|
Cracks
in the Egg
August 21, 2002
By Michael Shannon
Even by his extraordinarily inane standards the following
Bushism is a real doozy, not just for its content but for
the mind set behind it:
"If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot
easier.. .just as long as I'm the dictator..." - on his
first trip to Washington as president-elect, Dec 18, 2000.
The irony is that Mr Bush, albeit in his own inimitable style,
is actually on to something there. It is much easier to rule
unencumbered by public opinion or within the guidelines of
the law. Things are so much simpler if you can just do whatever
it is you or your advisers please with the wave of a hand
or the issuance of a decree. Things do tend to get so complicated
when forced to consider the opinions of those with varying
viewpoints.
Fortunately for Mr Bush, in a manner of speaking, his wish
came true. In the months that followed September 11th he was
granted a level of autonomous authority that did border on
the dictatorial. However, with the passage of time the emotive
reasoning for that has slowly but surely ebbed. And now I
am sorry to rain on your parade Mr President, but all good
things must come to an end.
The firestorm of criticism leveled at the Bush administration
over the past several weeks vis-a-vis Iraq reached a remarkable
crescendo last week. Suddenly those who were doing the criticizing
could no longer be dismissed as unpatriotic, cowardly obstructionists.
Suddenly it was coming not only from within the Republican
party - Nebraska Senator Chuck Hagel, a highly decorated Vietnam
vet, asking head hawk Richard Perle if he would be willing
to lead the assault into Baghdad was priceless - but - stop
the presses! - from within the cozy confines of Bush Inc.
For a man like Brent Scowcroft - as politically close to
Bush 41 as any man alive - to come out in the Wall Street
Journal, that bastion of rock ribbed Republicanism, and say
that invading Iraq is a lousy idea was more than any opponent
of military action against Iraq could have possibly hoped
for. While his voice has been an unexpected boon to the cause,
that people are questioning the Bush administration's rush
to war comes as no surprise at all. Particularly when you
review how ineptly the whole process has been handled.
The lunacy began over the past several months as we have
been inundated with so-called attack scenarios. One day we
hear about massive waves of troops and heavy equipment launched
from multiple directions, the next a beefed up Special Ops
mission and the day after that, a completely different plan.
Are these "leaks" real? If so, is the administration really
that porous that war plans can not be kept secret? Or are
they trial balloons set aloft by the proponents of the differing
strategies to see which plays out best? Or are they intended
to keep Hussein guessing? Perhaps they are merely the products
of over active imaginations. More likely they are indicative
of an administration that has painted themselves into a rhetorical
corner with all their macho chest thumping and is now flailing
about for a way to make an idiotic idea a reality.
But whatever the reasoning behind all this nonsense the root
question remains the same: why Mr Bush has made the overthrow
of Hussein his job one. Particularly when last fall's primary
objective - the capture or dismemberment of those responsible
for perpetrating the worst crime against the people of the
United States ever committed - hasn't come even close to being
realized.
Are we really about to invade a sovereign state - run by
a homicidal maniac to be sure - merely because the President
doesn't like the guy? Yes, I know that the argument can be
made that W is the dutiful son fulfilling the destiny denied
to his beloved father. But that is a little too Shakespearean
for my taste. Oh right I forgot; Mr Bush is doing it because
Hussein poses a clear and present danger to the United States,
ie., as the owner and developer of an ever expanding arsenal
of WMD. But this is a very weak argument, for if we do have
credible information that Hussein has these weapons and is
prepared to use them against us, it completely undermines
his own reasoning that to not act now is to wait too long.
Mr President, if you have knowledge that he truly does have
these horrible weapons and is preparing to use them than what
the hell are you waiting for?
While there is little doubt that Hussein does have a few
diabolical tricks up his sleeve, this is far from news. Samantha
Powers, in her terrific book The Problem From Hell,
spells out in great detail that the United States was well
aware of Iraqi use of chemical weapons both against the Iranians
during their eight year war in the 1980's as well as against
the Iraqi Kurds who committed the unpardonable sin of wishing
to have a say in how they lived their lives. He repeatedly
used these vile weapons while the United States government,
with a number of the men who now figure prominently in this
Bush administration, not only stood by and did nothing but
continued to actively support his larger efforts against the
Iranians. That we are outraged by these truly despicable acts
ten/twelve years after the fact rings more than a little hollow.
Team Bush continues though to play this card because they
feel it is the only one that will carry any weight with the
American people. They know that if they told the people that
they wish to effect a "regime change" in Iraq as a way of
dismantling the power structure of the Arabian OPEC states,
they would immediately leave themselves open to a pan Arab/Islamic
response - which nobody wants. They also know that if they
come right out and state that we are going into Iraq to gain
control over their enormous oil reserves that that would seem
to say we are going to war so that Exxon et al, can continue
business as usual. While both the above may be very supportable
realpolitik positions, positions that within the confines
of think tanks and ready rooms seem to make perfect sense,
neither is going to play very well in Peoria.
So whether those who support the Iraqi war initiative like
it or not, it is becoming increasingly apparent that they
will need a much more sellable casus belli before America
marches willingly off to war.
And in the meantime - if the policies emanating from the
Bush White House/Pentagon seem confused, inarticulate, misleading,
evasive and mendacious keep in mind that they are a direct
reflection of the defining characteristics of the head man
himself and his style of governing.
Contact Mike at shnnn613@cs.com
| This
week is our Third Quarter Fund Drive. Please consider
making a DONATION
to help keep our website online. We'll even send
you some bumper stickers! |
|
|
