President Bush Between a Rock and a Hard Place
As Presidential news conferences go, yesterday morning’s was revealing in the way the President’s comments telegraphed the White House strategy in the coming election campaign.
For the first time, the President admitted that the nation is sorely divided over the war in Iraq, saying, “the nations psyche “ is being tested by the war. Interpretation: my party may be in big trouble. His message was clear though – that he will not compromise by promising to withdraw troops just to make it easier for Republicans to be elected. Whether you approve of his job performance or not, that does make him consistent on the subject of the war. And that was a difficult pronouncement for Republican congressional candidates to listen to.
What makes this especially complicated is the new polling showing over 60 percent of Americans staunchly opposed to the war in Iraq. That means, quite simply, that many Republicans will have to run far from the President’s agenda to survive, and probably accounts for his low approval rating.
In reality, Bush is between a rock and a hard place. With Iran offering a new form of blatant state terrorism by defying the U.N., and with Syria flaunting its terror ties, the White House has few options but to stay put in Iraq, at least for now. Any sign of weakness could be traumatic. It is a very unpopular decision because as the people of Iraq slide into civil war, the plausibility of America’s presence there becomes even more troubling.
But perhaps, this is really an eventual way out. If a full scale civil war breaks out, the President may then have the option to redeploy American troops to the Iranian border, where such a force would send a message to Islamic-Fascists that there is only so much nuclear saber rattling that we will take.
Wouldn’t it be a real irony if the United States used the pretext of civil war as an actual reason to begin a pullout.
Of course, with the way things happen in the Middle East, all of this could be nullified by breaking developments. It is a region where anything can happen and probably will.
That’s my take. What’s yours?
Comments(3)
Larry,
The Bush Administration has almost shown an ignorantly blind faith, almost a religious belief, that “staying the course” in Iraq, no matter what, come hell or high water, is the moral thing to do, and has, in the process, shown an unwillingness to appropriately use American power as a force for good in other, in my opinion, more important areas of the Middle East. I agree that the UN has, as of late, shown itself to be moribund with regard to the security of Israel, helping the democratic world fend off Hezbollah (in my view, the greatest threat to America and the free world today, even more so than Al Qaeda), as well as stabilizing the region as a whole, and making sure Iran doesn’t proceed further with its terrifying nuclear ambitions and intentions.
All the more reason, therefore, for the US and this administration to step up to the plate and, as Bush would view it, do the “moral” thing and get out of Iraq, not because a civil war will force us to, but because, quite frankly, if we are serious about defending our country against terrorism, and as you call it, “Islamic-Fascism,” we need to move those troops to Iran and to northern Israel, stabilize Lebanon, cut off ties with Syria and force them out of Lebanon, just as we so quickly forced the Baathists out of Iraq, and begin to work on helping the Israelis dismantle Hezbollah, piece by piece, for as long as it takes.
In the meanwhile, it seems as though the administration (and the news media) have forgotten about Afghanistan completely. Do we hear about the Taliban? Why haven’t we caught Bin Laden and Al Zawahiri? Particularly in the wake of these scary, recently foiled 9/11-like terror plots in Britain, the work of Al Qaeda.
Maybe Iraq will indeed have turned out to be a failure, if that nation falls into full-blown civil war and continues to be a breeding ground for the resentful Arab street and Al Qaeda. However, a misguided mistake is not an excuse to ignore more important (to America’s security, foremost) priorities. Therefore, in my view, we must pull out of Iraq as soon as possible (in the context of a phased withdrawal), and move our manpower, resources, and focus to fighting Iran, Hezbollah, Syria, Afghanistan, the protection of Israel, and the stabilization of Lebanon.
I believe that this is an area and culture that we Americans do not fully understand. It is so opposite of what we believe and the way we live, that we cannot understand how the people think and act. And we believe that our type of living and our type of freedom is the only right and proper one.
I am sure that basic freedoms are something that every living human being deserves, but our version of personal freedom and their version of personal freedom are completely different. We cannot possibly expect that their democracy will look and act like ours. If we plan to stay until that happens, then we will be in Iraq a long, long time.
I think that we need to be considering the beginning of withdrawal from the area. We have given them the basic structure. They have held elections. They have a government that is as ‘in control’ as it can be at this time. They have an army that has been trained and they have a police force that has been trained. We can keep forces in place to continue to train and support those efforts. We can provide as much protection as possible to companies who are attempting to repair the damage done to the infrastructure during the conflict. But it is time to let the cream rise to the top. Let the governement begin the job of developing the democracy that THEY want to have, using the tenets and customs that make their country unique. Yes, it may mean a civil war there…. but after all… we have one in our history and look where we are!
It is a very hard place for President Bush to find himself these days. I believe that he started this for right and just reasons. He just needs to withdraw for right and just reasons, too.
Between a rock and a hard place indeed, Larry. I’m against the war in Iraq and the Bush administration in general. Although, I intially had the idea that the president believed that there was a major risk to us Americans and the war was necessary for our safety. I eventually was skeptical after a year when I did not see any results. I did not hear about a warehouse discovered full of missles that could have been fired at us or anything like that. Election 2004 is when things really started to heat up. All opponents to the reigning Republicans were anti-war. Bush was reelected and still no results from the war in Iraq. Saddam Hussein was captured along the way. However, no evidence has shown that he was a threat to our home soil. Now, all pro-war politicans are being voted out. However, I do know the Republican party is doomed should we pull out. I think the civil war in Iraq could be in fact a great excuse to get out. I don’t think it’ll reverse the damage, but it’ll stop the situation from getting worse for them.