http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article15915.htm
Bush's Mad-dash to History's Dustbin
By Mike Whitney
12/15/06 "Information Clearing House" -- -- Sometimes I'm struck by the
sheer enormity of Bush's stupidity. It is truly breathtaking. After nearly 4
years of steadily-intensifying guerilla warfare with no end in sight, Bush
has decided to expand the war.
Think I'm kidding?
As Robert Dreyfuss says, "The president is trying to cobble together, brick
by brick, an Iraqi government that is able and willing to do what al
Maliki's
can't or won't do: break the back of Muqtada al Sadr's Mahdi Army and
redouble the offensive against the Sunni-led Iraqi resistance." ("Bush v.
The Two Majorities" Robert Dreyfuss; uruknet.info)
So, now Bush figures that he's doing so well against the Sunni resistance
that he's ready to take on the biggest Shiite militia in Iraq?
Makes sense, doesn't it?
After all, if you're already getting clobbered why not speed it up and get
it over with fast.
This is mind-boggling!
Muqtada al-Sadr is the most powerful man in the country, the de-facto
sovereign of Iraq. He oversees the 60,000 man Mahdi Army which currently
poses no threat to US forces. If Bush turns on him, the occupation will
become virtually untenable overnight. Al Sadr's men have infiltrated every
area of the state security apparatus including the police force, the
Interior Ministry and the fledgling Iraqi Army. He's capable of cutting off
US supply lines to Baghdad, disrupting oil production, and coordinating
attacks on the Green Zone.
Fighting al-Sadr is a "no-win" situation and anyone with any sense would
steer clear of it.
So, why does Bush want to rouse this sleeping giant when his hands are
already full?
He doesn't like al-Sadr?
What difference does it make if Bush doesn't like him? That's just
gibberish. Franklin Roosevelt didn't like Stalin, but he didn't open up a
two-front war to prove his point? This type of thinking is foolish and
counterproductive especially when we're already embroiled in an "unwinnable"
asymmetrical conflict.
It just shows, once again, that Bush is not a person that we can take
seriously.
There are also reports that Bush is fine-tuning a plan to remove Prime
Minister al-Maliki and replace him with an "iron-fisted" tyrant who'll go
after the death squads which have turned Baghdad into an anarchic
slaughterhouse.
This is another whacky idea. Al-Maliki has no power other than his
connections to the armed militias. He doesn't control US forces and he's
certainly not going to attack his own power-base; that's expecting too much
of him.
The US already undermined what little authority al-Maliki had by forcing him
to meet with Bush in Jordan. That triggered a "walk-out" of al-Sadr
loyalists, al-Maliki's main body of support. Now the Prime Minister has been
reduced to a meaningless figurehead who neither controls the Defense or
Interior Ministries. He has no army, no militia, and no power.
What does Bush expect him to do? Or is this just another farcical kabuki the
Bush public relations team concocted to shift the blame onto someone else?
If Bush chooses to replace him; so be it. It won't make a bit of difference?
(except to remove the pretense of "Democracy")
The outcome of the present conflict will not be affected by Bush's throwaway
stooges who govern nothing beyond the block-walls of the Green Zone. Even
the American people know that.
The rumors in the Times suggest that Bush is snuggling up to his new
throat-slitting buddy who runs the Iranian-trained, death squads, Abdel Aziz
al-Hakim. Al-Hakim is the slipperiest guy in all of Baghdad and oversees the
most feared militia in Iraq, the Badr Brigade. You've probably seen their
handiwork in the form of the mutilated young Sunnis bobbing along the
Euphrates after being tortured and shot gangland-style in the back of the
head.
That's our new soul-mate, al Hakim. Sounds like Bush's kind-a guy.
In fact, Bush refers to him as "His Eminence" (I kid you not) and gave him
the "red carpet" treatment when he paid a visit to the White House last
week.
Does Bush really think he can out maneuver this guy? You can't put-one-over
on a thug like al Hakim. Guys like al-Hakim invented treachery, Bush is just
a novice. He'll use Bush until all of his enemies are removed and then he'll
start to work on the occupation. Anyone can see that.
Or is there someone who believes that an Iranian-backed cleric who runs a
10,000 man death squad, really wants to serve the greater regional interests
of the United States of America?
Nonsense.
As soon as the Sunni resistance and his arch-rival al-Sadr are pulverized,
al-Hakim will make his move. He's probably sharpening his daggers already.
