps more troops, especially in Bagdad, would turn the trick and bring a democratic government into being in Iraq. This time he is again depending on the Iraqis to show up. Their past perfomance leads me to be very skeptical of this scenario. Bush seems to have a simplistic notion that an election, then a government formation, equals democracy and democratic government. That does not appear to be happening in Iraq. The present Prime Minister, a Shiite, beholden in office to the support of a renegade cleric, alSadr, who controls a formidable Shiite militia, seems more intent on eliminating as many Sunnis as possible rather than establishing a "unity" government.
Bush claims suppression of violence will buy the time necessary for the formation of that "unity"government. I suspect also that Bush is moving in this direction to cover his ass when things don't work as predicted so that he can say it"ain't my fault, the Iraqis failed to do their part".

In a candid interview Bush gave for "60 Minutes" he exhibited very clearly his blind belief in his position. When asked if he were stuborn, he paused and replied "I am very flexible". When asked how he reacted to the families of killed soldiers he was very pensive but replied that he felt the sacrifice of those lives was very noble. Asked if he felt the war was a mistake replied "definitely not" and that the Iraqi people owe a great debt of gratitude to the Americans for liberating their country. Bill O'Reilly has a psychologist analyze the body language of various people. I wish someone would do that on Bush. His logic is so out of sync with reality that I suspect he has a deep personality disorder. It has%2