Surging Towards Bethlehem: How to Stop the Madness

By Bernard Weiner
Created Jan 10 2007 - 8:51am

By Bernard Weiner, The Crisis Papers

...Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity...

And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?
-- W. B. Yeats, "The Second Coming"

In the Vietnam-War era, which was the crucible of activism for my
generation, we had a devil of a time trying to get the Democratic Party to
recognize the necessity for withdrawing our troops from that ill-advised,
unwinnable war. With regard to Bush's misadventure in Iraq, it turns out not
all that much has changed.

The midterm election and many polls since have clearly demonstrated that
Americans recognize that Bush's Iraq policy is and has been a thoroughgoing
disaster -- from taking us into war based on lies and deceptions to the way
the Occupation has been totally mismanaged. Our troops are now caught in the
middle of a brutal sectarian civil war. But the Democrats appear to be
divided about how to proceed: give Bush one last chance to "win," whatever
that may mean, or start pulling out our troops while we still can with at
least a shred of dignity.

Given this situation, the time for politeness, for speaking around the
truth, is gone. Civility yes, holding one's tongue, no.

Not while more and more young Americans are dying in Iraq, 3000 to date,
with an estimated 25,000 maimed; not while up to 3000 innocent Iraqi
civilians are being slaughtered every month; not while billions of dollars
each month (half-a-trillion! total so far) are being siphoned from the U.S.
treasury, and vital social programs, to pay for this moral monstrosity of a
war.

And definitely not while CheneyBush are determined to send tens of thousands
more U.S. troops into Iraq's civil-war hellhole.

The "surge" scenario is one written to satisfy the Administration's
political goals, not one expected to change much on the ground in Iraq,
which is why so many military leaders are opposed to it. Clearly, the
"surge" is a public-relations, fig-leaf operation to cover Bush's
embarrassing exposure of mendacity and fecklessness.

REPUBS ARE NERVOUS ABOUT BUSH'S "SURGE"

If we all spoke something like the truths discussed below, our words would
not change the minds of the Bush Bunker crowd; they've set their course, and
intend to stay that course. But such truths surely are catching the
attention of Republican powers-that-be and office-holders, who saw what
happened to their ilk in the midterm elections over the Iraq issue. They
would like to keep their jobs and influence in 2008 and perhaps have a shot
at getting back in power.

It will be those Republicans who are best able to get the message through to
the Bush Administration on the necessity for drastic changes in policy --
only a small chance of that happening -- or, even more far out, to get
Cheney and Bush to resign. Definitely not going to happen. If it comes to
it, they seem willing to take the country and Constitution down with them.

With no major foreign or domestic victories to his credit, Bush's legacy is
Iraq, and he doesn't want to leave office with yet another "loser" sign
slapped on his back. Ergo: the "surge," one last attempt to stabilize the
stalemate in Iraq. Best-case scenario for the Bushistas: something,
anything, that can be called a "victory." Alternative best-case scenario for
Bush: The "surge" takes two years to fully unfold, and the inevitable U.S.
defeat in Iraq happens on the next President's watch.

For the Bush Administration, those two alternatives would be a win-win, and
to get there our brave young men and women in uniform will just have to
"sacrifice" -- in many cases, their lives -- for the Bush cause.

So here are five truths that need to be aired, and their implications:

1. THE USUAL: IGNORING REALITY

CheneyBush and their cohorts have decided to ignore the voters with regard
to Iraq, ignore the military, ignore the troops, ignore the allies, ignore
the experts, ignore reality on the ground in that country, and are moving
America full-speed over the cliff of catastrophe. As Democratic Sen. Joseph
Biden suggested the other day, the Bush Administration is willing to
sacrifice thousands of more young American troops as long as it delays the
inevitable U.S. retreat from Iraq until after the 2008 election. (
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/04/AR2007010401525.html
[1] )

And, to sweeten the pot, Bush -- per usual, years late and smarts-short --
is advocating a jobs program for young Iraqi men. Might have worked in 2003,
ain't gonna work in 2007. The Bush-botched situation is way beyond that now,
deep into outright sectarian warfare.

2. THWARTING THE CHENEY-BUSH POLICY

Since CheneyBush and their court lackeys are determined to try to stalemate
the war in Iraq for another two years, and have the power to do so -- fully
aware that Iraq is a lost cause (see Biden link above ) --there are only
three ways to stop them.

