Iraq Speech Prologue

Posted by Seth Kramer on Wednesday, January 10th 2007 at 8:09pm


President Bush doesn't addresses the nation frequently. However tonight he is doing so at 9pm. So since this is a special occasion I'll be doing what I always do. Mocking him, while drinking, live.

If you've been living under a rock (not Iraq) for the last 4 years here's the redux. Following a several months of inspection by UNMOVIC's Hans Blix in March of 2003 troops were mobilized to topple the government of Saddam Hussein in order to find and destroy weapons of mass destruction that the American people were told could, or would be sold to terrorist groups. There was a brief struggle, but after a campaign dubbed "Shock and Awe" by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Baghdad fell, Saddam's children were killed, and in December of '03 Saddam would be found hiding in a hole in the ground near Tikrit. The original rationale for invasion, the weapons, would never be found, nor would any operation ties to Al Qaeda.

Meanwhile in April of '03 with the Saddam's Baath Party was deposed, all Baathists, even low-level beaurocrats, were taken out of power. The army was disbanded, and their weapons were not taken. Looting began, to which Sec. Rumsfeld would respond "Stuff happens". Law and order had begun to break down in Baghdad. Tensions would grow between the Shia and Sunni factions. Iraq, a largely Shia country, previously ruled by a Sunni dictator would begin to see the influence of Iran, it's Shia neighbor and enemy in an 8 year war in the 1980s.

Anti-American sentiment would grow until it finally boiled over in the Spring of 2004 in Fallujah (see: Fallujah Is The Cemetery Of The Americans.) It would never again be contained. From that point on we have, as I said in that blog, attempted to "Help the Iraqi people establish a government of their choosing, and rebuild." It has become clear in recent months that Iraq has plunged into a civil war. The people of Iraq are more concerned with killing one another over their religion than rebuilding the mess that their country is in. As long as this remains true we cannot help them, unless we choose a team to join, and kill the opposite side. This we cannot do, not only because it would be wrong, but also because neither side would take us.

I believe the men and women in our armed forces in Iraq are doing all they can to put a lid on this, to solve the problems of Iraq. But Iraq's problems remain, and it is not the fault of these men and women. It is the fault of the Iraqi government for not attempting to heal these divisions. The current Iraqi PM is either impotent or simply doesn't care. In my view, an increase in troops, temporary or not, will not solve the fundamental problem in Iraq. So what's the solution? I don't like saying it but I think we have to leave let them fight this battle. All we are is collateral damage, and an increase in troops will simply provide more targets. I don't like leaving Iraq in disrepair, but it is only so because the Iraqi people have made repair impossible. It is embarrassing to leave now, but it will be embarassing to leave later. Now has the advantage of fewer deaths. Iraq was a mistake. I have believed so from the beginning, back in my days of letter-writing for the Howard Dean campaign.

Mr. Bush is expected to call for more money, and more troops for Iraq. More blood and treasure to pour into the desert. Why? Why are we to believe that this will solve anything? The President is fully aware he has zero credibility among the American people. November made that clear. Not only did his party loose the House, but they lost the Senate in part due to corruption, in part because they chose to not perform oversight, but mostly because people are very angry with Mr. Bush and his war and their only recourse was to vote for the other team. Democrats should know that this is unfortunately not a mandate for their policies, it is simply an outpouring of dissapproval for the existing ones.

The bar has been set quite high for the President. After his critcism of the Iraq Study Group's recommendations--a report which seemed designed to put an easy-to-swallow bipartisan gelcap over what amounts to a pull out--he said he'd need a month or so to prepare a plan and speech, and everyone's been waiting on pins and needles. As I write this MSNBC has a countdown to his speech, minutes, seconds, the whole shebang. We are all looking to him for a magic bullet. Unfortunately magic bullets don't exist.

Bush needs to be eloquent, compelling, and persuasive. Mr. Bush is none of these. He himself, would be the first one to admit his shortcomings in speaking.
Bush needs to explain why more troops will change anything. Only 17 percent of Americans support the idea of more troops. And we need to believe his strategy isn't just "loose harder".
Bush needs to explain what victory is. We have never had a clearly defined definition of victory. Without an objective a plan is all but impossible.
Lastly, Bush needs to apologize. As previously stated he has no credibility. He needs to look humble. He needs to admit at least some culpability for the disaster that is Iraq. This will go miles toward allowing the American people to trust him.

And of course there is a political component to this whole affair. Not only is Mr. Bush's legacy at stake, since he chose to cloth himself in Iraq since the '04 election, but also the presumed Republican front-runner in '08, John McCain is at serious risk. He has advocated a troop increase for quite some time, and if this is done, and it fails, McCain's presidential hopes are probably finished. Lastly in '08 the entire House, and 33 Senators are up for reelection. Of the Senators, 20 are Republicans, if they support a plan that amounts to "stay the course" (Now with 12% more) they run the risk of being fired. Many of these 20 GOP Senators are very weak like Wayne Allard (R-CO), Norm Coleman (R-MN), John Sununu (R-NH), possibly Lamar Alexander (R-TN), Liddy Dole (R-NC), Mitch McConnell (R-KY), and thats not even considering people who may retire. Many Republicans are already stepping away from Bush's plan (Oregon's Sen. Gordon Smith, Indiana's Sen. Richard Lugar, and Kansas' Sen. Sam Brownback. Expect more of this, especially from those running for the White House.