I've blogged before about my inability to understand the president and the war in Iraq. It's felt as though I was just missing one little piece of perspective, and then I would get it. I didn't expect to agree with his reasoning, but I really need to know why.
I think I've figured it out. This isn't Vietnam or the Persian Gulf to GWB. It's post-World War II Japan. He believed (and probably still believes) that following a short but powerful attack (dropping the atomic bombs) the US military would be able to spend a few years writing a constitution, holding elections, and weakening the monarchy.
Now, this thesis has a few holes. After all, Japan had spent quite a few years fighting prior to 1945 and was considerably weakened even before the bombs fell. At the same time, I think I understand why GWB has dragged us into war, and I feel better.
Back to work.
3 comments:
I will admit that I enjoy dogging Dear Leader about as much as anyone does. I haven't really subscribed to the Devil Theory of Those I Oppose, however; I suppose that even George the Slow really thinks ("thinks," or whatever verb is appropriate to the remains of his boozed-out, coked-out mental processes) that he's doing good.
But when it comes right down to it, George's motivations are important only to God, who sees the heart, etc. To the multiple thousands of Iraqi civilians who have been killed, or maybe "only" tortured, maimed, or brutalized, it maybe doesn't matter so much why El Presidente has done what he has done. I will go on dreaming of the day -- which will never come -- when Dear Leader stands trial for his war crimes. No doubt, whatever tribunal is hearing his case will take his protestations of good intentions into account -- for whatever they may be worth. And, having imagined this trial-which-is-never-to-be, I feel better ... and can get back to work.
I understand your need to know "why" (I'm an actor, remember), but I'm not certain that knowledge will help matters. GWB and his administration need to be taken down. Impeachment would be nice, but a pipe dream. On the other hand, taking back the House in 2006 is a reachable goal.
Now that you have the "why" firmly in hand, your next step is to spread the message so the "why" becomes "whatever".
The best theory is that it's retaliation for a failed assassination attempt on Bush 41.
It's ironic that the first trial of Saddam is for his acts of retaliation against the people of Dujail, where there had been a botched assassination attempt against Saddam.
But the real tragedy is that working as a team, Bush 41, Saddam, Bush 43, and Osama are mutually assassinating the Rule of Law itself.
Not that the Rule of Law can be saved. The Rule of Law has been slowly committing suicide ever since Hammurabi of Babylonia first wrote it down on stone tablets, some 3750 years ago.
Post a Comment