HOW W’S DYSFUNCTIONAL APPROACH MIRRORS IRAQ
By Schuyler ThorpeAuthor and Political ActivistTit-for-tat killings, and ineffective government, ill-equipped and under-trained security forces…
Ah…Iraq, Iraq, Iraq.
Is this the kind of model democracy that Bush wants to spread for the Middle East?
Apparently so.
Think about it for a second.
Why is Bush still believing that this failed war in Iraq is the only way a heralded democracy will work?
Because that is the way Bush
functions. He doesn’t see things in an orderly, judgmental fashion; but rather, a disorganized, and chaotic system of things–based partly on his own ineffective and incompetent leadership.
So what we see as disillusioned and out of the mainstream, Bush sees the exact
opposite. According to Rumsfeld (upon his departure as Secretary of Defense): “The war is not well known. It was not understood; it is too complex for people to understand.”
And that right there is also a
mirror of Bush’s approach to this war. And to Iraq's fragile democracy.
The people don’t understand, because they are not on the same wavelength as the Bush administration is. They are not as mentally deficient
as this administration is. So they can’t possibly understand
what is truly going on in Iraq–not without sinking down into the same chaotic instabilities which permeates the current governmental thinking.
And as a result of such instabilities, our own seat of government has become
isolated from the rest of the world–and not just from the reality around it.
Unfortunately, that reality is what has become the Iraq of today. Only because our President believes that in order to bring democracy and stability, we must bring forth disorder first, then chaos, and then finally…?
A full blown civil war.Which may have gotten started over the recent spat of bloodshed; where first a couple hundred Shiites died. The Shiite-run militias enacted revenge by setting some innocent Sunnis on fire–after they left from their daily prayers.
Yes, Bush
condemned the violence from the first attack, but he won’t on the second. Because in his mind, the Shiites should be the victors and the Sunnis should be the
victims this time around.
But the
victims are fighting back–having organized one of the most well-funded, and well-armed insurgencies that this world has seen in a generation.
And the Shiites are paying the price for their own arrogance. (Much like Bush paid for his in the recent mid-term elections.)
But what about the Iraqi troops? Why haven’t they stopped the bloodshed?
Because they are unable to.
In a recent Pentagon admission, our own troops were found to be ill-trained to carry out the task of rebuilding Iraq; let alone policing it properly–and training our Iraqi replacements at the same time.
Which leaves us where?
Caught flat-footed in this new civil war.
Of course, the military heads won’t admit it's happened. They say that the government is still there and the Iraqi army hasn't turned against it. But the collapse of the Iraqi government
will take place. Because Bush made it
happen. It’s what he’s wanted all along: Two
imperfect and dysfunctional models of democracy.
One Iraqi. One U.S. of A.
Schuyler Thorpe is an author, a political activist, and a frequent letter writer to The Everett Herald of Snohomish County. He can be reached at: starchildalpha1@yahoo.com
NO REALISTIC WAY OUT OF IRAQ; NO MATTER HOW WE PLAY IT
By Schuyler ThorpeAuthor and Political ActivistAt this point in time, it’s safe to say that Bush is certainly
wishing that he had never invaded Iraq on flawed and possibly
fixed intelligence in the first place. (The debate over this will most likely intensify in the months to come.)
But Bush felt that the time came for America to take the opportunity to expand its sphere of influence in the Middle East–after invading Afghanistan in October 2001 shortly after 9-11–and take out Iraq as well; by establishing a series of strategic and permanent bases in that beleaguered country from which to do…what? Spread democracy and
freedom abroad in some kind of ambitious plan of American influence and power?
Possibly.
However, the whole grandiose plan fell apart more quickly than anyone had originally hypothesized. True to form, we invaded Iraq just as quickly as we did Afghanistan–but based on the fears that Saddam still was a threat to the United States somehow, and needed to be dealt with swiftly.
And just like Vietnam, we believed that both of these countries would benefit from some kind of sweeping idyllic democracy based on our own Western foundations.
