These are the rants of an anonymous Left-leaning Libertarian. Libertarian views are generally socially liberal but fiscally conservative. I view George Bush as the anti-Libertarian, he is socially conservative and fiscally irresponsible. Unless you are a very wealthy person, religious fundamentalist, or a racist redneck, I cannot understand why a person would support George Bush.

Friday, February 23, 2007

So who wants this surge?

Who is really in favor of this 'surge' (AKA, escalation).

The American people? No. Polls strongly show that the American people are not behind this surge policy.

The Iraqi Study Group? No. The Jim Baker led study group did not propose a surge as being done by the Bush administration.

The Iraqi people? No! A majority of Iraqis think that they would be better off if the American forces left. I don't know their view is wise but that is what they believe.

The generals? No, even Bush himself kept telling us that the generals did not want more troops. But only after some chicken-hawk at a right-wing think-tank pushed for this 'surge' did Bush fire the generals that did not want the surge and put a general that wanted the surge in charge.

The only people that seem to want this surge is Bush & Cheney who just want to salvage their already pathetic reputations and some conservative "think-tanks" that want to accomplish the same thing. We are wasting money and lives for the vanity of ideological zealots that were proven to be completely wrong. What a waste. What a huge waste of blood and money.

The only rationale for invading Iraq that (sort of) remains standing is the "bring democracy to Iraq" rationale. Well, that rationale has now fallen. Democracy is the governance of the people, by the people, for the people. But instead of listening to the desires of the Iraqi people (or the desires of the American people), King George is pushing his Agenda on the people. I guess democracy is officially dead in Iraq. I just hope we can keep democracy alive here in the USA.

Bush, Cheney & the GOP lost a war against a third world country

Someone needs to write a book named "How Bush, Cheney, and the GOP took the world's remaining super-power and lost a war in a third-world nation"

They've blown 1/2 a TRILLION dollars in a war that has now lasted longer than World War 2 and yet more Americans are dying now each month than during the early phases of the war. As the aptly named (and very good) book labels it, this is a "Fiasco".

Let me give an outline on how it happened:
1) This was a virtually unwinnable war to begin with. The Arab world has been seething for the last 40 years with sympathy toward the occupied Palestinian territories. What kind of complete idiots thought that the main ally of the Israeli occupiers would be 'greeted as liberators' when they began occupying another Arab/Muslim nation? Unreal stupidity by Bush, Cheney, and their Neo-con cabal. And then throw in the fact that Iraq was a nation that was intentionally created with severe ethnic and religious fault lines. Ethnic & religious hatred was kept under control by a harsh secular dictator . . . only ignorant people didn't see that these ethnic issues were a huge potential problem. This war was virtually unwinnable from the start but the delusional Bush administration was unable to see this and refused to listen to the many experts that said this was a very bad idea. If this war was winnable, it would require very smart policies and a lot of money & troops . . . . but . . . .
2) The administration mislead (AKA lied) their way into this war. Despite contradictory CIA & FBI reports, the Bush administration would tout aluminum tubes that could "only be used for enriching uranium" and (completely fictional) "meeting between Atta and Iraqi intelligence officials." Although these lies were sufficient to fool the American public who actually believed their government wouldn't lie to them, these lies were never believed by the Iraqi people. As a result, virtually the entire Arab world believes this war is nothing but an oil grab and help for Israel. Whether Americans believe these lies is irrelevant . . . the fact that Arabs don't believe them mean there is strong fuel for a resistance/jihadi movement.
3) Insufficient troops were sent to occupy Iraq. As mentioned many many times, General Shinseki told the Bush administration that some 400,000 troops would be needed to successfully occupy Iraq. For making this assertion, Shinseki was forced into an early retirement.
4) Incredibly bad civil occupation policies fueled resentment by the Iraqi people. Instead of keeping inefficient but functioning state-owned factories running that employed lots of people, the CPA disbanded those factories with some neo-con dream about how new private enterprise factories would just sprout up to take their place. Instead of reforming the Iraqi military and transitioning them into new police, military, or other jobs; the CPA disbanded the Iraqi military and sent them home with their weapons but without a paycheck. Instead of handing over Saddam's palaces to the Iraqi people, the USA took them over as military & diplomatic bases. (Meet the new boss, the same as the old boss.) Instead of hiring lots poor unemployed Iraqis, contractors imported low-wage foreign workers. The CPA's policies ensured that the the occupation would be a disaster . . . and as usual, the leader of this disaster was rewarded with a medal.
5) Incredibly bad military occupation policies fueled resentment by the Iraqi people. Checkpoints with a shoot-first, ask questions later policy has lead to hundreds (or thousands?) of killings of innocent civilians. House to house insurgents disrespected the people and violated cultural policies. Good anti-insurgent techniques were not adopted until very lately.
5) Very stupid interrogation (AKA torture) policies further strengthened insurgents. Even George Bush as admitted that Abu Ghraib was a disaster. But what he has not admitted is that he, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and torture-czar Gonzales are largely responsible for this. Instead of standing strong behind the Geneva conventions and official US policy, the Bush administration changed the definition of torture, they called the Geneva convention "quaint", and they said it didn't apply to many of their detainees. They created a new term of 'unlawful combatant' and tried to stuff these people into a legal black hole in Gitmo. The created a literal Gulag archipelago of secret prisons scattered in Europe, Asia, and the mid-East. And then when the Abu Ghraib scandal exploded, they actually had the chutzpah to blame it on 'a few bad apples'. No, the fish rots from the head . . . those 'few bad apples' were simply following along the guidelines they were given.

Anyone that thinks the GOP is better on defense is delusional. A party that took the only super-power and lost a war in a third world country cannot be viewed as 'good on defense'.