Death Squad Diplomacy
The tragic irony of the of current turmoil in Iraq is that many of the death
squads, which operate out of the Interior Ministry, received financial and
material aid from US intelligence agencies. In A.K. Gupta's article
"Unraveling Iraq's Secret Militias" (Z Magazine) the author states:
"Not only are many of these militias linked to Iraqi politicians, but the
Pentagon is arming, training, and funding them for use in counter-insurgency
operations."
Gupta's story has been corroborated by numerous other sources that have
provided the sordid details of US plans to invoke the "Salvador option" in
Iraq, that is, use the same strategy of terrorizing the public as was used
in El Salvador in the 1980s. Somewhere along the line, the plan ran amok and
the "nearly autonomous" militias began carrying out massive ethnic cleansing
and serial-killing operations.
In other words, the Pentagon and US intelligence services, in their
eagerness to fight this "new kind of war", created a Frankenstein which they
can no longer control and which is destroying the very fabric of Iraqi
society.
Again, we see the tragic blowback from reckless decision-making which has
produced lethal unintended consequences.
The Bush-Rumsfeld counterinsurgency strategy has been a complete flop. It
has ignited a cycle of violence which will persist for years and created the
very real prospect that the Iraqi bloodstorm will cross borders and sweep
through the entire region.
America's puppets throughout the Middle East are now gazing on nervously as
Bush's poor judgment continues to destabilize the country and fuel the
growing mayhem.
The basic problem is that Bush listens to no one. He appears to be the last
man in America who still clings to the spurious notion that "victory" is
achievable.
He has totally ignored the results of the midterm elections as well as the
Baker report, and is steaming full-speed ahead with his own plan to increase
troop levels and recapture Baghdad.
Hip Hooray! Victory is just around the corner!
Only 4% of the American people want to pursue a "stay the course" strategy,
but Bush doesn't care. He's surrounded himself with militarists and neocons
who only reiterate the same crackpot theory that was first put forward in a
policy paper (written by neocons) for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu; "A Clean Break: a New Strategy for Securing the Realm". The plan
is nothing but a madcap prescription for transforming the entire Middle into
a balkanized hodge-podge of warring factions, armed militias and Islamic
extremists killing each other well into the next millennia.
The pro-Israel hawks in Bush's entourage love the idea, but the "sane"
elders in the political establishment (like Baker) know that its sheer
lunacy.
Who, in their "right mind", would deliberately topple regimes and
destabilize an entire region believing that they would eventually come out
on top of the heap.
The plan is little more than the fanciful musings of a high-school
sophomore.
Still, according to an article in yesterday's New York Times, Bush is still
following the same suicidal scheme. It says, "The Bush administration is
working to form a coalition of Sunni Arab nations and a moderate Shiite
government in Iraq, along with the US and Europe, to stand against 'Iran,
Syria and the terrorists,' another senior administration official said
Tuesday." (Helene Cooper, NY Times)
"Stand against Iran, Syria and the terrorists"?
This isn't the Baker plan, or the Congress' plan, or the plan the American
people demanded in the midterm elections. Those have all been tossed on the
scrap-heap. This is the neocon plan; "A Clean Break"; articulated almost
word for word from the original document.
Bush hasn't changed a thing! He is still carrying out an agenda that runs
contrary to the will of the American people as well as his father's most
trusted advisors. He's following a strategy that was clearly intended to
establish Israeli regional hegemony.
Its crazy.
Baghdad, Bloody Baghdad
What does Bush hope to accomplish re-fighting the same battles over and over
again?
Over 90% of the Iraqis want the US out now. 63% believe that it is
acceptable to kill American soldiers.
How does he expect to change these figures and win over the "hearts and
minds" of working class Iraqis?
Increasing the number of troops won't change anything. In fact, the numbers
have gotten increasingly worse with every new survey.
So, what's the plan; surround the entire country with concertina wire and
gun-towers and pick off anything that moves?
The Gaza-model? Is that the plan?
Gimmie a break!
They hate us. We're a Christian army in a Muslim land and we'll never be
accepted. Period. Bush's father's friends knew that. That's why they were
against it from the beginning. They knew that we would never establish
security. They knew that we would always be "occupiers" in a hostile land.
So, why can't Bush see what everyone else sees?
650,000 Iraqis have already died in this ego-driven fiasco. 2 million people
have fled the country, and over 1 million have been internally displaced.
