Only In Your Dreams, GI!

by pessimist

I'll be home for Christmas, If only in my dreams

This melancholy marker of the season written for the Greatest Generation (as they continued with the sadly necessary task of making the world safe for unrivaled American corporatism) reflected the realistic understanding that the job they were doing required that they make sacrifices - such as missing Christmas with the family - if they were going to rid the world of Hitler and Tojo. The only problem: other tyrants later rose up in their stead, and in the very land they were defending.

One thing that the GI of WWII clearly understood was the reason for being involved in it. Japan had attacked the United States in support of their effort to establish economic colonies in Asia, and Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy declared war on the US due to treaty obligations with Japan. Thus, there was nothing left but to fight the good fight and win it.

But today, things aren't quite so clear cut. Despite all the outraged outcry from the wrong-wing, there was no supportable justification for invading Iraq, no reason offered up for the invasion by Bu$hCo that stands up in the light of rational examination. Nothing to explain why 2163 Americans (as of post date) died attempting to steal control of Iraq's oil - something 159,000 U.S. troops will spend this Christmas continuing instead of being home with their families for Kwaanza/Chanukkah/Christmas where they should be.

But since we broke the country through the rash application of your clumsy preemptive war policy, we get to deal with the nation rebuilding issue you once sought to avoid. Worse yet, we're going to go it alone soon. Now that the excuse to keep them in Iraq - the election - is officially concluded, our allies can't get out of Iraq fast enough. Bulgaria and Ukraine are on their way, while Tony the Killer Attack Lap Poodle says he's leaving also.

It's clear to everyone involved that it's time to go - even Rummy sees it:

Rumsfeld Says U.S. to Cut Iraq Troop Levels

There were 159,000 U.S. troops in Iraq on Thursday. The Pentagon sent an extra 20,000 troops to Iraq to bolster security during the recent elections, and Rumsfeld has previously said those 20,000 would be withdrawn in January to return U.S. force levels to a 138,000 baseline. Rumsfeld has said repeatedly that troop reductions depend on political progress in Iraq ....

Political progress in Iraq... just HOW did King George define this in his Second Inaugural Address?

"Freedom, by its nature, must be chosen, and defended by citizens, and sustained by the rule of law and the protection of minorities. America will not impose our own style of government on the unwilling. Our goal, instead, is to help others find their own voice, attain their own freedom and make their own way."

OK, nice sentiment. But what does this mean in Iraq?

Bush, Rumsfeld and other administration officials have said a withdrawal would begin when the U.S.-trained Iraqi security forces show sufficient signs of being able to defend the country against insurgents.

For an Iraqi security force trained by anybody to be effective, there has to be a government that has the confidence of the population. From the sound of this, that condition isn't being met:

Iraqis March, Say Elections Were Rigged

Large demonstrations broke out across the country Friday to denounce parliamentary elections that protesters say were rigged in favor of the main religious Shiite coalition. Sunni Arab and secular Shiite factions demanded Thursday that an international body review election fraud complaints, and threatened to boycott the new legislature.

When a government isn't meeting the needs of the people, bad things happen. Just ask Marie Antoinette! Or, better yet, ask one of the Iraqis who is attempting to bring some kind of order to the American-caused chaos that is claimed to be his nation:

[G]unmen attacked an Iraqi army checkpoint in the city of Adhaim, in religiously and ethnically mixed Diyala province, killing eight soldiers and wounding seventeen, an Iraqi army officer said on condition he not be identified for fear of reprisal. "There were too many to count," said Akid, a 20-year-old soldier from Diwanayah being treated for gunshot wounds to both thighs. "They tried to kill everybody."

Akid, who would only give his first name for fear of reprisal, said his battalion of about 600 men had already suffered over 250 desertions after a Dec. 3 ambush in Adhaim killed 19 Iraqi soldiers.

"They gave up," he said. "They said, 'The hell with this.'"

Uh, Donny-boy, that doesn't sound like Iraqi Security Forces Working Toward Self-Sufficiency or More Iraqi battalions 'in the lead' against rebels. But then, you do have some built-in excuses, don't you?

Above you said, and I quote, "a withdrawal would begin when the U.S.-trained Iraqi security forces show sufficient signs of being able to defend the country against insurgents", but as of Nov. 29, 2005, you are trying to exclaim Don’t call Iraqi enemy ‘insurgents’, which is defined as one:

Rising in revolt against established authority, especially a government.

Does this mean that the war is over and you won? Or does this mean that your precious PNAC-generated Iraqi Interim Government isn't the established authority of Iraq? Certainly, when the corporate mainstream media begins asking questions, one has to wonder 'just what the facts is':

Bush’s view of Iraq doesn’t square with reality
Iraq’s capabilities, American support fall short of confident assessments

President Bush’s depiction of Iraqi security forces as “helping to turn the tide” is difficult to square with persistent setbacks in handing control of the country back to its own people. The deficiency was highlighted recently when Iraqis put out a call for more former officers from Saddam Hussein’s army to rejoin the armed forces.

As he did before the invasion, Bush tied Iraq to terrorism, to make the case that a stable Iraq would make for a safer America. He declared, “The terrorists have made it clear that Iraq is the central front in their war against humanity. And so we must recognize Iraq as the central front in the war on terror.”

Iraq was not the terrorists’ chosen battlefield until Saddam was defeated and extremists poured across unsecured borders.

Ah, things would be so much easier if America was a dictatorship and you were the dictator, wouldn't it, George? No embarrassing revelations of your incompetence and delusional strategies!

Without Iraq in the news all the time, we would be able to check up on your other effort to rid the world of 'terrists' - which also isn't going very well:

In Afghanistan, .... some officers said the hostile forces were making gains by acquiring more advanced weaponry, such as armor-piercing munitions, and improving their training and organization.

Asked whether conditions in southern Afghanistan are more dangerous than earlier in the conflict, Capt. Matthew Harmon, commander of headquarters company, 1st Battalion, 3rd Special Forces Group, said in an interview, "That's a very fair assessment." Harmon is serving his fourth tour in Afghanistan.

Capt. Chris Sample said the 1st Battalion had engaged in 88 firefights in the past six months. That is more than in its three previous Afghanistan deployments combined, he said. There also has been a recent increase in vehicle-borne suicide bombers, he said.

I guess the Other Rich White Oil Executive's Burden isn't such a good place to hide behind in the glaring light of your extra-legal domestic surveillance efforts, is it? But then, maybe you can find a scapegoat for that war and cover your back!

You know, it's clear that you don't read the speeches you give. You don't think much about what you are saying, either. What kind of better place could you be in now if you listened to your own words (from the Second Inaugural Address)?

"The leaders of governments with long habits of control need to know to serve your people, you must learn to trust them. We will encourage reform in other governments by making clear that success in our relations will require the decent treatment of their own people."

You might start with your own government, Maybe then other national leaders will start listening to you again. Maybe then you won't only get a picture of a lump of coal in your Kwaanz-anukkah-mas stocking.

Maybe then 159,000 Americans would really have a Happy Holiday.

Copyrighted [©] source material contained in this article is presented under the provisions of Fair Use.

FAIR USE NOTICE

This article contains copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material available in my efforts to advance understanding of democracy, economic, environmental, human rights, political, scientific, and social justice issues, among others. I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material in this article is distributed without profit for research and educational purposes.