Iraq and Memorial Day

This week on Thursday, May 25, 2006, George Bush and Tony Blair held a news
conference. Let me show you some problems. This is simply from things they
both have said. First, let us remember why we went to war in Iraq in the
first place. On March 19, 2003 George Bush said, "We come to Iraq with
respect for its citizens, for their great civilization and for the religious
faiths they practice. We have no ambition in Iraq, except to remove a threat
[the Hussein regime] and restore control of that country to its own people."

That was it! Two reasons: a) Remove Hussein, b) return Iraq to its people.
To remove Hussein, you have to remove Hussein's party, the Baath Party. The
Baath party ruled from July 1968 until 2003 in Iraq. As we know, coalition
forces, primarily American, and secondarily British, removed Hussein and his
Baath party in the course of the 2003 invasion of Iraq. By June of 2003, the
occupying Americans and the British banned the Baathist Party in Iraq. Bush
and Blair call that the de-Baathification of Iraq.

During the de-Baathification of Iraq, George Bush disbanded the 400,000-man
Iraqi Army in May 2003. It should be noted disbanding the Iraqi army was at
the objection of Bush's "man on the ground" in Iraq, Paul Bremer. But by
that time, Bush was no longer listening to reason.

Failing to listen to Paul Bremer was a mistake. Thursday, Blair admitted the
mistake. Blair said, "I think inevitably some of the things that we thought
were going to be the biggest challenge proved not to be, and some of the
things we didn't expect to be challenges at all proved to be immense. I
think that probably in retrospect -- though at the time it was very
difficult to argue this -- we could have done the de-Baathification in a
more differentiated way than we did."

By "more differentiated way" means, it was foolish to toss out a 400,000-man
organization, which, if Bush had been using his head he could have used to
control the early stages of the insurgency. But no, arrogant and heady Bush,
in the "Mission Accomplished" mindset wouldn't hear of maintaining the Iraqi
army and Blair foolishly agreed. There is an axiom about warfare. If you are
fighting in somebody else's backyard, you are at a disadvantage in the first
place. You do not know the lay of the land. At most, Bush only had 168,000
troops in Iraq, hardly enough to control Iraq's 25 million person
population. Another 400,000 local Iraqi soldiers certainly would have
helped. After all, the Iraqi soldiers knew the lay of their own land. They
knew where the insurgency was forming. But no, Bush threw all that out the
window. So far, the insurgency that ensued has cost 2,463 American troops
their lives, and wounded over 17,869.

Besides wasting a 400,000-man resource, Bush's arrogant "Mission
Accomplished" mindset had other repercussions. The rest of the world does
not accept George Bush's self-serving cowboy Texas swagger. As it happens,
Bush is one Texan who regrets his swagger. Thursday, Bush said, "Sounds like
kind of a familiar refrain here -- saying 'bring it on,' kind of tough talk,
you know, that sent the wrong signal to people. I learned some lessons about
expressing myself maybe in a little more sophisticated manner -- you know,
'wanted dead or alive,' that kind of talk. I think in certain parts of the
world it was misinterpreted, and so I learned from that."

Bush's problem is a matter of arrogance. Here he was on May 1, 2003, on the
deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln, strutting his stuff, in the infamous
"Mission Accomplished" speech. He thought he had Iraq in the bag. He thought
he had won! Thinking that, he failed to notice mercenaries and other
undesirables were flooding into Iraq, setting up housekeeping, preparing for
battle. Battle for what? Let us not be naive. Iraq has the second largest
oil reserve in the world. Iraq's oil would be a fine prize for the victor.
Oil marketeers around the world knew this. They figured the oil was up for
grabs. Therefore, ever since mid 2003, mercenaries and soldiers of fortune
have gathered in Iraq hoping to grab hold of the oil. It is the oil they are
after, nothing else! Being caught in the crossfire has unsettled Iraq's
population and has ignited a civil war. This was Bush's mistake and now he
is forcing American soldiers to give up their lives in the aftermath.

