Why What Bush Says Doesn't Matter
By Roy D. Follendore III
Copyright (c) 2004 by RDFollendoreIII
November 28, 2008
We should not be there. If it were not for the crazy right wing political fringe on a nutty religious crusade, we would not be there. But since we are there, and since our people are being murdered by a society that hates our guts, let's be careful about what we say and do over there. For instance, we should not be torturing prisoners. I know, for some it is a small thing. It's not just that the lesson to be learned from the past few weeks is not that disgusting images of torture are disgusting. But it is not just that torture and human rights abuse that is wrong. Of course torture is disgusting and human rights abuse are wrong. The lesson to be learned is the another fundamental mistake made by our President when he placed the power of policy making in the hands of individuals who did not understand the inevitably of technology to empower human communication. What were they thinking? What was he thinking? Did President Bush actually believe that his leadership changes reality?
The distribution of images taken during the torturous 'softening up' and 'interrogation' of Iraq prisoners were inevitable and anyone with an iota of common sense could have, would have, and should have understood that fact. Within our high speed wireless society, quality images are cheap and proliferate and witness everything that is done everywhere on earth. Every knowledgeable person knows that images are unquestionably the crucible for modern political power because they not only communicate things that are intended, they also communicate unintended truths. This fact is partly because of the current nature of our technology which makes it far easier to censor words than images. Uncensored images of administrative corruption will inevitably soak into the minds and actions of Americans. Any middle class American would have to have their head buried in the sand, or else up in the clouds to not understand these things. It is therefore amazing that a President of the United States could think that he would be able to control the inevitable horrific images of war. Did all of the educated people who run the United States military establishment advise our President that a sterile war exists or did he come up with this idea himself?
George Bush's solution for fighting terrorism has been a World War II mobilization with cold war weapons systems. The reason that this can not work is simple economics. It infinitely easier to recruit twenty desperate and religiously motivated individuals and then use simple terrorist tactics than to recruit, train and maintain twenty million and apply centralized command and control. That means that in terms of dollars expended, terrorism is amazingly cost effective.
On top of this you have to be nuts to actually believe that a bloody world war approach of invasion could possibly do anything more than fracture and fragment our American support overseas.
It is no wonder that this President as well as his Republican party and certainly the national news media have been slowly coming to the realization that George has become unelectable. In one pole writers are saying that the Bush administration is continuing to lose control of the media. The truth is that if it was not for post 911 nationalism, the problems of the Bush administration would have been far more closely examined. The truth is that our flag not only acted as a blindfold to reality, it gagged those who could see and would have spoke up, and it muffled the hearing of those who would have listened to the realities.
Most middle Americans are frankly astounded that this process has taken so long. At this point there have been so many Bush administration failures, it is difficult to keep them all in mind at once. There is the failure of his neoconservative administration to prepare for and protect America from terrorism, the failure to kill or capture Osama Bin Laden, the failure to find weapons of mass destruction, the failure to protect human rights, the failure to follow the Geneva Convention and the failure to gain support from the United Nations are just some of them. There are the weapons of destruction that was America's original justification for invasion that no longer exists because those probably weapons never existed or could not be found.
A fundamental problem that our President faces at this moment is a little something called political economics. You see, within the center of our Washington D.C. beltway, taking action is expensive. Politicians can't afford to swat at the winds of every issue because their message will get lost and also because every action creates resistance with an equal and opposite reaction. Successful politicians don't waste political capital on pointless efforts because if they did they would not be successful. The signs that this particular administration is failing are all there.
It is no wonder that at this moment, President George W. Bush's approval rating is at 42% and steadily going down. What we have had over the past four years is a national leader who bases both his strategic and tactical planning on rigid ideologies. That worked for a while because he was able to squeak through to win the White House. From his perspective his trouble has been that the American people tire of ideology the way that they tire of fashion. His wave peaked because of a terrorist attack and America was left with a President who was not all that smart who was expected to have wisdom. What America found was that it had elected a man has been willing to bet America's future on his failing neoconservative ideologies. The administration of George W. Bush has now squandered our military and our budget. Two years and trillions of dollars later Americans have found that he had lost the bet. So what?
In or out of office it is impossible to hide behind a Presidential Seal. Unlike the Pharaohs, American Presidents, even George W. Bush can't claim to be a deity, even if he actually believes that God told him. Well on second thought, maybe he might claim to be God but it would be doubtful if it him much good. The problem that all Presidents have is the simple fact that in America there is the President and there is the certainty of the flaws arising from the mortality of the man who is President.
But so what if George isn't reelected? Well, for one thing, we still have to figure out ways to fix all of the problems that he has caused for America. For another, this will be one ex-President who should expect public hostility when he leaves office. In his vacancy Americans should hang on and expect another national scandal that could easily make Watergate look tame as the gates of evidence starts flooding to the surface. The Presidents behavior has never been fully explainable.
George W. responds like a lame duck who has committed all of his resources and is constantly on the defensive. This President has simply lost command of public issues and the press knows this. You can tell by the difficulty George has in maintaining his dignity and prestige of his office with junior reporters when he felt he was not being properly reminded that he is 'Mr. President.' You can see this by the way that this man has had to expend attention on such things as censorship of images of the American flag draped coffins as they are flown in to be buried. He is desperate and fearful in the face of the true images of war.
