Tuesday, March 21, 2006
King George the Clueless
George W. Bush, stung from embarrassingly low poll numbers, is out in a media blitz to sell the American people on his war in Iraq. I suspect people are not buying it. In his speeches he talks about how Iraq isn't in a civil war (despite claims to the contrary by Iraq's interim prime minister...what the hell does he know about his country, anyway?) and now is saying troops will not be coming home until 2009. Bush doesn't want to set a timetable for troops withdrawal because it will encourage insurgents. You know, the insurgents seem to be doing their thing without our encouragement.
Why must the Bush administration deny reality? It's obvious that Iraq is in a civil war, or at least fast approaching one. But W. has a very different world-view and seems to think things are just peachy in Iraq. I wonder if he knows that Baghdad gets only four hours of electricity a day, or that it's not uncommon for people to wait 12 hours in a queue for gas. Isn't that mindbogling? Iraq produces tons of oil, yet its own citizens have to wait half a day in the broiling heat to get gasoline. While risking their lives to do so.
So, we'll get another couple years of a couple thousand flag-draped coffins coming home, and thousands of healthy young men will find themselves amputees, brain damaged, or blind, all thanks to George W. Bush. I've even heard some Iraqis say that things were better under Saddam Hussein, that as long as they didn't cause trouble, life was okay. It's pretty bad when the people you've liberated pine for the days when they lived under the hand of a brutal dictator. Then again, trading in a brutal dictator for insurgents who like to blow people up daily doesn't seem like a good trade-off. I've said it before and I'll say it again: if we in the United States can train our military and police forces in the space of a few months to do their jobs, why can't we do the same thing in Iraq?
Oh, and just as an aside, but has anyone seen Osama Bin Laden lately? It'd be nice to put behind bars the man responsible for the attacks of 9/11. I wonder why we don't make his capture a priority? No reason, probably.
|
George W. Bush, stung from embarrassingly low poll numbers, is out in a media blitz to sell the American people on his war in Iraq. I suspect people are not buying it. In his speeches he talks about how Iraq isn't in a civil war (despite claims to the contrary by Iraq's interim prime minister...what the hell does he know about his country, anyway?) and now is saying troops will not be coming home until 2009. Bush doesn't want to set a timetable for troops withdrawal because it will encourage insurgents. You know, the insurgents seem to be doing their thing without our encouragement.
Why must the Bush administration deny reality? It's obvious that Iraq is in a civil war, or at least fast approaching one. But W. has a very different world-view and seems to think things are just peachy in Iraq. I wonder if he knows that Baghdad gets only four hours of electricity a day, or that it's not uncommon for people to wait 12 hours in a queue for gas. Isn't that mindbogling? Iraq produces tons of oil, yet its own citizens have to wait half a day in the broiling heat to get gasoline. While risking their lives to do so.
So, we'll get another couple years of a couple thousand flag-draped coffins coming home, and thousands of healthy young men will find themselves amputees, brain damaged, or blind, all thanks to George W. Bush. I've even heard some Iraqis say that things were better under Saddam Hussein, that as long as they didn't cause trouble, life was okay. It's pretty bad when the people you've liberated pine for the days when they lived under the hand of a brutal dictator. Then again, trading in a brutal dictator for insurgents who like to blow people up daily doesn't seem like a good trade-off. I've said it before and I'll say it again: if we in the United States can train our military and police forces in the space of a few months to do their jobs, why can't we do the same thing in Iraq?
Oh, and just as an aside, but has anyone seen Osama Bin Laden lately? It'd be nice to put behind bars the man responsible for the attacks of 9/11. I wonder why we don't make his capture a priority? No reason, probably.