Unfortunately, things didn’t come to pass in either war. In LBJ’s or the current sitting President's. Both wars fell apart more quickly than either administration had imagined; leaving both Presidents severely disillusioned that–if given enough
time–things would work out for the best and we can leave on some kind of
victory note. One of which would vindicate both administrations and silence those critics whom have been verbally attacking the policies upon which had led to both conflicts.
And now–32 years after Vietnam–we are basically in the same position LBJ had placed our troops in so long ago.
With the insurgency unabated in its attacks and Malaki’s government unable to stem–let alone
contain–the violent attacks and secure the country, we are now faced with the all too real possibility that we will not be able to withdraw our forces for the next ten years (2016 at the latest), or even win the war militarily long enough to even constitute a significant drawdown of US forces.
Recent suggestions point to the likelihood that the Bush administration will be bogged down in serious indecision and a tug-of-war of its own as it tries to grapple with what it sees as a winnable situation. (Keep in mind that this
is the Bush administration we are talking about here. Nothing proffered would faze the White House in the
slightest.)
And while the administration continues to rally against those who are trying to seek an end to this failed war and those who are calling for withdrawal, events on the ground may end up forcing Bush to prematurely do what he’s accused his Democratic opponents of doing all this time:
Cutting our losses and running.After all, Bush has a legacy to think about. And a lame-duck one at that.
Schuyler Thorpe is an author, a political activist, and a frequent letter writer to The Everett Herald of Snohomish County. He can be reached at: starchildalpha1@yahoo.com
THE REALITIES OF WAR
By Schuyler ThorpeAuthor and Political ActivistAs the old saying goes, “I only have myself to blame”. I blame myself for voting in change and hopefully a change in course in this lopsided and increasingly lost war in Iraq.
Unfortunately, the
realities of war said, “Hold on a minute! You want
what again?”
A change in course?
Isn’t going to happen. At least that’s what the vulgarities in this mess is saying.
On Monday, top Democrats and some Republicans were saying that we don’t have enough troops to hold onto Iraq for an indefinite period of time. (That much is a given.) But the other shocker came when General Abizaid said that we don’t have enough troops
available to triple our current troop levels.
So does that mean we can
leave this nightmare and call it quits?
No.Surprised?
Don't be.
The frankness of the quagmire Bush and his cadre of corrupt Republicans has put our nation in is this:
We cannot win the war militarily, but the untenable situation in Iraq means that we can’t leave
either.
What does this mean for our troops?
It mean’s that this is the worst corundrum ever construed by the human mind on an international stage. Essentially, we’ve gotten ourselves trapped in a situation with no real exit. Because with each turn we take, we essentially find ourselves staring at one dead end after another.
Like an infinity loop.So regardless of what Democrats
wish to do may not be realized either. And with Bush at the helm of the decision-making process, he’ll make darned sure that we stay
stuck until the end of his term--then leave the mess for the next President to clean up. (Though he or she may not be able to deliver on all fronts then, either.)
The other thing which caught my attention was the comments that Abizaid said: “That the Iraqi government has at least 4-6 months to fix things before everything goes into a full blown civil war.” But many experts are already saying that this time has long since past--as Malaki's government is either unwilling or
unable to contain the everspreading violence.
Whatever happens from this point forward, at least we know that we have the next 4-6 months free and clear before we all hear this from the Bush administration: “We didn’t anticipate that the war in Iraq would last this long.” (A play on the words Bush used after Hurricane Katrina hit Louisiana in 2005.)
Schuyler Thorpe is an author, a political activist, and a frequent letter writer to The Everett Herald of Snohomish County. He can be reached at: starchildalpha1@yahoo.com
WILL OF THE PEOPLE…? MAYBE NOT
By Schuyler ThorpeAuthor and Political ActivistBe it easy enough in our sometimes tumultuous democracy that the people can freely vote and elect their choice in representatives: Sometimes based on party line, others based on issues which matter most to them.
