It appears things are coming to a head in Iraq. At least there is an election. Much hope is riding on the event. My feeling is that Bush, as he has in the past, is engaging in wishful thinking in projecting a rosy outcome for the Middle East. That is greatly to be desired by us all., of course. We want resolution to this vexing problem. It remains to be seen what effect the election, with Sunni participation, will have on the insurgency.
The problematical fact is, however, that the various factions will find it difficult to reach a satisfactory compromise on the devisive elements. We see the ill effects of partisan politics here in our country and we've been at it now two hundred years. Tribal and religious affiliations have a far greater influence in Iraq than what divided our Founding Fathers. Then there is the recent history of domination of the majority Shiites by the minority Sunnis and the dual problem of revenge coupled with desire for restoration to power. A volitile mix in a terribly unstable country.
Bit by bit Bush is acknowledging the fallacy of his reasons for pre-emptive war but insists we are better off now than we were. This rationale itself is fallacious. Saddam was never a credible threat to the U.S. Iraq was a hollow shell of a country. Saddam spent his fortunes on his palaces and let the country go to hell. Obviously he stockpiled tremendous caches of armaments, which likely, we sold him. But his feeble attempts to acquire a nuclear capability was more for show and bluster than any serious intent to attack the U.S. It would be akin to a mouse attacking a German Shepard. Being a secular dictator, Saddam was more a target of binLaden than a co-conspiritor.
The real reasons behind Bush's rabid rush to war will eventually come out and we will all be surprised, to some degree, by what motivated it. There are many people who conjecture about it but a lot of them are pushing an agenda of their own liking, not necessarily being objective. Our elections next year will be a referendom on the war to a large degree and we'll see what people think about it.
The current flap about torture is so typical of this administration. They talk out of both sides of their mouths. "We have laws against torture but we want to be able to resort to it if, in our judgment it is neccesary". This in the face of the Senate and House voting overwhelmingly to pass McCain's amendment.
The problematical fact is, however, that the various factions will find it difficult to reach a satisfactory compromise on the devisive elements. We see the ill effects of partisan politics here in our country and we've been at it now two hundred years. Tribal and religious affiliations have a far greater influence in Iraq than what divided our Founding Fathers. Then there is the recent history of domination of the majority Shiites by the minority Sunnis and the dual problem of revenge coupled with desire for restoration to power. A volitile mix in a terribly unstable country.
Bit by bit Bush is acknowledging the fallacy of his reasons for pre-emptive war but insists we are better off now than we were. This rationale itself is fallacious. Saddam was never a credible threat to the U.S. Iraq was a hollow shell of a country. Saddam spent his fortunes on his palaces and let the country go to hell. Obviously he stockpiled tremendous caches of armaments, which likely, we sold him. But his feeble attempts to acquire a nuclear capability was more for show and bluster than any serious intent to attack the U.S. It would be akin to a mouse attacking a German Shepard. Being a secular dictator, Saddam was more a target of binLaden than a co-conspiritor.
The real reasons behind Bush's rabid rush to war will eventually come out and we will all be surprised, to some degree, by what motivated it. There are many people who conjecture about it but a lot of them are pushing an agenda of their own liking, not necessarily being objective. Our elections next year will be a referendom on the war to a large degree and we'll see what people think about it.
The current flap about torture is so typical of this administration. They talk out of both sides of their mouths. "We have laws against torture but we want to be able to resort to it if, in our judgment it is neccesary". This in the face of the Senate and House voting overwhelmingly to pass McCain's amendment.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home