Word on the Street

Republicans lashing out so strongly against Rep. John Murtha’s (D-Pa.) call for the pull out of Iraq was a disproportionate response to the simple act of free speech. One might argue that it was not the dissent that was so jarring and abhorrent to the GOP but the source that uttered it. John Murtha is a war veteran and has strong connections within the military establishment. “Murtha is not a typical left-wing Dem. A Vietnam vet, he served 37 years in the Marines and received two Purple Hearts, a Bronze Star with a Combat "V" and the Vietnamese Cross of Gallantry.(NYP)" Those that bleed together… and all that. So, what we witnessed might well be a bit of true Washington smoke and mirrors.

Whether it was the dark lord Cheney or the master of puppets Rove who orchestrated and mobilized the tools of the administration to gang up in such short order is irrelevant. With poll ratings in the sewer and no real light at the end of the tunnel short of complete capitulation, the Bush administration is truly up against a wall and in check on all fronts. Its kind of nice.

The rude lashing out was an effort to draw the public’s view away from the real significance of the statement. The word on the street is that Murtha is in tight with many generals at the Pentagon and in the field. He has their ear and their confidence via his service and experience. If he calling for a withdrawl of our troops, the odds are strongly suggestive that he is giving voice to not only his constituency, but to those who conduct the very instruments and cogs of the American war machine.

In Roman society, Caesars had to have the support of the legions in order to rule effectively and securely. While the Bush administration is in no genuine threat of being assassinated by some uppity praetorians, this is as close as Bush and Co. has come to getting stabbed by a messenger of Brutae. Dissent from the military is inevitable given the circumstances, if you consider that neither the ruler nor his chief minions ever truly served in the armed forces. Can you say five deferments? Shakey Air National Guard attendance records anyone? Never in the life of American government has there been a situation as clear cut as this with those in power basically saying “Do as I say and who cares that I wouldn’t do it were I in your shoes.” One could hope that the conservative culture of the military will be forever influenced by the events of our time and from here forward not so blindly support a Republican leadership for conservatism’s sake.

Lets see where we are by mid-March. :-)

BTW, sorry I have not posted for a while. More when I can...

Body Counts as Bench Mark?

From today's WP:

By Ellen Knickmeyer
Washington Post Foreign Service
Monday, September 19, 2005; Page A01

BAGHDAD -- Using enemy body counts as a benchmark, the U.S. military claimed gains against Abu Musab Zarqawi's foreign-led fighters last week even as they mounted their deadliest attacks on Iraq's capital. (Wonkette)

This is EXACTLY what they did in Vietnam. I smell endgame and it isn't going our way.

AP Errors or Bush Freudians?

Am I reading this correctly? Look at the third paragraph. The AP quotes President Bush as saying ''We'll complete our work in Afghanistan and Iran,'' Bush said. ''An immediate withdrawal of our troops in Iraq, or the broader Middle East, as some have called for, would only embolden the terrorists and create a staging ground to launch more attacks against America and free nations.'' Color me confused.

Do we have troops in Iran? Have I been so pummeled by bad news and executive buffoonery that I somehow missed the invasion or Iran? Or, is it the more likely case that President Bush was riffing and merely gave over to verbal diarrhea and let some secret chicken out of the coop.

Do we have diplomatic engagement with Iran over the nuclear issue? I thought so. Are they a viable threat to the United States? I thought not. In fact, wasn’t it just determined that Iran was, at least technologically, years away from being able to attain nuclear weapons? ... Yes, the last time I checked, for whatever that is worth.

Good lord this is upsetting.

Bush goes on to say that as long as he is President, “we will stay, we will fight and we will win the war on terrorism.” Well, that settles that. Now my fears are somewhat more confirmed than they already were. Comparisons to the Vietnam War are all too common when referring to the situation in Iraq. However, I would think that this statement by the only chief executive of this nation to be installed by the Supreme Court and not the people of the United States portends of the analogy being applied to the War on Terrorism in general.

Vietnam was not winnable. You know why. For those who are raising a quizzical eyebrow, dig this. Vietnam had a centuries long history of invasion, subjugation and colonialization by bunch of different countries, China and France being the biggest offenders. When America came in, the Vietnamese just saw them as another colonialist invading power. It had nothing to do with politics or ideology for them. It was about sovereignty and stopping the violation of their land. Communism was just an organizational tool. The US was fighting something stronger than them. They were fighting an idea and resentment that was hundreds of years old. The Vietnamese would have fought to the last child if they had to. Nothing could have broken that resolve.

Once again, we are involved in a conflict in part of the world where we do not (at least our President doesn’t) fully understand the general perceptions and ethos of the culture we are trying to “save” and democratize. This may seem like pulling dirt out of history’s dustbin, but the Crusades are still very present in the minds of many Arabs. So, once again, you have an invader stomping in and telling them how its going to be. It won’t fly. I will eat my hat if democracy sticks in Iraq.

And Bush is thinking about Iran?

Does the Arab world hate the infidel? Sure. Is that xenophobic, wrong and generally stupid? To us, sure. To them, heck no. We can thank the British, Spanish and Christianity in general for that. We, the United States of America, one of the younger nations on the world stage, march over to the fertile crescent and silk road lands, like true sophomores and think we can fix stuff, mold them in our democratic image? We can’t even get a President properly elected.

The same rules don’t apply in this war game. When people are willing to strap bombs to their chest to get us out, that’s a sign that we don’t belong. When the rules of the game are that different for the two teams playing, that strongly suggests that the game can’t be won. Our President’s myopia is costing us precious lives, truckloads of money and more good will than we can ever recoup. George W. Bush’s choices have written a check that no matter how big of an ass he may be, that ass cannot cash.

You can't kill an idea or attitude with a gun. Just a person. And, as their blood spreads, so does their idea.

BTW, I thought Maureen Dowd was good today.

What is Bush thinking?

I mean, seriously. The Bush Administration’s choice to not meet with Cindy Sheehan regarding getting our military forces out of Iraq defies all logic. One would think that in light of gravely floundering support for the military effort, Bush, nay, Bush’s advisers would see this as an opportunity to do a bit of positive PR and have our Chief Executive appear to be the compassionate conservative he originally professed to be by granting a meeting with her and providing some semblance of an explanation to why American forces will “stay the course.” Talk about missed opportunity

To aggravate (much to my pleasure) the situation, the Republican leadership is even calling for the President to meet with her. This will be the only time I will ever publicly express thanks to Senator George Allen of Virginia. (And, indirectly, thanks to Frank Rich for hipping me to it.)

When your “base” is telling you it would be common decency to meet Cindy, in elected office, shouldn’t it be logical to maybe take that hint every once in a while? Again, I am loathed to call George Allen a representative of the Republican base, but he sure professes to be. And, since it suites my argument, he is most certainly base. Please allow the double entendre to wash over you fully.

The Bush Administration has been really enigmatic. Either they are oblivious, i.e. they are just completely clueless as to how to intelligently handle this situation, or, slightly more likely, they are the epitomes of hubris incarnate and will not deign to show any fallacy in their governance. It is really hard for me to tell. Certainly the allusions to Vietnam will increase with the increased protest/peace movement. We already have the class A quagmire ready made. Hippies in the 60’s got blamed for lots of society’s ills down the line, but right or wrong, they were spot on when it came to Vietnam.

On the other hand, Bush and crew do have a lot on their plate and could just be flustered and not thinking clearly with regards to Ms. Sheehan’s protest. There is Plamegate, North Korea, the Sudan genocide, skyrocketing fuel prices, and global warming all to consider. The White House claims to have already met Cindy Sheehan, but this is, as yet, remains unconfirmed.