A. Cut off funding for the escalation. Speaker Pelosi and Rep. John Murtha
are flirting with this idea of putting restrictions on the use of
appropriations for the Iraq War. This in order to make sure that funds are
spent for the drawing down of U.S. troop levels, rather than for the
introduction of more soldiers. And, to avoid the charge of "not supporting
our troops," the Democrats will continue to fund the soldiers currently in
Iraq.

Congress could pass a bill requiring that the Administration consult with
the appropriate committees before major shifts of policy occur in Iraq. Bush
might veto, or ignore, such a resolution, of course, but at least he'd be on
the record as impeding the effort to close down a war that the American
public, in the election and in poll after poll, has decided is not worth
continuing.

B. Impeach Bush and Cheney for their high crimes and misdemeanors, which
would include their lying and deceiving Congress and the American people
into supporting the 2003 invasion and occupation of Iraq and the escalation
of the war in 2007.

Impeachment may or may not have traction at first, but it will grow as the
congressional committees, chaired now by Dems, hold hearings on Bush policy
and corruptions; besides, if the Administration is forced to deal full-time
with impeachment, they will have less time and energy to focus on getting
involved in mischief elsewhere.

C. Refuse to participate in this politically-motivated escalation of the
Iraq War. Rather than waiting to be fired for indicating that the
"temporary" surge (which rightwingers correctly define as at least 18 months
and probably longer) (
www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-usiraq6jan06,0,3061050.story?coll=la...
[2] ) is a reckless, doomed idea, let there be mass resignations at the
Pentagon, with the generals and colonels publicly denouncing the escalation
madness.

To stanch the flow of increasing oppositon, Bush and Cheney have cleared the
Administration's decks of anybody but pro-escalation loyalists; Generals
Abizaid and Casey, both of whom have questioned the wisdom of escalation,
are gone, and perhaps the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who reportedly are leery of
implementing a politically-motivated "surge," may be on the chopping block
next. Public support for the "surge" is at about 11%%; not even Bush's base
is buying in.

Republican politicians already are out there with their opposition, and it's
not just conservatives Chuck Hagel and Gordon Smith and Norm Coleman
anymore. Hard-Rightists Ollie North (
www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=18797 [3] ) and Heather Wilson, (
www.abqjournal.com/news/state/525264nm12-31-06.htm [4] ) for example, also
have come out against Bush's "surge" scam.

As that snowball of public opposition rolls down the political slope, more
Republican leaders will have "cover" to denounce CheneyBush's war policies.
More troops in-country or those ordered to Iraq likely would refuse to
participate in a war the generals themselves -- as well as many of their
civilian bosses in the Administration -- have abandoned as unwinnable.

The refusal of Lieutenant Ehren Watada to return to Iraq (
www.thenation.com/doc/20060626/brecherwebvideo [5] ) is just the tip of the
iceberg of resistance inside the officer corps, and among the rank-and-file
troops as well: Hundreds of on-duty soldiers have signed a petition calling
for "redress," urging the U.S. to withdraw from Iraq. (
www.huffingtonpost.com/2006/10/25/219-members-of-us-militar_n_32462.html
[6] )

3. IRAN IN THE CROSSHAIRS

It's clear that the neo-con goal of changing the geopolitical face of the
Middle East, by threat or use of force, remains in place as the operating
principle of the Bush Administration. Iran and maybe Syria are still in the
crosshairs. If the bombing of Iran's nuclear facilities does not happen in
the next few months, either by the U.S. and/or ally Israel, it is being
planned for before Bush leaves office. (
www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2535310,00.html [7] ) This may explain
why an admiral is taking over the ground wars in Iraq and Afghanistan,
supplanting Abizaid at Central Command: the navy will be tactically
important in any move on Iran.

4. CHENEY-BUSH POLICY ENDANGERS AMERICA

Not only is CheneyBush policy endangering our national interests abroad --
U.S. actions are the best recruiting tools for expanding extremist jihadi
ranks -- but America's military is stretched way too thin for the country's
good. The Reserves and National Guard are being overused in Iraq to the
point of angry frustration and exhaustion, and Army/Marine recruiters are
told to get new bodies into the training pipeline however they can: huge
bonuses, lowering the moral and educational and psychological requirements,
going abroad for foreign soldiers for hire (
www.iht.com/articles/2006/12/26/news/military.php [8] ) -- even, I kid you
not, asking those already slain in battle in Iraq to sign up for a new
hitch! ( www.cnn.com/2007/US/01/05/dead.letters.ap/index.html [9] ) (Yes, of
course, the last named was a bureaucratic screw-up, but symbolically it
seems quite in keeping with the Bush Administration's overall tendency to
FUBAR whatever they touch.)

