In recent speeches by politicians the World has been told that conventional forces (the Surge) are doing well against unconventional forces (terrorists) in Iraq.
The Bush team seems to be floating this idea. General Petraeus first gave some credit to Al-Sadr for some of the quiet in Iraq because quiet came to Iraq after Al-Sadr’s ceasefire. The United Nations has given some credit to Al-Sadr for the quiet in Iraq. But a following Bush team report removed Al-Sadr’s name and inserted Mr. Bush and his Surge. General Petraeus’ boss is America’s Commander In Chief. Mr. Bush is America’s Commander in Chief.
The Surge is too little too late.
Mainstream America, in 2003, asked the Bush team if it did not need more troops. The Bush team said no. So, the Bush team marched off to Iraq with seemingly a single objective in mind – get Saddam Hussein. And the Bush team did.
How did the Bush team manage its OBLIGATION to Iraqi non-combatants?
The Bush team’s 2003 Secretary of State, Colin L. Powell, had brought up the OBLIGATION to Iraqi non-combatants. He said the Bush team would control the hopes and aspirations of some twenty-five million Iraqi citizens. The Bush team ignored the hopes and aspirations of twenty-five million Iraqi people. Some 2,000,000 Iraqi citizens became refugees.
A British diplomat, Sir Jeremy Greenstock, was looking for the American general whose responsibility it was to start a new government. He looked – but he found no one. The streets of Baghdad descended into CHAOS.
The Bush team’s response was, “STAY THE COURSE”.
Where was the Surge? Was the Surge incubating? The Surge would show up four years later. Too little, too late.
The Bush team’s attack on Iraq was a typical Bush team train wreck performance. “Nobody don’t know what caused the Bush team to march off to war against Iraq”. The yellowcake assertion looked almost like a ruse.
Once the Bush team accomplished its objective of removing a sitting government, the non-combatants were on their own. The Bush team did not provide security. There was no police force and no army. The planning and execution of the Iraq war was Bush team “wisdom” in action.
The Bush team and its allies do not want to be held accountable for war crimes or crimes against humanity.
And elected politicians, to some extent, seem to be “birds of a feather”. So the electorate is using the only tools it has to try to fix something the elected politicians not only won’t fix, but won’t even talk about. The elected politicians stand MUTE on the cause of the Iraqi war.
So, the UK and American citizens are trying to do something their politicians are loath to do – charge themselves with war crimes.The UK politicians want to change the law that gives their citizens the right to bring war crime charges against them and/or military leaders.
Since America does not have a law equivalent to the UK’s, American politicians can ignore the calls by the electorate for impeachment of the Bush team. Only America’s House of Representatives can impeach an American president. When the Republicans had control of the House of Representatives they exercised their impeachment power for something as trivial as “failing to tell the truth about improper touching”.
The Democrats now have leadership of the House of Representatives. Somebody’s blog post, long ago, said that “impeachment was off the table”. If that is true then some politician may have traded away a right of the American electorate. It does seem strange that ” … improper touching” could rate impeachment while possible war crimes gets a pass.
If problems are not fixed, they remain.
And terrorists will continue to be terrorists. And the world’s citizens who are against the Iraq war will continue to try and get accountability for the Iraqi war. And those responsible for the Iraq war will continue to “duck” responsibility from any charge of Iraqi war crimes. And the Surge, too little too late, will not fool all of the people all of the time. And women suicide bombers will likely keep on being women suicide bombers.
There are mindsets that believe that a military solution can solve any problem. How many of the 25,000,000 Iraqi citizens will need to be killed before pacification/democracy takes root? Is force-feeding democracy to a country acceptable? Is war the best vehicle to provide the force-feeding of democracy to a country? Is this the first time in the history of America that it has attempted to, via war, force-feed democracy upon another country? “America didn’t used to be this way”. Could the Iraqi war management have been mainly a civilian management performance? It is difficult to believe that America’s military could “botch” something up the way the Iraq war was “botched” up. The Iraq war “sports” the Modus Operandi of the Bush team.
The Bush team has already proved that the Surge will not stop terrorism. All that remains is for the Bush team to absorb what is clearly evident.
Who believes what the 2003 Secretary of Defense said – when he said “its not about the oil”. It sure was not about the Iraqi people. What was left?