Thursday, Bush excused it all by saying, "Part of progress [in Iraq], of
course, is on the political track. You know, we had elections in Iraq; 12
million people voted last December. Now, it seems like an eternity ago, I
know, like a decade. But that's not all that long ago in the larger scope of
things. Twelve million people said, we want to be free.. That's progress...
one of the reasons that I appreciate Tony [Blair] coming is that he brings a
fresh perspective of what he saw, and the American people need to know we
are making progress toward a goal of an Iraq that can defend itself, sustain
itself and govern itself. That will deny the terrorists a safe haven."

The key phase is "an Iraq that can defend itself, sustain itself and govern
itself." Bush suggests that if Iraq fails to defend itself, Iraq will be a
haven for terrorists. Think about that. Bush is saying terrorists will use
Iraq for a base of operations to form up and attack America. Bush fails to
realize, the people who attacked America on 9-eleven were living and working
right here in the United States, not Iraq. Bush fails to realize, the people
who attacked London on July 7, 2005 were living and working in London, not
Iraq. The same is true of the attacks in Spain, Egypt, and Indonesia. The
terrorists attack from within, not from abroad. It is not like the Japanese
when they came across the Pacific Ocean to attack Pearl Harbor. It is not
like Hitler coming across the channel to attack Great Britain. Bush is
fighting a 1940s war in a twenty-first century terrorist environment. Bush's
tactic is wrong. Bush's mission is wrong.

Thursday, Bush said, ".One thing, . is that we want to make sure we complete
the mission, that we achieve our objective. A loss in Iraq would make this
world an incredibly dangerous place. Remember there is not only sectarian
violence, a hangover from Saddam's era, but there is an al Qaeda presence,
in the form of Zarqawi, who wants to sow as much havoc as possible to cause
us to leave before the mission is complete."

Bush is wrong on all counts. For one, the hangover is not the result of
Hussein. The hangover is from Bush's mistake during the de-Baathification of
Iraq. Bush, in a very real sense, sent an engraved invitation to every
insurgent, rebel and "thug for hire" in the world to come join the party.
Losing Iraq will not create a dangerous place. It already is a dangerous
place! Iraq became so because Bush failed to seal up Iraq's borders when he
had the chance in mid 2003. Bush points to Zarqawi. Why Zarqawi? For that
matter, why al Qaeda? According to Bush, al Qaeda is busy making phone calls
to Aunt Mabel in Wichita, Kansas.

Bush says he has a mission in Iraq. What mission? There is no "mission."
What Bush has in Iraq is the aftermath of a failed policy that has killed
nearly twenty-five hundred U.S. soldiers, and easily murdered 30,000 Iraqis,
in addition to countless wounded on both sides. It is a senseless war. It is
a needless war. It always has been. There was no reason to attack Iraq.
Hussein was not a threat. America had nothing to fear. Errantly, Bush swore
Hussein was fixing to attack with weapons of mass destruction. There were no
such weapons, nor could Hussein deliver them. Bush said there was an al
Qaeda connection. There was no al Qaeda connection. *** Cheney said we
would be welcomed as liberators. Not so, to date 2,463 U.S. dead prove that
to be wrong. Donald Rumsfeld said the war would be less than 5 months, it
has now been three years plus. For the entire war, every step, every
promise, every policy has been false, disingenuous, or flat wrong.

The war did not have to happen this way. As Blair says, the
de-Baathification should have been handled differently. More importantly,
Bush has continually tried to shove a Western concept of democracy down the
throats of a culture very different from his own. He claims to have made
progress, but at what cost. There will be approximately 4,700 American dead
by the time Bush leaves office. It is believed the taxpayers will end up
paying at least $900 billion for Bush's failed enterprise in Iraq. Far too
costly!

So this Memorial Day think of those affected. Think especially of the
American families now suffering a real loss because George Bush is complicit
in the murder of their son or daughter in Iraq. George Bush lied to get us
into this war, now he can't find a lie to get us out. Shame on Bush. Shame
on Blair. Shame on us for allowing the war to continue with an
irresponsible, arrogant cowboy in the Whitehouse.


Brian David Smith, San Diego, California


.

Quantcast