bustardblog

Learning from Iraq

Bush is not capable of learning from Iraq, so we have to.

Tristero, over at Hullabaloo, clearly has a lot of admiration for Josh Marshall, as do I. But he speaks an absolutely essential truth when he insists that it is not sufficient to discuss the competency with which the war in Iraq was planned or fought. Whether or not more troops would have made a difference, whether the Army should have been disbanded, whether a larger coalition would have saved the day, etc., etc.,  - are entirely irrelevant arguments. The basic idea of invading Iraq was absolutely stupid and immoral.

After being so wrong on Bush/Iraq, a reluctant admission that if you want to be dogmatic about it then I side with the 'impossible' dogmatists, makes me fear that when Cheney and Bush start up in earnest over Iran, the same misjudgment will doom any attempt to oppose it. (Tristero)

And he gets full marks for saying "'when' Bush and Cheney start up in earnest over Iran."

As I tried to point out in a previous post, Bush will bomb Iran within the next two years. Those who argue that it will be done better this time, that there will be no occupation, that he has learned from his mistakes; are merely enablers for a mean old drunk.

There are some slight changes int he cast of characters: instead of Wolfowitz, this time it's Muravchich; the role played by Ahmed Chalabi, will now be taken by Amir Abbas Fakhavar. Featured players: Bush, Cheney, Richard Perle, Michael Ledeen, AIPAC, JINSA and the AEI remain the same.

Iraq and Israel: Where'sthe Pressure?

Atrios gets it right once again when he says that Bush intends to be in Iraq forever. (Although his complaint that no one listens to him is absolutely beyond me)

Still, my cock-eyed optimism allows me hope that some of the ideas being pushed by the Baker commission might have an impact.

A participant in the commission's debate is reported in Today's NY Times as saying that "unless the government of Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki believed that Mr. Bush was under pressure to pull back troops in the near future, there will be zero sense of urgency to reach the political settlement that needs to be reached.'"

This will probably have no real effect on Bush's actions in Iraq, but it might wake up a few concerned about our relations with Israel. The U.S. has put minimal pressure on Israel to reach a negotiated settlement for decades. In the last six years there has been absolutely none - "there is zero sense of urgency to reach the political settlement that needs to be reached."  The benign neglect of the Bush administration is anything but benign.

The incredible influence of JINSA and AIPAC, as well as the heavily pro-Likud bias of many of the neo-cons at the top levels of this administration, has jeopardized the future of Israel.

Each skirmish with Hezbollah in Lebanon; each rocket exchange with Hamas, only aggravates the hatred of Israel by it's neighbors - hatred that is becoming increasingly  stronger and more radical every day. Considering the West Bank, Gaza and Israel as one entity, this year is one of the first in which the number of Jews and the number of Arabs living there are roughly equal -about 4,5 million of each. * The birthrate of the Arabs of course is much higher than it is for Jews, and the tipping point is past.  This does not include the tens of millions of Arabs in Syria, Iran, Lebanon, etc etc who have promised to destroy Israel.

With no pressure for peace, there will be no Israel.

*Inexact and disputed number make this unprecise analysis necessary, but the trends are not deniable.