Letters to the Editor
-
Sad, Sad Man
How far does Bush Derangement Syndrome reach? This essay is a case in point - ignore the complexity of the situation on the ground in Iraq and make it all seem to be just a "Bush did this" diatribe on why we need to cut and run.
As an aside - Mr Blumenthal wrote a similar piece on the Guardian webste the other day - and even that audience was not buying it. I am sure that Salon will be a much easier sell job.
Does it ever occur to this writer that the people of the Middle East actually may have motivations of their own? That what happens in Washington is really not their prime motivation - and specifically what happens to Bush is totally out of their perspective? You have so many flavors of insurgents - Sunnis trying to restore their privileges, Shias (Sadrists) shucking for Iran, just plain thugs running a kidnap and rob operation and on top of it all - Zarqawi running a terror and "let's start a civil war" operation. Zarqawi had the face recognition because he ran a great PR shop - and he certainly did not need the help of the Pentagon to promote it.
But there is one truth - the "insurgents" all have one common goal - and that is to prevent the current government from getting up enough momentum to start moving the country forward. Because when that happens, they lose the ability to use guns to force their point. And with Zarqawi dead - maybe the violence can drop a notch and just let the "freedom fighters" kill themselves (as they seem to be doing so well in Baghdad)
Making progress in Iraq is like herding a pack of cats in heat - it happens slowly and it does not run on a schedule. The people of this area have their own culture and their own speed in getting things done. But if encouraging them to move forward and control their destiny is wrong - then what is your "delusional" alternative?