Why does it appear as if the Administration is purposefully allowing Iraq to go straight to hell? One would think they wanted a Civil War. Certainly refusing to call it as much prevents them from reacting appropriately. Is that the intention?
President Bush keeps touting the "success story", but his actions speak far louder than his words. He's not doing anything to ensure success. Few people, other than radical Republicans, take him seriously any longer. If he truly intended to obtain victory in Iraq he would have paid heed to his military advisors and sent the 400,000 soldiers they old him it would take. All this "lighter, meaner, modern" rhetoric Rumsfeld was forcing down the Generals throats was clearly naive at best, more likely it was derelict. Effectively having our soldiers fight with a hand tied behind their back. Why in the world would they do that? And lets not even mention equipment shortfalls. Even if it were an honest "experiment" at the beginning, it's been an obvious disaster for well over a year now. "Staying the course" becomes code speak for "taking the road to Hell".
In the mean time this war the camel's hair taking our nation into bankruptcy. Ignoring reciprocal costs such as higher energy prices, we've already spent nearly a half trillion dollars directly on the war. It's hardly possible to fathom such amounts. Perhaps some relative perspective can help. That kind of money could have bankrolled NASA for over 20 years. It's enough money to pay off every outstanding student loan in the U.S. 10 times over. Before the war there were an estimated 22 million Iraqis. We could have given each man, woman and child, more than $20,000 each. Does that help?
All that money, and what do we have to show for it? 3,000 dead soldiers and another 10,000 maimed beyond normalcy. Plus innumerable lives and wounds of innocent Iraqis. And a new world reputation of repugnance and disrespect. Money well spent?
And now here we are in the miserable end-game. The President won't commit the man power needed to win. And honestly, the situation is so bad now that on its own it would no longer be enough. Nor would he have the backing of the people --he's long spent his so-called "mandate". Nor will he commit to the only sensible plan still left to us. As presented by Senator Biden, to split the country into provinces and adjust the mission to one of border control. (Yes, I know. What do we know about maintaining borders?) And it's a shame. Right now we desperately need some leverage with Iran and Syria. Putting out an opportunity of participation in a divided Iraq, with Syria involvement in the Sunni province and Iranian involvement with the Shia province, could make an immeasurable difference in our regional and world relations.
Unfortunately, the powers that be, have no such plans. Actual solutions seem beyond them. Which is really quite amazing. Why would anyone continue down a course of ensured failure? Almost any course of action is better than no course in such circumstances. Dismissing alternative courses out of hand is pointless, even reckless.
Then again maybe it's not so amazing after all. Maybe it's actually "the plan". On retrospect, the whole thing starts to add up to one nasty con-job. Oil and War industries make out big. Economic pressures on the U.S. will ultimately lead to a collapse in social programs (a Republican wet-dream) and Israel will be stronger and safer as all her enemy neighbors are busy fighting civil strifes among themselves. Iran might seem the kink in the plan, but Israel's already planning to bomb them with our backing. All the present huff is just lead up to that. Clearly such a plan can work in the short run, but they are playing a very dangerous game for the long haul.
Sound crazy? I'll tell you what's crazy. A President who says one thing and does another. And a citizenry that takes his word for it. When did actions stop speaking louder than words?