5. OUR FREEDOMS ARE ENDANGERED SPECIES

Our freedoms, supposedly what we're fighting to protect, have been snatched
from us, mostly in secret, by the Bush Administration. The concept of habeas
corpus -- of justifying to a court why someone has been arrested -- is dead.
The right to a jury trial: dead. The prohibition of cruel and unusual
punishment (i.e., torture): dead. Attorney-client confidentiality: dead.
Guaranteed access to a lawyer: dead. Right of privacy in one's home: dead.
Letter and email privacy: dead. And so on. All these police-state actions
are in violation of the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh and Eighth Articles of
the Bill of Rights.

Under a cockamamie theory that a president can ignore or violate laws
whenever he claims he's acting as "commander-in-chief" during "wartime,"
Bush has: authorized secret "disappearances" and tortures of suspected
"terrorists," including American citizens; has established a network of
secret CIA prisons around the world; has authorized "extraordinary
renditions" of suspects to countries that specialize in especially brutal
torture. Police agents can enter your home, tap your phones, peek into your
computer and emails (and now snail-mail) -- and are not required to present
a court warrant or even tell you that you are being subjected to an
investigation. The Constitution is in shreds.

The Republican Party for most of its modern life (especially after Waco) has
been vehemently opposed to the federal government amassing too much police
power in its hands. But this White House crew these days is after as much
power as it can get its hands on -- and is aided in this by their GOP
lackeys in Congress and in the corporate-owned mass-media -- and has created
huge bureaucracies to snoop and spy on its own citizens.

SO WHAT'S TO BE DONE?

Ordinary Americans have to see politics less as a once-every-election
activity and more as an ongoing, daily campaign to save our country. That
means actively opposing the worst of CheneyBush policies, of course, but it
also means constantly letting Democratic leaders and our members of Congress
know how we feel about their vacillations and timidity; we must hold their
feet to the fire and demand that they truly act differently than the
Republicans -- not just with regard to Iraq but to a whole host of domestic
and foreign issues, where all too often they have caved in the past and let
Karl Rove and his minions roll all over them.

No more. The issues for which we're fighting are far too important for us to
slip back into our lethargic, let-someone-else-do-it mode. Keeping democracy
alive and well ultimately is up to us, each of us.

In the Vietnam-War era, five different presidents were told by their
national-security experts that there was no chance for the U.S. to win a
stalemated war with guerrillas in that country, but those presidents
persisted in the disastrous folly anyway. More than 54,000 U.S. troops and
an estimated two million Vietnamese died in the slaughter before the
Americans conceded that they had made a terrible error. Unless the
Democrats, and the rest of us, step up now to stop Bush's non-sensical
escalation of the Iraq War, a similar catastrophe awaits.

The Democrats have to be warned in no uncertain terms about their
responsibilities with regard to rescuing our troops in Iraq. Either act as
an authentic Opposition Party should, or risk being abandoned in 2008 by
the activist base that returned them to power. Perhaps the prospect of the
incumbent Democrats reverting to non-relevancy, with the Republicans back in
the majority with their boots once again on the Dems' necks, may finally
concentrate their minds on what American voters sent them to Washington to
do. #

Bernard Weiner, Ph.D. in government & international relations, has taught at
San Diego State and Western Washington State Universities, worked as a
writer/editor with the San Francisco Chronicle, and currently co-edits The
Crisis Papers (www.crisispapers.org [10]). To comment:

crisispapers@comcast.net
.

First published by The Crisis Papers 1/9/07.
www.crisispapers.org/essays7w/surging.htm [11]

Copyright 2007 by Bernard Weiner.

_______
Bernie Weiner happily re-upping.

About author Bernard Weiner, a poet-playwright, worked as a writer/editor
with the San Francisco Chronicle, has taught government & international
relations at various universities, and currently co-edits The Crisis Papers
(www.crisispapers.org [12]). For comment: crisispapers@comcast.net [13].

--
NOTICE: This post contains copyrighted material the use of which has not
always been authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material
available to advance understanding of
political, human rights, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues. I
believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright
Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107

"A little patience and we shall see the reign of witches pass over, their
spells dissolve, and the people recovering their true sight, restore their
government to its true principles. It is true that in the meantime we are
suffering deeply in spirit,
and incurring the horrors of a war and long oppressions of enormous public
debt. But if the game runs sometimes against us at home we must have
patience till luck turns, and then we shall have an opportunity of winning
back the principles we have lost, for this is a game where principles are at
stake."
-Thomas Jefferson