Letters to the Editor
had_enough
Published Letters: 816 Editor's Choice: 48
-
what Bush would do...
[Read the article: Improvement in Iraq: Trust Joe Klein and his secret sources]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]...if he didn't have the money for the war.
Bryan wrote:
"I confess ignorance - if the Democrats had simply not sent a bill, how would Bush have “ignored” the lack of money? Where would he get more? The answer to that may change my mind on the Democratic strategy."
&&&&&&&&&&&&
I was thinking about this today. And it dawned on me why the Dems decided to let Bush have his money. Aside from obvious immediate political imperatives.
I think Bush would starve the troops. No guns. No bullets. No body armor. No working humvees. No food. worse medical care. I'm sure any of you can make your own list. Bush would deprive the Army of the most visible necessities.
But the Pentagon would send them out there anyway. And as the stories came back, Bush would say, in aggrieved innocence "it's the Democrats. They won't give me the money I need to keep you safe and go after Al Qaeda, the people who attacked us."
And you know what? The Beltway pundits and a plurality of the voting population would actually buy it.
and THAT is why the Dems gave him his blood money. Because they know Bush is stone crazy. A narcissist would kill anyone he had to, to get what he wants. To get what he needs: constant approval from his base of voters. That base consists of the only people who still believe him. They're the only ones who matter.
You don't believe me? You think I'm nuts? Ok. But think about it. The more you think about it, the more plausible it sounds, yes?
I think he'd do it. I think he'd do it in a heartbeat, and laugh all the way to the newsconference wherein he would cry crocodile tears for the troops, because those traitorous democrats in the House wouldn't give him his money.
Starting to sound more plausible, ain't it?
The man is a beast. So is Cheney. We know this. Bush would play the brinksmanship game to the bitter end.
-
he can't be forced
[Read the article: Do Dems now share equal blame with Bush for Iraq? No]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]it's as if some of us out here on the left actually think Bush can somehow be *forced* to end the war.
He can't. He'll never end the war on his own. Either an anti-war democrat in the White House will end it. Or the Iraqi government will end our participation by asking us to butt out.
Those are the only two ways this war will end. Bush will not end it. He can't. Not only would it be a form of political suicide (why should he care about that?), but if he really is suffering from narcissistic personality disorder (and, personally, I think the jury's in on that one: he is), he's simply incapable of ending the war without *victory*--whatever the hell that means to him.
Since he will never achieve victory in this mess, by any reasonable definition, he will never end it. Period.
although, that said, I can't help but wonder what would happen if he was pushed right to the wall, with nowhere to hide. Hasn't happened yet. Maybe he'd cave, like the coward he so obviously is. Be interesting to see, that's for sure. The Dems haven't painted him into a corner yet. But I wish they would. The dude might self-destruct. He's clearly unstable.
-
Now. Glenn.
[Read the article: Major troop reductions imminent -- again]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I admire your outrage. I do.
But there is nothing new in this. At all. War supporters have found, repeatedly, that if they just lie, and say what they think people want to hear, regardless of whether the lie comes true or not, that'd enough. It's worked for over 4 years now. Why won't it work again?
It seems clear that Bush will probably rotate some troops back to the US before the 2008 elections. These guys aren't stupid. But it will be a sham. Bush, and the GOP, are laying the groundwork to have it both ways: they can say to their base that they're still fighting the war in Iraq, they haven't "surrendered." And they can say to swing voters "look, we're reducing troop levels in Iraq, things are going better."
Look for Bush and the GOP to simply lie about conditions in Iraq before 2008. It'll be a variation on "who do you believe? Me or your lying eyes?"
After all, that's the game Bush has been playing for a long time now. Even before he was President. There is no reason that it won't work again.
All the GOP has to do is hang on to their Base, and convince a narrow plurality of swing voters in key states to vote for them again, and, viola! They have the house and senate back.
Bank on it. These guys never give up, and never give in, unlike the Democrats, who appear to know ONLY how to give up, and give in.
Bush and the GOP were just brilliant in not re-instituting a draft. Had there been a draft, this war would never have even started, and if it had started, we'd have been out very, very quickly, regardless of conditions on the ground.
No draft, no mass public outcry. No mass public outcry, no end to war.