George W. Bush is now forced to expend precious press time condemning the very 'detainee' policies that he and Vice President Chaney have spent so much political capital protecting for the past three years. But like Nixon, George is finding out that there is no way to distance himself from the media. Instead of protecting our nation, He can't come clean and he can't let go of the issues from his righteous posture. George consistently chooses to continue to protect Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, the administrator who orchestrated weapons transfer to Saddam regime and who oversaw his policies that violated of the Geneva Convention that allowed the prisoners to be abused.
At this moment, in the eyes of most Americans, the shame of this White House far supersedes the immorality on which George W. Bush ran to replace. The purpose for defining a prisoner as a 'detainee' is to bypass the Geneva Convention in the same way that President Bill Clinton's attempted redefinition fellatio was an attempt to bypass the moral obligations associated with the potentially impeachable laws of adultery. But there is a gulf of difference between the lies of office that arise from war and a sexual affair.
There are untruths and half truths laying just below the surface of the news stories that just won't go away. It is obvious that the moment this President planned to insert American troops into Iraq he was not yet elected. This is a politician who did not take out Saddam in order to create a new Democracy in the middle east. What he and his 'Compassionate Republican' group's version of America actually intended was to remove Saddam's wall that has been separating two aggressive Muslim factions. In George W. Bushes Biblical perspective, the war of terror is not about terrorist cells who fly aircraft into buildings, it was about weakening the growing religions that support terrorism as they grow to build their oil rich armies against his version of a Christian America. Over the last four long years there has been layer after layer of ideological oriented propaganda that has been slowly pealed away until we finally get a glimpse of the metal of this man.
The trouble with this Presidents Iraq rhetoric is that there can be no Democracy within regions where the nastiest perpetual religious dictatorships and territorial war prevails. While our Generals commit even more of our bravest troops to fighting more rebellious Islamic warlords, the truth is that even our Federal Government lowest managers are increasingly aware that this is a quagmire. The internal resistance that the Oval Office has found is embedded in the simple fact that many simply no longer want to personally participate in this disastrous occupation and religious/tribal civil war. It is obvious that America is not really turning over responsibility for Iraq to friends. It is a bad sign when even the individuals who seem to be cooperating with us are actually doing so simply to get us out of their country. It is ominous when they are willing to die for doing so. Americas weakness in Iraq does not lay within the design and overwhelming numbers of tanks, but in the simple fact that the same army that crushed their nation is helpless to protect those individual Iraqi leaders it considers allies. Our military leaders and their expensive weapons systems were not designed for implementing and managing peace under these circumstance.
Instead of the Texas Christian ideology that sustains the Presidential neoconservative agenda, the bottom line is that within the heart of the middle east we have stirred up the core of an Islamic 'hornets nest'. Unfortunately Americans are not hearing the underlying issue that surrounds our commitment to Bush's gamble. By labeling and eliminating Saddam's 'evil' dictatorship, George W. Bush may very well have sewn the seeds of creating a unified Moslem empire and quite possibly created a far larger evil on a far larger scale, Unless the United Nations arrives to aid the United States in full force, we should expect that when American troops withdraw from Iraq a horrific civil war will begin. We have seen this kind of American interventionism before by our military. Many thousands and possibly millions more innocent lives can be expected to be killed as we withdraw. These causalities may have been unintended but they are no less deaths by proxy.
It has been reported that some significant powers in Washington are now saying openly that this President and his administration cannot be trusted if it is not capable of having second thoughts. The President has called for Republicans to stand by the course. But the fact is that these leaders have already recognized that there has been a fundamental failure by the leaders of our American government to understand the nature and consequences of their power. At this point so close to election, only one thing is certain, no man is an island, even our President of the United States. When this President finally leaves office, the George W. Bush gang will find that they are not only alone, they are unable to rebuild their empire from Midland Texas. Democrats and the majority of world hope that the whole Bush crew will simply go back there to their homes and hang their heads in shame. When history concludes who was to blame for setting the stage of the impending Middle East civil war holocaust, our 'cowboy' American President and his cronies will be at the top of the list as initiating the conflict.
You would think that these issues were the original reason why the title of this article is "Why What Bush Says Doesn't Matter." Well that just isn't so. All of these issues were not the reason. The reason for this essay is simply that regardless of our intentions, we can only make a difference by allowing others to make their own mistakes and helping those, who like us, must then pick up the pieces and learn from their mistakes. One man's apocalyptic vision, no matter how powerful he may be is not our nations vision. The failure of one person does not have to mean the failure of our nation. Somewhere there are people who understand that America can and will make a positive difference in the Middle East but that it will not and can not be through tanks and bombs.
Our soldiers need to be ordered home so that they can be reunited with their families. Open ended wars serve no purpose. It is time that we learn the non idealistic nature of this modern concept of peace. We desperately need leaders who will voice the fact that fiercely Islamic tribal nation, Iraq can not become an American democracy. We need to come to terms with the fact that our troops will be bringing home their middle eastern failures because of it. Our leaders under the Bush administration have squandered the sacrifices of brave men and women who served them because of their huge blind egos that refused to see the virtues of maintaining a flexible foreign posture. Like the Vietnam conflict, our soldiers may have won all of the military battles while America lost the political war. Without a clear understanding of how we were to implement our aims though peace this was inevitable.
That my friend is why what Bush says doesn't matter anymore.
Copyright (c) 2001-2007 RDFollendoreIII All Rights Reserved