1.31.2007
Iraq Is Screwed
Meet The Press. A talking heads program where politicians and other so-called experts bloviate about the leading issues of the day.
I usually don’t watch such TeeVee sideshows because the guests put so much spin on their comments that I get vertigo. Or they just evade giving a straight answer, talking in circles until I get vertigo anyway.
But I did watch a few minutes the other day because the host, Tim Russert, had four guests sitting around the square table with him to discuss the Iraq War.
What I found interesting is that all the guests, whether pro- or anti- troop surge, didn’t come out and state the obvious. Senator Chuck Schumer discussed a new approach in Iraq, redeploying the troops. Well, Chuck, you can talk about moving around the troops all you want. The fact is that nothing can change the situation over there. Iraq is destabilized. Iraq is royally fucked. Not only do you have to deal with the factions fighting among themselves, there are neighboring countries supporting the internecine violence for their respective ends.
The genie of chaos is out of the bottle. It’s time to face up to the truth. “Surging” – a blatant euphemism for escalation – will at best delay the inevitable. Pour in 21,000 or 210,000 more troops, it doesn’t matter. The Iraqis will keep fighting among themselves. After a period of death and destruction, they might somehow form some sort of new order or find their country divided up by their neighbors. But it won’t be any democracy or anything akin to a structure of influence and control the American Empire sought when it invaded.
One guest on Meet The Press, Michael Gerson, a former speechwriter for “our” president, said that “the standards of victory probably are a little lower right now.” (Link) I just love that double speak. Victory means you win. How can you take winning and equate it “lower standards?” Does “victory” mean we manage to reduce the number of American soldiers being killed each week while chaos rages on? Does “victory” mean that the US has succeeded if it’s not driven out of Iran, that the American presence can at least hide in the Green Zone while the rest of Iraq falls apart?
This clown Gerson probably wrote another memorable line I cherish. Dubya stated last month that he was "disappointed by the pace of success" in Iraq. (Link)
But leave it to a conservative Republican to redefine a word, to apply a phase that really doesn’t fit. I love it when rightwing talk show hosts like Rush Limbaugh vilify someone like me, saying that I want defeat. I don’t want defeat. It would be great if peace came to Iraq and the people ended up with a better government than the tyranny they had with Saddam Hussein.
But what I want and what I see is going to happen are two different things.
Don’t worry about Rush Limbaugh and all the other dogmatic neo-cons. When the US finally fails in Iraq, he and his ilk will blame it on the “liberals,” claiming that they gave strength to the enemy by questioning the mistakes committed by the president. Victory could have been ours, Rush will say, if those damn “liberals” didn’t undermine the heroic efforts of George W. Bush.
In a word: bullshit.
But that’s how conservative pundits and politicians play the game, demonizing any who disagrees. Demonization is key when trying to inflame hearts and minds into war. Remember how the France spoke out against the invasion of Iraq? At the congressional cafeteria French fries were called “victory” fries.
But this is nothing new. Before World War I, the Germans had to be demonized by American politicians and newspaper publishers during the ramp up to battle. All sorts of nasty things were said about the “evil Huns.” And during that time Sauerkraut was called “victory” cabbage.
Those who don’t learn from history…
So let the neo-cons rant on all they want about “victory” in Iraq. It ain’t gonna happen. At best, continued US occupation is only slowing the inevitable.
Neo-cons call people in favor of troop withdrawal “cut and run defeatists.” Once again trying to make an inappropriate phrase stick.
But it’s not about “cutting and running.” It’s really about cutting our losses.
# posted by Stan Spire @ 5:12 AM 
