War’s Rationales Are Undermined One More Time: Revelations May Hurt Bush’s Image
How many reports will it take to convince Americans that George W. Bush lied to us? He lied to us about Saddam Hussein’s alleged connections to al Qaeda, he lied to us about Saddam’s WMDs, and he lied to us about “the end of major combat operations”. What it is going to take for people to WAKE UP AND SMELL THE CAT LITTER? Or are Americans really that undemanding of their Prevaricator-in-Chief?
You know, if (Heaven forbid) Bill Clinton had been guilty of this sort of dissembling, the hue and cry would have been heard from LA to DC. Why, then, is George W. Bush being given a free ride? Oh, that’s right…I keep forgetting- he’s resolute.
One by one, official reports by government investigators, statements by former administration officials and internal CIA analyses have combined to undermine many of the central rationales of the administration’s case for war with Iraq — and its handling of the post-invasion occupation.
The release of yesterday’s definitive account on Iraq’s weapons — and its conclusion that Iraq no longer had weapons of mass destruction years before the U.S.-led invasion — is only the latest in a series of damaging blows to the White House’s strategy of portraying the war in Iraq as being on the cusp of success.
The report also comes just a few weeks after Democratic presidential challenger John F. Kerry gave new life to his campaign by emphasizing what he asserts is the gap between the president’s rhetoric and the realities in Iraq.
This week, President Bush’s former administrator in Iraq, L. Paul Bremer, broke with the administration to say officials had sent too few troops to Iraq and had allowed a culture of lawlessness to develop. The CIA, using information gathered after the invasion, cast doubt last week on whether Saddam Hussein aided Abu Musab Zarqawi, an al Qaeda associate, as the administration repeatedly alleged before the war.
When you put together all of the pieces of this puzzle, the picture is clear. George W. Bush and his minions decided early on that war on Iraq was both possible and achievable. All they had to do was to find a way to spin public opinion just enough to achieve a popular consensus.
Of course, Bush and his neocon cohorts succeeded beyond there wildest dreams. Hell, they even managed to convince me, to my everlasting chagrin. I decided that, given the evidence presented, Iraq WAS a legitimate and ongoing threat to the security of our country. Having come to that conclusion, I realized that there are times when it becomes necessary to put partisanship aside and get behind the Greater Good. Little did I realize that the “evidence” was fabricated, and that the rationale for going to war was built on lies and deception.
The risk for the Bush campaign is that the drip-drip of the revelations will slowly erode the advantage that the president has held among voters for his handling of the Iraq war and especially the struggle against terrorism. Despite growing misgivings about the violence in Iraq, Bush has held a commanding lead on whether he would better protect the country from terrorists.
But in the first two candidates’ debates, Kerry and his running mate, John Edwards, have worked to separate the two issues. They have charged that Bush bungled the war on terrorism — especially against al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, who is still at large — through what they have described as a needless diversion into Iraq.
In the final analysis, we are being led by a liar and a hypocrite. George W. Bush is all too happy to wrap himself in flag and faith. Too many Americans seem unwilling to look beyond that flag and faith to see the ugly, unpleasant, and dangerous truth. Too many seem perfectly happy to let Bush continue the permanent War on Terror- never mind the fact that most of the terrorist activity in Iraq can be laid directly to his illegitimate war there.
“Better to fight terrorism in Iraq than in the US” is not a political philosophy. It’s a complete whitewash of the truth. We would not be having to fight terrorism in Iraq were it not for Bush’s invasion. Three-plus years after 9.11, and there is STILL no evidence that connects Saddam Hussein to that terrible day. Yet both George W. Bush and Dick Cheney continue to parrot the party line- that Saddam WAS connected to al Qaeda, who was responsible for 9.11.
Do we really want a President and Vice-President whose political strategy is straight out the Josef Goebbels School of Political Truth Manipulation? Repeating a lie may eventually convince people that it is, in fact The Truth, but it does not change the fact that it is in the still a lie.
WE DESERVE BETTER.
