Let's get this right, folks.Dubya is like a rock, only dumber, but the people around him suddenly appear to be smarter than you.
Wake the hell up.
This is an ESCALATION. George Bush is Escalating in Iraq. It's not a "surge".
Bush lost control of Congress, because he, as the fulfillment of a 40 year movement of Conservatism, has failed America in every way possible. Conservatism and Bush have failed in terms of National Security. Conservatism and Bush have failed in terms of expanding opportunity. Conservatism and Bush have failed in terms of unifying the nation. Conservatism and Bush have failed in terms of getting things done in Washington. In terms of spending controls, in terms of keeping government out of our business, in terms of protecting the middle class, in terms of optimism and a vision for the future of America and the world, in terms of moral fortitude, in all of these areas and more Bush and Conservatism have failed.
However, Conservatism and Bush are the cream of the crop, par excellance, top of the list at the two great achievements that gave them absolute hegemony over America and the world for the last 6 years: controlling the big lie, and spreading fear.
In this particular case, the big lie is that there's something winnable left in Iraq, besides the Bush legacy and no-bid contracts for Halliburton.
The fear? The fear is that America will be seen as weak somehow in the world if we don't flex our muscles in Iraq again.
Horse hockey! Call this thing what it is and disperse Bush's latest smokescreen. There is no "surge". Despite a resounding rebuke in November, Bush will push to Escalate the War in Iraq.
Everything to be won in Iraq was won during combat operations. Since then, we've been an occupying force that has provided neither security nor the foundations necessary for the rule of law. Welcome to the civil war that Conseratism built.
Every time you say "Surge", you give the impression to another American voter that we can get in, with some overwhelming force, and get out without paying any cost. Best estimates say that this supposed "plan" would require an additional 35,000 troops for at least 18 months. First of all, even at the peak of post 9-11 patriotism the military expanded its roles by fewer than 25,000. Of course 18 monts would become 2 years, because that puts us right at the end of the Bush Administration and he's planning to leave this problem for his chosen heir, John McCain.
The true lesson of 2006 Election must be that Conservatism failed, largely because fear failed. Fear as an organizing principle is Un-American, and every time you say "Surge" you give credence to the failed big lie and fear principle that drives Conservatism and Bush's power.
John Edwards talking about Escalation. Barack Obama is talking about Escalation. Stop playing the losing game and start calling the failure of Conservatism by it's true name of the day: Escalation.
Oh, and in case you were wondering, even the troops on the ground think escalation is a bad idea.
GREAT article, Josh, and absolutely correct. I called WTOP yesterday morning in fact, and demanded they interview someone supporting the ISG report instead of talking endlessly about whether we'd surge 20K or 35K troops; the dialog has been changed from the ISG and changing policy to how big a surge, and that was NOT the question. Wish I had used the word escalation. Let's start calling the television and radio stations and writing letters to the WaPo pointing out this is not a surge but an ecalation and quit papering over the truth. The question is not escalating, but changing the policy.
Why have the national Democrats gone dormant since the election, pray tell? The November election is almost as if it never happened, Bush has seized the initiative and ignoring the results, and the national Dems are aiding and abetting him--- what gives?
Add to that the fact that most of Bush's decisions seem to have been based on defying his father in one way or another it is predictable that Bush would do the exact opposite of what other more level heads are advising. So we have at least several forces at work here and maybe more.
1. As a control freak the only way to get Bush to withdraw from Iraq is to advise him to send more troops. He will do the opposite to prove it is he who is in control and not an advisor.
2. Because the Baker ISG was composed of friends of his father one can be assured he will defy them to "show" his father once again that he knows better. This is just another way he has of expressing what seems to be his endless anger at his Dad.
3. Bush is still meeting with the Neo-cons who got us into this mess. These are people who want us to kick the butt of just about every country on the planet (except perhaps Israel which seems to be considered an extension of the US in the Middle East). They need their wars for a variety of reasons and they don't give a damn what the American people think.
All this illustrates why the Neo-cons chose Bush in the first place. I wouldn't doubt that they analyzed his personality problems and decided they would always be able to control him, because although Bush says he is the decider, he is anything but. He is being controlled by his compulsions and those around him. These are doing the controlling (and thus the deciding).
Americans have been putting up with this because most American, including me, don't even feel like were in a war. Bush will continue escalating it to the point where Americans will have to be drafted to meet Bush's lust for death.
Yeah I am outraged at this -- And Americans should be too -- cause sooner or later Bush's lust for death is going to effect you. As the bumper sticker says,"Your kid is next". It's time that Americans demand some accountability from this whole insane administration and at least Impeach sicko. We don't have to put up with this alcoholic, cocaine snorting, pshycologically insane man.