Bush's "fairy tale" speech
I would like to point out what I consider to be the "fairy tale" qualities of Bush's last speech.
Even honest conservatives are now admitting that the “five point” plan is “riddled with holes.” Jed Babbin, a National Review contributor, described a couple of these contradictions:
“The first is that the president insisted that the 'turnover' of Iraqi sovereignty would be complete. But how can that be when, as he said, 138,000 American troops will remain there as long as necessary, under American command? If they are not subjected to the law and authority of the new Iraq provisional government, how can they be anything other than an occupation force? Though the 'Coalition Provisional Authority' will cease to exist on June 30, changing the sign over the door but leaving American troops there under American command (the only way they could possibly stay) continues the occupation." [1]
In other words, when the administration says, “the occupation will end” - it won’t; when they say “full sovereignty” - it isn’t; and when they claim Iraq will have “democracy” - it will initially be a system where the Iraqi people have nothing to do with the choice of their president, vice presidents or members of their government – those people will be chosen by the CPA, the very people the administration promises will no longer exist. Yeah right. There are several Alice in Wonderland aspects to these policies, and I doubt they will lead to a happy ending.
Already, Tony Blair has put a damper on this tea party by saying that the Iraqis should have final say over any major military operations. [2] Nonsense says the US, they may have “full sovereignty” but that doesn’t mean they can control military operations within their country.......The Mad Hatter, wearing an American flag on his lapel, has spoken. And the Red Queen, who already seems to be in charge of Gitmoizing our policies, will no doubt have the final say, "sentence first, then the verdict!" Yes, it’s quite obvious, we’ve fallen down the Rabbit Hole.
These illusions are not for the Iraqis, they aren’t fooled one bit. "Bush is a scorpion. He is a liar. He is sneaky, making all kinds of promises when he just wants to control Iraq," said Ayman Haidar, a policeman on duty in Baghdad. [3]
No, these fairy tales are solely for domestic US politics. First, they will allow Bush to use appealing terms in his speeches - “democracy” “full sovereignty” “the occupation has ended” etc. etc. etc.
Secondly, and Dan Senor hinted at this in a recent interview, is that after June 30, the Iraqis (not the US) will be responsible for the problems in Iraq. After that magical day, if we criticize events in Iraq, we are actually criticizing the Iraqis. Bush will no longer be responsible for events there. He will not be accountable for anything that happens. Well, isn’t that convenient.
And what about Bush’s critics, who will point to deteriorating conditions in Iraq? Well, we will suddenly hear a chorus of charges of “racism” from Bush supporters: the president’s critics are “racist” because they think the Iraqis can’t control their own government – it is condescending to the Iraqis, it is elitist etc. etc.
Get ready, we’re going to hear a lot more of that kind of nonsense. It is, after all, an election year.
Even honest conservatives are now admitting that the “five point” plan is “riddled with holes.” Jed Babbin, a National Review contributor, described a couple of these contradictions:
“The first is that the president insisted that the 'turnover' of Iraqi sovereignty would be complete. But how can that be when, as he said, 138,000 American troops will remain there as long as necessary, under American command? If they are not subjected to the law and authority of the new Iraq provisional government, how can they be anything other than an occupation force? Though the 'Coalition Provisional Authority' will cease to exist on June 30, changing the sign over the door but leaving American troops there under American command (the only way they could possibly stay) continues the occupation." [1]
In other words, when the administration says, “the occupation will end” - it won’t; when they say “full sovereignty” - it isn’t; and when they claim Iraq will have “democracy” - it will initially be a system where the Iraqi people have nothing to do with the choice of their president, vice presidents or members of their government – those people will be chosen by the CPA, the very people the administration promises will no longer exist. Yeah right. There are several Alice in Wonderland aspects to these policies, and I doubt they will lead to a happy ending.
Already, Tony Blair has put a damper on this tea party by saying that the Iraqis should have final say over any major military operations. [2] Nonsense says the US, they may have “full sovereignty” but that doesn’t mean they can control military operations within their country.......The Mad Hatter, wearing an American flag on his lapel, has spoken. And the Red Queen, who already seems to be in charge of Gitmoizing our policies, will no doubt have the final say, "sentence first, then the verdict!" Yes, it’s quite obvious, we’ve fallen down the Rabbit Hole.
These illusions are not for the Iraqis, they aren’t fooled one bit. "Bush is a scorpion. He is a liar. He is sneaky, making all kinds of promises when he just wants to control Iraq," said Ayman Haidar, a policeman on duty in Baghdad. [3]
No, these fairy tales are solely for domestic US politics. First, they will allow Bush to use appealing terms in his speeches - “democracy” “full sovereignty” “the occupation has ended” etc. etc. etc.
Secondly, and Dan Senor hinted at this in a recent interview, is that after June 30, the Iraqis (not the US) will be responsible for the problems in Iraq. After that magical day, if we criticize events in Iraq, we are actually criticizing the Iraqis. Bush will no longer be responsible for events there. He will not be accountable for anything that happens. Well, isn’t that convenient.
And what about Bush’s critics, who will point to deteriorating conditions in Iraq? Well, we will suddenly hear a chorus of charges of “racism” from Bush supporters: the president’s critics are “racist” because they think the Iraqis can’t control their own government – it is condescending to the Iraqis, it is elitist etc. etc.
Get ready, we’re going to hear a lot more of that kind of nonsense. It is, after all, an election year.
posted by Zack at 11:40 AM
1 Comments:
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Post a Comment
<< Home