Category Archives: The War

Mookie still in the saddle

Until we get rid of this punk in the black turban, there’ll be no victory parades. And right now, it appears his buds in the Iraqi government are still protecting his porky little butt. Or, as this troop asserts: "The Madhi army is sitting on the 50 yard line eating popcorn and watching us do their work."

President Bush

He’s grown old before my eyes. More wrinkled, grayer, doesn’t smile as much as the Texas governor who once elbowed me in the ribs as he circulated among state troopers after receiving an Austin briefing on a major flood in South Texas. I was there as a reporter. He didn’t know me from Adam. But he may have remembered me from the governor’s mansion’s Christmas party for the news media the previous December. If so, he had a good memory for faces and names. When he elbowed me, in a sort of happy-jock way, with a happy-jock grin on his face, I sort of half-smiled and, though I was there to write down whatever he said, I spent the rest of the time trying to stay out of his way. He still smiles easily in news conferences at the White House, but I can see that he’s tired. He spends too much time with the loved ones of dead soldiers and Marines, too much time with the wounded at Walter Reed, too much time with generals and advisers, and probably reads too much of the vitriol the media, the Dems, and the haters have thrown at him for six years now. I don’t hate him. I dislike some of his decisions, such as his refusal to control illegal immigration, to have (until lately) declined to increase the size of the fighting forces, and his apparent disinclination to follow through on some of his (I think) admirable aims after 9/11, such as taking on nations supporting terrorism. Saudi Arabia comes to mind. Yet, in the main, I still like him, and I’ve lost some friends over defending him. Bush haters all. Their slurs seem irrational to me. Also to House of Eratosthenes who (which?) has the best essay I’ve ever seen here on Bush Derangement Syndrome. Good luck, George, in your last two years. Try not to let the bastards get you down.

Ain’t your grandfather’s war

Lot of truth in this analysis, seems to me, unfortunately: neither Bush nor Dems accepting responsibility for what the war (or its loss) means. He wants to win but not tell the electorate exactly what that will entail–war with Iran and Syria for one, and staying in Iraq for decades, for another. The Dems want to lose but not tell the electorate why, beyond their hatred for Bush, because they doubt their real hatred, for America as it is presently constituted, would play in Peoria. They make Bush look honorable, but just barely. Crikey!

Via Fresh Bilge 

The runaway camel

Cameljordaniandesert.jpg

One tires of always viewing the Arab Middle East through a jaundiced eye, although Lord knows they deserve all the criticism they get. Camels aren’t exempt, of course, as camel races, for one, have long been said to use virtually-enslaved foreign children as jockeys. But just for a moment, we pause to consider an enthralling primer on the lighter side of the camel, the beast with the feathery lashes and soulful eyes. What to do if you find yourself the rider in a moment of runaway desperation:

"Don’t get angry with the camel or strike it after you have it under control. While your adrenaline may be pumping, it’s important that you keep your cool. Camels tend to hold grudges, so if you frighten or mistreat them, they are liable to be unpleasant in the future."

Via Fresh Bilge 

Which to believe?

One or the other? Or neither? ABC News finds cheering troops for a visiting President Bush, post-surge speech, at my old alma mater Fort Benning. While the NYTimes finds "a restrained response" at the same occasion. Only ABC is playing against type, which might be a clue. Or not. Read what you like, but be careful what you believe. Things are never what they seem.

Via Best of the Web Today

We can’t leave, but we can’t stay

I usually find reasons to take heart from former Reagan speechwriter Peggy Noonan’s latest column, but not today. The headline "The Two Vacuums" and the subhead "Neither Iraqis nor Democrats seem ready to do what’s required of them" seemed reasonable so I printed it out to read. Only when I read it did I realize that the headline writer, for whatever reason, was trying to avoid her main point, which is that Bush is coming unglued, hasn’t a clue what to do, and his new strategy isn’t new at all. It certainly seems new to me, with its hints of finally cleaning up Mookie and his sectarian-warring militia in Sadr City, and the insurgent/militia sanctuaries in Syria and Iran, even if that means war with those terrorist-supporting countries (see bit about carrier battle groups in the Gulf, and providing Patriot anti-missile systems to regional allies), and a clear and hold strategy for Baghdad’s most violent neighborhoods, which I don’t recall seeing before. Maybe I am the one who sees substance that isn’t there, but his detractors (the usual ones and the shocking new ones like Noonan) seem to be saying: "We can’t leave, but we can’t stay. Sorry if Iraq falls apart and the genocide begins, but we are an impatient people more interested in presidential style than substance, and we are losing what patience we had with this man and his war." As if it really was only his war, and getting rid of him would make all things better. The mind reels. Mine, anyhow.

UPDATE  For all that, the stock market continues to soar. Somebody’s not pessimistic. But Donald Sensing is, deeply.

The view from Baghdad

Fighting continues in the city, between insurgents, militia and the government, but so far Bush’s "new plan" seems not to have truly begun and Iraqis, meanwhile, are arguing among themselves whether it will do any good, according to Mohammed at Iraq the Model:

"…there are different opinions even among members of a single bloc but I also see that a majority supports the new strategy while opposition is coming from extremists who realize that they will be the next target for the government and allied forces."