Brave, Brave, Brave, Brave Sir Robin

[richardf8]

Thinking about Iraq.

"Bring the troops back home" is very popular with the anti-war crowd. Most democratic candidates are advocating this as the solution to the problems Dubya has created over there. It's a bad solution though, because it ignores the fact that WE made a mess of the place. But as flags that were being waved a year ago get draped over coffins today, more and more people seem eager for a pull out. And now it looks like the Bush administration, always more mindful of the next election than of the Right Thing To Do, appears eager to look for a way to pull out of Iraq in time to get re-coronated, er elected, to the throne, er presidency of the US. That, anyway, would seem to be the latest from a meeting with Paul Bremer.

There are problems with this. The first is that, left to itself, an Iraq that has to be rebuilt by Iraqis after being destroyed by the U.S. is not going to be very friendly to the U.S. Bush began this enterprise having been told by protestors in the streets that we did not have the stomach for such an enterprise, but the time to heed that was then. Now all that pulling out can do is make matters worse, like the resurgent Taliban in Afghanistan. And the way we have shuffled the deck, we could wind up with something far worse than the secular autocracy that was in place before.

But now that Bush's rah-rah "I'm An American and I Have A Big Penis" war has gone sour, he seems willing to trade in the "Marine Hymn" for the the "Ballad of Sir Robin," who "Bravely turned his tail and fled." But then, it worked for him so well during Vietnam, I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

Comments

[alistairkatt.livejournal.com]

He's stuck between Iraq and a hard place, that's for sure. Stay with a half-formed neo-con advised agenda and things get worse and the bodies stack up; leave and terrorism breeds faster than fungus in a heated petri dish.

The public's losing enthusiasm for this war, but they don't yet totally grasp how we can't leave it a hopeless mess. That's why the only solution is to broker deals with the United Nations, with the Middle East having a big say in the talks, so we can get help. But this appears to be the absolute last item on any neo-con's agenda. No "mea culpas", no matter how many are left to die.

I can't believe how many idiot articles about the UN's "irrelevance" appeared nine months ago. Frankly they're more relevant than ever.

[chipuni.livejournal.com]

I can imagine the phone calls.

"Bonjour?"
"Hello, Mister Chirac? It's George."
"George?"
"George Bush. Out of Washington...."
"Ah. Oui?"
"Well, I'm really sorry to have called you a 'cheese-eating surrender monkey.' And to have insulted the plans that Dominic laid out for a fast return of power to an elected Iraqi government -- the plans that, errr, I'm mostly following now."
"Ah."
"And, well, I was wondering... You see, our troops have at least thirty attacks a day; Italy just suffered its biggest troop loss since World War II; and well..."
"Oui?"
"We'd like to replace some of our troops with yours, so that yours die instead of ours. What do you say to that?"
"Non."
"Pretty please?"
"Non."
"Damn. Thanks, bye!"

[richardf8]

That would be a lovely skit.

[lordrunningclam.livejournal.com]

Check out this article from today's Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1083847,00.html):

This is a war that can be lost. I wouldn't be surprised of Italy pulled all personnel out in the next day or two and the only question is who would follow after that. The UN is already gone. Bush is begging for foreign troops to help and they just look at him and say "I told you so." Then the only way they can even proceed with the war beyond 6 months would be to reinstate the draft very quickly. I'd guess it would be at least 8 months before the draft was reinstated and the first draftee made it to Iraq, and the war could easily be lost by then. If he did reinstate the draft, I wouldn't be surprised if there were a million protesters in the streets of DC the day the lottery started.

Worse than that, he his disgraced us in the eyes of the rest of the world. Check out this quote from a speech by Zbigniew Brzezinski given on 10/31:

Ladies and gentlemen, forty years ago almost to the day an important Presidential emissary was sent abroad by a beleaguered President of the United States. The United States was facing the prospect of nuclear war. These were the days of the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Several emissaries went to our principal allies. One of them was a tough-minded former Secretary of State, Dean Acheson whose mission was to brief President De Gaulle and to solicit French support in what could be a nuclear war involving not just the United States and the Soviet Union but the entire NATO Alliance and the Warsaw Pact.

The former Secretary of State briefed the French President and then said to him at the end of the briefing, I would now like to show you the evidence, the photographs that we have of Soviet missiles armed with nuclear weapons. The French President responded by saying, I do not wish to see the photographs. The word of the President of the United States is good enough for me. Please tell him that France stands with America. (http://www.prospect.org/webfeatures/2003/10/brzezinski-z-10-31.html)

Can anyone imagine any sane European leader saying that today? It just won't happen and may never happen again. Bush have single handedly destroyed our Superpower status.

