Not because his second sentence was ungrammatical:
"This has been tough weeks in that country."
Not because he pronounced "instigated" as
"instikated" in his fourth sentence.
Not because he said Donald Rumsfeld was Secretary of
State.
Not because of his foolish comment that before 9/11
"we assumed oceans would protect us." (Ever since the
Russians built their first ICBMs fifty years ago, the
oceans haven't protected us.)
Not because he said of the August 6 briefing,
"Frankly, I didn't think it was anything new"!
Not because he said that even if he had known
beforehand that Iraq did not have WMD stockpiles, he
still would have gone to war against Saddam Hussein.
Not because he had no coherent answer as to why Dick
Cheney must hold his hand when he testifies to the
9/11 commission.
Not because he said that no one in his Administration
had "any indication that bin Laden might hijack an
airplane and run it into a building," when in fact,
at the Genoa G-8 summit, there were precautions taken
against incoming airplanes as missiles.
And not because he repeatedly refused to take a shred
of personal responsibility for allowing the 9/11
attacks to happen on his watch.
No, his performance was scary because he plunged the
United States deeper into a no-win war in Iraq.
"We will finish the job of the fallen," he said.
He gave only a pro forma nod toward the additional
innocent Iraqis the United States may kill in the
process.
"We will continue taking the greatest care to prevent
harm to innocent civilians; yet we will not permit
the spread of chaos and violence," he said. "I have
directed our military commanders to make every
preparation to use decisive force, if necessary, to
maintain order and to protect our troops."
He reiterated this point later, saying, "Our
commanders on the ground have got the authority
necessary to deal with violence, and will--and will
in firm fashion."
Here is the President warning that U.S. troops, who
have already killed more than 600 Iraqis in the last
week, will have a free hand.
That is a signal for slaughter.
He also continued to underestimate the resistance the
United States is facing in Iraq. He called it "a
power grab by extremist and ruthless elements." He
said, "It is not a civil war. It is not a popular
uprising." And, astonishingly, he asserted, "Most of
Iraq is relatively stable."
That is not what many reporters have seen with their
own eyes, and it is not what the TV screens are
portraying.
What's more, Bush's vow to unleash "decisive force"
will only make things worse.
He indicated that he will go after Moqtada al-Sadr,
saying the cleric "must answer the charges against
him and disband his illegal militia." This strongly
suggests that Bush will order his troops to, as one
senior commander said, "kill or capture" al-Sadr. And
if that happens, all hell could break loose.
In his Manichaean worldview, Bush lumped the Iraqi
insurgents in with the terrorists of 9/11. They are
all "enemies of civilization," he said, and they
share "a fanatical political ideology."
But many of those who are fighting against the U.S.
occupation are not Al Qaeda members who want to
destroy America and are not subscribers to the
"ideology of terror." Rather, many are Iraqi
nationalists who want to expel America from their own
country because they have seen the brutality of the
U.S. occupation.
That's a huge difference, and Bush makes a terrible
mistake by conflating the two.
He also seems to have a static view of who the enemy
is. He sees it as a finite group of innate murderers
and evildoers. He thinks that all he needs to do is
kill all the bad guys and victory is his.
But he doesn't understand that his policy is creating
new enemies by the thousands every single day.
He warned that if the United States does not take
"resolute action" and does not "stay the course" in
Iraq, it will "recruit a new generation of killers."
What he failed to grasp is that by maintaining the
brutal occupation, he himself is recruiting that
generation.
And the more "firm" and "decisive" the U.S. military
response, the more recruits Bush will be enlisting to
fight against the United States.
Interestingly, the first question Bush got was on the
Vietnam comparison.
But Bush did not want to hear anything about it. "The
analogy is false," he said, without explaining why.
He did, however, suggest that it was almost
treasonous to raise the specter of Vietnam. "That
analogy sends the wrong message to our troops and to
the enemy," he said.
(This is an echo of John Ashcroft's infamous
statement that "those who scare peace-loving people
with the phantoms of lost liberty" are giving "aid"
and "ammunition" to America's enemies.)
In previous remarks, Bush has made clear that he
believes the lesson of Vietnam is two-fold: first,
that the political leaders interfered with the
generals, and second, that the United States did not
use overwhelming force.
If that is the lesson he applies here, the generals
will run the war, and overwhelming force will be the
order of the day.
Expect more troops to be sent over soon, or to have
their tours extended. Bush said if General Abizaid
wants more troops, which he does, he'll get them.
Bush also displayed again the full fervor of his
messianic militarism.
Several times he mentioned that the war offered a
"historic opportunity to change the world."
In one of his most emphatic moments, he said, "I also
have this belief, strong belief, that freedom is not
this country's gift to the world; freedom is the
Almighty's gift to every man and woman in this world.
And as the greatest power on the face of the Earth,
we have an obligation to help the spread of freedom."
This is Bush saying that he is doing God's work in
Iraq. That is a particularly inappropriate claim to
make, leaving aside the obvious leaping of the
church/state wall. Given that Bush has chosen to wage
war in an Islamic country, it is unlikely that there
are many Iraqis who are anxious to hear Bush's
theological justifications.
Bush's rhetoric is proof once again that the
government of the United States is in the hands of a
crude and deluded leader, whose war policy in Iraq
promises more disasters to come.
"Our work may become more difficult before it is
finished," he said.
With Bush's approach, that is a guarantee.
Tags: Saswat, USA, Bush