The Surge and Common Sense
It would be interesting to see that panel of centrist Republicans and Democrats try to make sense of the Iraq war.The Iraq war is a major problem that America is facing. The panel would not have to go to the trouble of “sparking a national revolt” on the Iraq war issue. That “Iraqi war national revolt” has been around since 2003. Back then, the loyal opposition was called “fascist sympathizers“.
And four years later, the electorate still has not been told, via TELL AMERICA news sources of the “demise” of yellowcake The electorate must try to use COMMON SENSE to figure out why the Iraq war was started.
America has been told a troop surge of some 20,000 or more soldiers will make Iraq better. It should. That number of troops added anywhere should make an impact. But the Iraqi impact is special.
The Iraqi Surge is fine – it is just four years too late. Common sense says the SURGE could have been way more effective had it happened in 2003 – before Iraq was allowed to sink into CHAOS. But now the managers of the Iraq war, seem to be in a face-saving mode. They appear to be looking for something positive to present to those shouldering the financial and human cost of this il-advised, mystery-laden Iraq war.
It is likely that nobody can make sense out of wrecking a government and leaving the civilian non-combatants to “manage their own security” for a period of four years. It is likely that nobody can make sense of “fighting terrorists” by giving them the run of Baghdad’s streets for four years. The Bush team told mainstream America in 2003 that it did not need more troops (a surge) but that flies in face of the Bush team’s handling of its responsibility for LAW AND ORDER in the newly vanquished Iraq. Iraq has been called HARD and some of the reason for that might have to do with the Bush team’s planning and execution.
It simply looks like civilians had a major impact on how the Iraq war was planned and executed.
There seemed to be too many surprises in the Iraq war. It is easy to believe that civilians, “unaccustomed as they are to managing wars” might leave “stuff” out. The Bush team left out a major “fact” of wars – when you win(and you are America) you have a responsibility to the civilian non-combatants. And the Bush team would likely have made a success of its Iraqi war had the population seen positive improvements in their lives. Common sense would dictate that.
And again, the timing of the 2007 surge was late – by about four years.
Common sense would likely TELL AMERICA where its major problem is. America is a democratic country(or a republic if you like). America is not a KINGDOM. If America starts to behave like a KINGDOM, likely - somebody is not doing their job.
The American House of Representatives is where Executive oversight starts. The House of Representatives can rein in an American President via impeachment. The House earlier did just that – but that President was a Democrat and he was involved in a personal act that caused no harm to the country. But the neo-cons were ravenous. They sensed an impeachment and their mood was festive. They seemed to be having a good time – until that magazine publisher offered a handsome sum of money to a lady who could verify a similar experience with Republicans. The festive neo-con atmosphere took on a somber mood as neo-cons, perhaps expecting retribution, started confessing.
It was said that the American electorate was not driven to impeach President Bill Clinton but the Republicans in Congress and the PRESS were.
Contrast “failing to tell the truth about improper touching” to starting a war based upon yellowcake which “nobody never found”. And look at how the yellowcake idea was created. The Bush team used foreign intelligence to “detect” the yellowcake. America’s intelligence – the CIA, was passed over for the foreign intelligence “information” because the foreign intelligence product fit the Bush team’s plans better. So, the Bush team used foreign intelligence rather than American intelligence.The Foreign intelligence said what the Bush team wanted it to say.
The office of the President of the United States of America, where creditability ought to reside, told the world about a yellowcake connection between Niger and Iraq. And the world believed. And America believed. And a war was started based upon that belief. But there was no yellowcake connection. And how was America told there was no yellow cake connection? By the standard “TELL AMERICA” news sources? No!
After the Bush team got caught with fake foreign intelligence, there was sort of an admission. Getting caught with fake foreign intelligence prompted a kind of rethinking of America’s intelligence. After getting caught with fake foreign intelligence – America’s intelligence service started to look more reliable than foreign intelligence. Whatever it takes – right?
You can read James Bovard’s article, “Bush’s WMD Flimflams” here:
http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0309d.asp
The House(Republicans) was ready and willing to impeach a President over failing to tell the truth about “improper touching” but could not “see fit” to impeach Presidential Behavior that started a war. ImpeachBush.Org collected about 1,000,000 signatures asking the House to do its job. But perhaps the politician to politician BOND was stronger than the politician to electorate BOND.
Is this panel of centrist Republicans and Democrats looking in the right place when it targets a future President’s Cabinet. Let the next president, whoever it is, continue to select those he/she will be working closely with. That is a prerogative that should not be tampered with. Let the “board of directors” idea stay with the congress’s oversight function. When the oversight function breaks – fix it. The House of Representative’s OVERSIGHT FUNCTION IS BROKEN. How will fixing the next president’s cabinet fix those House members who did not do their jobs?
Would a bipartisan cabinet of a president help get the House of Representatives to do its job? The impeachment process should have either convicted or not convicted the Bush team. How would the suggestion of the centrist Republicans and Democrats ensure political respect and functionality of the oversight that one equal branch has over the other. How will the Centrist group stop the next Republican leader of the House of Representatives from standing shoulder-to-shoulder with the Executive branch as it trampled American laws?
The Bush team has done a lot of talking – rhetoric comes naturally. The Bush’s teams performance is still on track – to collide with something going in the opposite direction. There is a list of Bush team performance train-wrecks. If the Bush team has not or will not “COME CLEAN” on its Iraq activities – the electorate should try to figure out things themselves.
