Bush speaks on Iraq --- or was it Nixon, or maybe Johnson?

by

Gerald Plessner

President Bush's speech about Iraq was not surprising. But it was more than a little sad.

Sad because we've heard the same speech so many times before, from Richard Nixon and Lyndon Johnson during Vietnam, and from this president, his vice president and his top appointed officials since they decided to take us into war against Iraq, and sad because so many have died so needlessly.

Once politicians take such a monumental stance, they just can't admit the slightest doubt about their judgement or their actions. Politics today is a blood sport of world-altering proportions. Show the slightest doubt about a decision and the opposition, and probably your friends, will eat you alive. If a politician survives, his power and legacy probably will not.

If a president persists against all criticism and his grand objectives come to naught, his reputation and our nation's psyche will suffer for a generation or more. The historical stakes are that high.

It should be no surprise that public support for the war effort is slipping. After the atrocities of September 11, 2001 almost the entire world stood by America's side. Had our effort to marshal world opinion not been so condescending and imperious but more inclusive, it might not have come to this.

Now we are talking about withdrawing from Iraq, Bush's majestic goals in tatters and thousands of American fighting men and women killed and wounded.

The administration bullied everyone they confronted before the war. Donald Rumsfeld dismissed those who suggested his plans were not enough. Paul Wolfowitz talked down to questioning senators and arrogantly refused to discuss the war's estimated costs. Typical of so many in the administration, he also bullied our best friend in the Muslim world, Turkey, about supporting the war against their citizens' overwhelming opposition.

It is no wonder that we have had to fight this war almost entirely at our own expense and sacrifice, running up the largest national debt in our history. It is not surprising that many Americans --- almost a majority --- now question the president's judgement and, by extension, his advisors' competence.

This administration built the case for this war on ideology and arrogance. They refused even to plan for the aftermath of combat, having a "boys will be boys" attitude about the looting and early postwar mayhem.

Given how little our leaders knew about Iraq --- and how little they seemed to care --- it is no surprise that a lot of men around the world are willing to kill themselves, our soldiers and too many innocent Iraqi citizens for a profoundly evil cause.

In his most candid statement since September 11, 2001, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told Congress last week that our troops may have to stay in Iraq for a dozen years. Given that we are building five large permanent bases in Iraq, there is little doubt about that.

So even if we had to leave Iraq, we wouldn't really be leaving Iraq, would we? Does that surprise you? If it doesn't, then maybe the next paragraph will.

I believe we have a moral obligation to stay in Iraq until the country is pacified. We owe that to the thousands of Iraqis the war has killed, damaged or displaced. Then we should give the generals the people and equipment they need to achieve that goal, and finally bring our people home. Those generals are as fed up with Bush and his minions but they can't talk out of turn because Rumsfeld takes retirement pay and other benefits away from them.

Finally, we should drum from public life every politician and political appointee who got us into this stupid war. It is their fault and they should pay the price for their arrogance and their stupidity.

About the author: Gerald Plessner is a Southern California businessman who writes regularly on issues of politics and culture. He would be pleased to hear from you and may be contacted at gerald@geraldplessner.com.