70% unemployment, massive malnutrition, unreliable electric power, and an
absolute security-vacuum from Mosul to Basra, from Baghdad to Falluja.
Enough is enough!
Martial law is not liberation. Military occupation is not "democracy".
Enter James Baker
Bush is making a big mistake if he thinks he can just brush-off Baker like
the antiwar crowd. Baker speaks for a broad cross-section of establishment
elites and corporate big-wigs. These are not the kind of guys who like to be
ignored. My guess, is that they've seen enough of this bullsh**. If Bush
goes ahead with this insanity of increasing the number of troops in Baghdad
and further damaging their "beloved military", they're going to start
figuring out a way to get rid of him.
The Middle East has been America's "Cash Cow" for 60 years. Baker and Co.
have played a big part in carefully assembling the requisite cogs and gears
that make it a smooth-running imperial machine. They have no intention of
standing bye while Genralissimo Bush pours gas over the whole region and
sets it on fire.
They can't let that happen and they won't let that happen.
If Bush persists, the money will start funneling into the Democratic coffers
and we'll see impeachment proceedings within 3 months.
President Buffoon is about to have his last lark in the Middle East. I hope
he enjoys himself.
Then, it's off to history's dustbin.
***
Wed., Dec. 20, 11 - 1, Peace Demo at Waxman's Office,
Cut Funding for Iraq War!
Bring Signs & Join
Progressive Democrats of Los Angeles, Topanga Peace Alliance,
Palisadians for Peace, Santa Monica Peace Table, Progressive
Democrats of the Santa Monica Mountains, the S.M. Peace Club
Wed., Dec. 20, 11 AM - 1 PM
In Front of Congressman Henry Waxman's Office
8436 West Third Street, Suite 600 Los Angeles, CA 90048
(On Third, Just East of La Cienega)
Urge Waxman to Take a Leadership Role in Bringing Troops Home Now
Demand Waxman Vote against the Next 150-Billion Dollars for Iraq
Ask Waxman to Sign on to HR4232,
Congressman McGovern's bill to cut funding for the Occupation
For more info on the peace march, contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Suggestions for Signs
Waxman, Cut $$$for Occupation
Waxman, Not Another 150-Billion
Waxman, Why Aren't You a Co-sponsor of HR4232?
Pelosi Pledges $$$$ for Bush's War, Not You, Too, Henry
Iraq War: 2-Billion Per Week, $11-Million Per Hour
How Much More $$$ for Oil War?
Adopting an inside/outside strategy, some activists will meet inside with
Waxman's staff while others march outside Waxman's office. An aide for
Waxman told us the Congressman hasn't decided yet how he will vote on the
next supplemental war appropriations bill. But remember, in 2002 Waxman
voted for the Iraq War Authorization bill, unlike 133 other members of
Congress who opposed a US invasion of Iraq. Since 2002, Waxman has voted
for almost every supplemental funding bill. Enough is enough!
Let's give Waxman the support he needs to stand up to the Democratic
leadership. Though the mid-term election was a referendum on the Iraq War,
House Speaker-Elect Nancy Pelosi says the Democratic Party leadership will
support continued funding of the occupation. Protest this outrage.
You do not have to live in Waxman's 30th Congressional District to join us
on Wednesday. Tell Waxman you want him to use his great influence to talk
to others, both in the Democratic leadership and in the Southern California
delegation, to end funding for the occupation.
Can't make it?
FAX Waxman
(323) 655-0502
(202) 225-4099
CALL Waxman
(323) 651-1040 (phone)
(818) 878-7400 (phone)
(310) 652-3095 (phone)
(202) 225-3976 (phone)
FAX Pelosi
415-861-1670
202-225-8259
CALL Pelosi
415-556-4862
202-225-4965
Or Contact Your Congress Member
http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/
Sample Fax
Dear _________________:
The Democrats took back Congress because an overwhelming majority of
Americans want the US occupation of Iraq to end. Now, we demand the
Democratic Party leadership act responsibly to cut funding for this
senseless occupation.
Respect the will of the people. Vote NO on the next
150-billion-dollar Iraq supplemental war appropriation bill.
Co-sponsor Congressman McGovern's HR4232.
HR4232 would end all funding for the deployment of US troops to Iraq.
HR4232 would provide for the safe and orderly withdrawal of US troops.
How many more thousands of Americans and Iraqis have to die before
the Democrats refuse to fund Bush's war? Cut the funding now.
Sincerely,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digest: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
