Text 1651, 95 rader
Skriven 2006-07-05 01:42:00 av ROSS SAUER (1:123/140)
Ärende: Bushbots and Iraq
=========================
This is the real "Bush Doctrine" being pushed by Bush's supporters.
 
Bush's supporters will libel any foe 
Joe Conason - The New York Observer 

06.30.06 - In the acrid debate over Iraq, the President's supporters 
will say anything. They will question the patriotism of those who 
disagree with "staying the course." They will insinuate cowardice on the 
part of those who would "cut and run." Even though they avoided military 
service, they will denigrate the records of decorated veterans like John 
Kerry and Jack Murtha. They will even accuse the war's critics of 
providing "aid and comfort" to the enemy, which is the legal definition 
of treason. 

Then the White House will turn around -- after days of encouraging such 
vilification of their opponents -- and leak the commanding general's 
optimistic plan to start withdrawing troops, which would proceed 
according to the same timetable proposed by those weak and pusillanimous 
Democrats. That is meant to reassure the majority of Americans who 
realize invading Iraq was a strategic error and a tragedy that must be 
concluded as soon as possible. 

All the slanders and all the maneuvers are performed for political 
expedience, not national security. In pursuit of Karl Rove's electoral 
strategy, the Republicans will spend a trillion dollars and squander 
thousands of American lives, tens of thousands of Iraqi lives, and the 
prestige of the United States. There is only one thing they won't do. 
They will not speak honestly about the war, because the truth cannot 
accommodate their crude partisan rhetoric. The unfortunate reality is 
that President Bush has no "plan for victory." On some days, he cannot 
foresee removing American troops during his Presidency and says that 
withdrawal will be a decision for "future Presidents" to make. On other 
days, he contemplates removing two-thirds of our combat brigades there 
by the end of next year. On some days, his ambassador to Baghdad 
discusses amnesty for the insurgents with the Iraqi government and other 
negotiable items. On other days, those difficult subjects are utterly 
taboo. He has no plan because the invasion of Iraq didn't proceed 
according to the expectations of the White House and the Pentagon. The 
Bush war cabinet had formulated a sketchy plan at the outset, with 
vague, implausible notions of how postwar Iraq would be pacified, 
rebuilt and governed. 

Among the ill-conceived schemes originally contemplated by our ill-
advised leaders was the installation of Ahmad Chalabi, an exile of 
dubious character, as Baghdad's strongman. That daydream had to be 
abandoned, along with the flower-strewn parades and the reimbursement of 
our invasion expenses with Iraqi oil revenue. What we got instead were a 
plague of suicide bombings, an intractable insurgency, an ethnic civil 
war and a government allied with the Iranian mullahs. 

While the Bush administration has no plan, the newly formed Iraqi 
government seems to be considering a negotiated peace. For months, Iraqi 
officials have been talking with representatives of the Sunni rebels, in 
the hope of convincing them to lay down their weapons and engage in 
democratic politics. 

Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki recently offered a limited 
"reconciliation" initiative meant to bring together the country's 
warring factions and reduce support for the insurgency. U.S. Ambassador 
Zalmay Khalilzad has assisted this effort, although his help is limited 
by Mr. Bush's political agenda. Unfortunately, that agenda blocks the 
Iraqis from dealing with the real problems motivating the insurgency. 

Most Sunni insurgents, unlike the followers of the late and unlamented 
terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, might be drawn to the bargaining table 
under certain conditions. Credible press reports indicate that those 
conditions must include a broad amnesty for fighters who have attacked 
American troops, and a timetable for the withdrawal of foreign troops 
and the end of the occupation. 

The Iraqi government might well be inclined to discuss those issues. But 
the Bush administration insists that there can be no broad amnesty -- 
and that any exit timetable will only encourage the terrorists. 

When Mr. Bush visited Baghdad for a few hours on June 13, Iraqi Vice 
President Tariq al-Hashimi, a Sunni leader, urged him to set a date for 
ending the occupation. Then the Iraqi President, Kurdish leader Jalal 
Talabani, who has been talking directly with insurgent representatives, 
said he "supported" Mr. Hashimi's request. 

Polls in both countries show substantial agreement between the peoples 
of Iraq and the United States on ending the occupation. Seventy percent 
of Iraqis wish that foreign troops would leave their country by the end 
of next year, and nearly 60 percent of Americans want our troops home by 
then or sooner. But no matter what the Iraqis may want and no matter 
what the American generals may recommend, don't expect Mr. Bush to "cut 
and run" -- or at least not until after November. 

COPYRIGHT (c) 2006 THE NEW YORK OBSERVER 

From Archae's Roost, Sheboygan, WI

þ CMPQwk 1.42 16554 þ
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
 * Origin: Try Our Web Based QWK: DOCSPLACE.ORG (1:123/140)