Sunday, October 29, 2006

Bush in the Ring of Fire

President GW Bush's brain trust at the White House has decided to counter Bush's sinking popularity and help his Party by more intensely projecting him on the public. They decided to increase his exposure with speeches at fund raisers, press conferences, and one-on-ones with media TV elites. When a Democratic spokesman was asked what he thought about this, he replied: BRING HIM ON. BUSH HAS THE SAME APPEAL TO THE PUBLIC AS MEL GIBSON AT A B'NAI BETH MEETING.

Despite his extended experience as a politician, you have to admit GW Bush is an inept public speaker. He does passable, albeit quirky, work with prepared speeches; but his off the cuff performances make even a high school speech teacher cringe. He mumbles, bumbles and links his thoughts with long, embarrassing AHHHHHs. His delivery of prepared material almost always smacks of the repetitive cheerleader. But let's give him a break and focus on substance rather than style.

In two of the one-on-one interviews last week, he managed inadvertently to make news. This was a surprise, because he usually just safely repeats off the shelf talking points or puffs himself up as the number one decision maker of America or better yet, its personal body guard against terror; although one time he told us he read three books on George Washington. Maybe he was trying to understand why George Washington confessed to chopping down a cherry tree – telling the truth is certainly something GW Bush would not do.

He told one interviewer that the recent bloodbath in Iraq reminded him of the TET OFFENSIVE in the Vietnam War. He told another that he was assured Red China and Russia would help him curb North Korean and Iranian nuclear ambitions. So what is the significance of these off hand comments?

Up until Bush's Tet Offensive characterization, mention of the Vietnam War in connection with the Iraq War was taboo by the Administration. Vietnam was a stinging US defeat – Casus belli now appears as confused as it is in Iraq. The Republic of Vietnam's soldiers fought with the same lack of exuberance defending their government as the Iraqi security forces do now. So such analogies were not helpful nor did they build public confidence as Bush became stuck in his Iraqi quagmire. Tet was a much more bloody affair than the last couple weeks in Iraq; 6000 American and Vietnam forces were killed and an estimated 50,000 North Vietnam and Vietcong died. It was a military victory for the US, but ironically, it was also a turning point of the war against the US. When asked about his heavy losses at TET after the war, Communist General Giap said that he viewed war as a synthesis of military, political and diplomatic factors. So when you hear the US cannot be defeated militarily in Iraq, consider General Giap's winning strategy.

By the way, it has been reported that Hopeless Henry Kissinger, an ardent promoter of the Iraqi war, now visits GW Bush regularly at the White House. Among Henry's regrettable credentials was that he extended the Vietnamese War two years, pointlessly incurring serious US casualties. Henry's role may explain GW Bush's mindless "stay the course" policy. Whatever you do Mr. President, DO NOT BOMB CAMBODIA OR LAOS, despite what Hopeless Henry advises.

As far as Russia or Red China support for US national security goals, it is simply not realpolitick; China and Russia are sharply competitive and despite nonsense about a global fraternity, these two countries quietly savor every US setback. GW Bush has an almost dream-like, childish illusion that his personal contact with their leadership means they support him in his national security objectives. Russia and China do not have the same sense of urgency over Iranian pursuit of nuc capabilities as the US, that is stuck with a policy of protecting and defending Israel. Russia and China figure that if Israel, Pakistan and India have the bomb, what is the big deal if the Iran follows... China and Russia also have special trade relationships with Iran, whereas the US does not even have diplomatic relations. As far as North Korea, China protects North Korea, and Russia has a strong military sales relationship with China – even conducts combined maneuvers. So these realities are masked by sweet talking GW Bush and the president sadly appears to be befuddled by Russian and Chinese smoke screens.

Ah, Iraq – in the last week or so, there was a serious spike in US casualties and the insurgents destroyed a massive US ammunition dump outside Baghdad. Additionally, a US General admitted that US military operations are not able to establish security. The British Army Chief of Staff spoke out stating that the occupation forces in Iraq fuel the insurgency, and although the English government seemed perturbed that the General spoke out of channels, no one disagreed with the substance of his remarks.

The Iraq war has set Bush's political house on fire; over two thirds of Americans realize they have been misled by the war and now are mad enough to vote his party out of office in congressional and local elections this November. Bush’s response has been to hold meetings with the top generals with the aim of changing tactics – as of now the Iraq forces trained by the US remain unreliable, and this will continue. No Iraqi wants to die for a corrupt puppet of the US government when the majority of Iraqis want Yankee to go home.

Now the fiasco in Iraq is reaching critical mass – it is not tactics, it is the strategy. Bush has apparently dropped his slogan, STAY THE COURSE and has redefined Iraq democracy to be some sort of amorphous strong man at the top. As in Vietnam, Bush may be tempted to support a military dictatorship to keep the country from complete collapse, but even that would fall apart as the locus of power in Iraq still resides in the militias. Before the insurgents close the main supply routes and penetrate the Green Zone, suggest a staged US withdrawal. Senator McCain's and neocons’ call for more troops in Iraq is nuts – it is defeat in detail all over again, ala Vietnam, as insurgents would match the incrementally increased US forces.

Bush now seems to settle on hectoring the Iraqi government to disband the militias as a solution. Problem is that the militias are part of the government. A threat by the US to depart Iraqi may frighten some small group of Iraqis and Kurds, but most Iraqis want departure sooner, not later. Most of those Iraqi purple fingers want the US out right now - vox populi.

Resurrection of Kissinger by Bush has comic-tragic implications: two losers hopelessly embracing each other. Based on TV appearances, Kissinger gives the impression of being in his dotage – his last misdeed was a deluded notion of extending oil and water pipelines from Iraq to Haifa, Israel. With US bayonets in Baghdad and his tribesman Wolfowitz as chief at the World Bank, such miracles may still happen over the dead bodies of Iraqis and Americans. Kissinger wrote an OpEd in the Washington Post titled THE ROAD TO JERUSALEM IS THROUGH BAGHDAD. Wrong again, Henry... Robert E Bartos Colonel USA RET


Anonymous Anonymous said...


Outstanding writing/insight again. Have you approached WorldNet Daily?

I feel your following should be much larger.




Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home