So now we are confronted with the realities that have been blinded by the smoke and the mirrors of a national election. With the Democrats overtaking both houses of Congress, there was enough of a tumult and a roar to stir the hearts of the populace into fervent observation and pondering. But now the truth begins to sink in, like a slow-acting nerve-numbing drug shot cleanly into the back of the neck via needle-point dart through a blowgun...except instead of falling into a drowsy stupor, we are instead reawakening to the harsh domestic and international landscape splayed smugly before our eyes. Politics hasn't really changed, nor has the need for a change in the structure to affect change in the streets and ultimately lead for positive change in everyone's lives. Conversely, the old hands still have their hands in the cookie jar of our federal government, and power will never change hands as long as it rests with these cunning bastards...
Everyone's stance is quickly fading toward one of a need for withdrawal of forces from Iraq...but no one has a substantial or even workable solution to that quagmire. Politicians on both sides of the aisle are eagerly awaiting the findings of the Baker Commission, as though there will be some eleventh-hour, Immaculate-Reception-sized solution that will fall into the government's lap and allow everyone involved to save face. But the real problem is that there is no real solution or timetable by which to work off of, and James Baker and company sure as hell won't have the answers. Baker - as Secretary of State under Bush the elder - played quite a role in the first Iraqi conflict, remember...and their precise reasoning for not entering Baghdad was a fear of the strains it would exert on the military. Vice-president Dick Cheney, speaking in 1991 as Secretary of Defense in that administration, eerily predicted what would ultimately happen while he served for his second Bush:
"Once you get to Baghdad, it's not clear what you do with it. It's not clear what kind of government you put in place of the one that's currently there now. Is it going to be a Shia regime, a Sunni regime, a Kurdish regime? Or one that tilts toward the Baathists, or one that tilts toward Islamic fundamentalists? How much credibility is that going to have if it's set up by the American military there? How long does the United States military have to stay there to protect the people that sign on for that government, and what happens once we leave?"
This was the justification that the first Bush administration found to keep the first Persian Gulf War simply to the protection of Kuwaiti interests. Barging toward Baghdad, which would have been just as easy in 1991 as it turned out to be in 2003, was declared imprudent. Had George H.W. Bush decided to take Baghdad in 1991, we would still be occupying it today. The violent rebellion and upheaval and insurgency seen daily from Iraq would be continuing on full force fifteen years after the takeover, as I fear it might be fifteen years from now...
And yet we are counting on the same brain-trust that could not or would not heed its own ominous advice from a decade previous to dig the military and national honor out of the same cesspool into which it threw itself, knowing full-well what would happen if they charted the course they set out upon. Simply because the panel is bipartisan does not mean that its findings will be solid gold. Remember, Baker and Cheney were working side by side everyday for King George I when Cheney rattled off the above comments. It is truly a shame that the bottom-feeders keep finding a way to the surface...but now Bush, pulling all punches like Chuck "The Bayonne Bleeder" Wepner throwing errantly in a losing cause, has declared that he too will deliver a policy review independent of the Baker Commission report. While Bush was all too willing back in March to suggest he would keep troops in Iraq through the entirety of his presidency, stating that a withdrawal "will be decided by future presidents and future governments of Iraq," he is now reeling and backpedaling from his earlier statements in a blind effort to regain Republican control in 2008. That is his only true focus now that he is a lame-duck president. Never showing much ambition while it counted, Bush is now indebted only to his party for working so diligently for his interests...
So reality rears its ugly head yet again. I, for one, will not be holding my breath in anticipation of troop withdrawals. Too many powerful men's interests are at stake for any progressive solution to ever be put forth...
Broadcasting from the cerebral vortex,
Bigalke 15/Nov/2006 21:49 Eugene