Perhaps the best thing to do is pull out and support the UN in re-making Iraq as a democracy, but not necessarily one in America's image. Of course, no good neocon would ever support the UN in anything, so I guess that's a false hope. Everything done so far indicates the administration is blinded by ideology and partisanship, so why would they stop now?

This really is very much like Vietnam, with the Republicans in the Democrat's shoes. Johnson tried to save face and couldn't and he was a whole lot smarter and more resourceful than Bush. Actually, this is worse. Vietnam was primarily a Bronze Age society whereas Iraq is a fully modern country with enormous oil resources. Bush will never convince the Iraqis that it's not just about the oil. Bush will never convince ME that its not just about the oil.

"It's all about the price of oil" -- Billy Bragg" (http://www.billybragg.co.uk/multimedia/price_of_oil.mp3)

Never forget that protesters can make a difference. It was only the fact that there were half a million protesters on the street in DC that kept a drunken Nixon from nuking North Vietnam. Kissinger had to convince him that there was no way they could stop a half million really pissed off people from storming the White House and marching out with Nixon's head on a stake.

Oh, and if Bush had a big penis we wouldn't be in this mess.

[richardf8]

Ah Yes. Any idea what Jello Biafra is up to these days. I gave his "Die for Oil, Sucker!" lots of airplay in the days of Gulf War I.

The Bragg song is good; it asks all the right questions. However, I don't think oil is all there is to it. I mean, unless we want Iraq as a platform from which to engage the Saudis. Sure Iraq has a fair bit of oil, but its not all that much in terms of the world supply. But then again, I think Bush probably is a bit obsessed with oil. His lust to penetrate the ANWR is inexplicable in economic terms, but an oil derrick, like an army, is an excellent proxy for that which we know, from Grand Jury testimony, Bill Clinton had but which we suspect, based on behavior, that George W. Bush lacks.

And so let us Dedicate Maddy Prior's "Me 'Usband's Got No Courage In 'IM" to Laura Bush. Maddy knows what you're goin' through, hon.

[visservoldemort.livejournal.com]

Oh, I don't have a single doubt this war is about oil for Bush. The question we have to ask ourselves is, just because Bush is doing this for his selfish reasons, does that necessarily mean it isn't still what we should do? Although frankly speaking we need to start turning this peacekeeping operation, for the sake of both my reason of a democratic Iraq and middle east and Mr. Bush's for cheap oil, into a more efficient and effective operation as well as taking steps to ease the condition of the Iraqi people. We also need to get some multilateralism in there fast, though not necessarily UN-style, because we cannot afford having our forces stretched this thin, not with Iran and N. Korea situations going like they are.

[richardf8]

Intentions matter because they inform method. The museum lootings (which, as IIRC included a Manuscript of the Babylonian Talmud) happened because Bush's intentions determined that it would be the oil ministry and not the museum that was guarded. The result: not only was the last bastion of Iraqi culture raped, but the oil infrastructure that really mattered (more than the ministry itself did) got trashed. It matters WHO initiates a war too. W. has botched everything he has ever touched, even the companies he headed. For him to launch a project as ambitious as the reconstruction of a nation could never be anything but a disaster.

[visservoldemort.livejournal.com]

I agree wholeheartedly. Sending the troops in was...an idea that in principle was good and still can be turned into a very good thing, though I would think they're needed more in Iran or Syria. However, leaving now would be irresponsible in the extreme, completely ruin our detterent capability and be a betrayal to the Iraqis who have had to suffer during our (admittedly for their greater good) military operations. Furthermore, leaving Iraq now will have the exact opposite of the effect we wanted. It will lead to a dictatorial government, more terrorism and a sense that if one kills enough Americans one can achieve their goals. However, though we have to stay in, we need to work in a more multilateral format. Now, I'm not necessarily proposing the U.N. but we need to give nation's incentives to help us with this peacekeeping. With Japan and Turkey having withdrawn troop offers, it's important we find more nations to help and soon. In addition, we need to focus on creating an infrastructure to lead to a democratic and stable Iraq as quickly as possible while still getting the job done. It's going to be hard, but with a lot of effort and some time we can still pull out with a successful, stable, pro-American and democratic Iraq behind us.