This time around, the people’s choice has heavily favored the Democrats and so–as such–George Bush is finally getting the message from the
very people he had shunned openly for these last six years.
However!
However…
It may not bear as much fruit as one might think.
Welcome to the dark side of politics.
“…we the people of the United States of America; to form a more perfect union…” Obviously…?
Not this time.
Though the Democrats have captured control of both houses of Congress, Republican obstruction now remains a very
real possibility.
Such ironies is that the once powerful GOP had once branded the Democrats as ‘obstructionists’, now so the Republican minority in Congress could very well end up being the
spoilers of this new Congress for the next 2 years–thus dimming any good intentions set forth by the Democrats.
And their supporters are declaring this to be their intentions as well; announcing that if the Democrats don’t deliver as promised, they will also be kicked out in 2008.
But Bush is also widely speculated to wield his veto power greatly over any bills which the Democrat-led Congress proposes.
And it could very well be known as a ‘lame-duck’ Congress from a ‘do-nothing’ Congress until 2008.
Speculations aside, the only difference worth noting is that
this time, one party is reaching out across the divide to talk and work together–despite clear-cut animosities driven in these last 12 years as the minority party.
But will the Republicans and Bush follow suit? Or will it just go back to the way it was for the next two years?
Only time will tell.Schuyler Thorpe is an author, a political activist, and a frequent letter writer to The Everett Herald of Snohomish County. He can be reached at: starchildalpha1@yahoo.com
AMERICA MUST CHANGE FOR THE BETTER!
By Schuyler ThorpeAuthor and Political ActivistLatest polls and voter sentiment have painted Bush and the GOP with a big fat bulls-eye this November 7th. And right now, the wave is growing. Not since 1972, 1938, and 1894, have the people been so motivated for a change in course!
Of course, the GOP and Bush are desperate to hold onto their tenuous positions of power by saying--and
inventing--things which have more to do with lies than the actual truth.
Unlike 2002 and 2004 where the GOP held the upper ground in 'Get out the Vote', this time around, Democrats have one-upped their Republican constituents by doing it much earlier (1.5 years early) and doing it more often.
And while the Republicans and Bush are trying their hardest to paint the Democrats as soft on terrorists and wanting to raise your taxes, the sad truth is that the majority party already is soft on terrorism and has already raised your median taxes for the middle class and the poor.
Now, if you are rich and wealthy, then you would see a
reducation in those same taxes. But the burden of the debt has been pushed onto the middle class and the poor--and along with it; generations of unborn Americans who have to shoulder the pain of this administration's spending spree.
As for terrorism, this government has reversed course on its stance in getting OBL; instead content in snagging a powerless and impotent dictator who hid in a coffin-sized hole for 9 months--and thus branding
him as the mastermind behind 9-11.
On top of that, Muslim extremism has exploded across the globe, and anti-American sentiment has never been higher. And terrorism itself has seen a 600% increase in attacks over the last year.
As for Iraq? The recent NIE has openly suggested that our presence there in that war-torn nation is doing nothing but
feeding the insurgency; rather than stemming the flow.
And here we have, George Bush and the Republicans saying that this isn't the case, and that if Democrats were to
win, terrorists win.
Has anyone thought to tell the President the truth about the reality of this world and what is going on in Iraq? Or is he just content to be just as dysfunctional and disconnected from reality, as the rest of his party (and administration) currently is?
Whether Bush likes it or not, change is
coming! The people will no longer stand by and allow this travesty to continue unchecked. Our nation needs a serious check and balance!
What we don't
need is more of the same from George Bush and the Republican Party!
So what will you do, America? What will your answer be on November 7th?
Will we finally stand united or will we fall further divided
?Schuyler Thorpe is an author, a political activist, and a frequent letter writer to The Everett Herald of Snohomish County. He can be reached at: starchildalpha1@yahoo.com
