|
Edited on Tue Feb-12-08 11:19 AM by butlerd
I'm constantly dumbfounded by Bush, Cheney, Gates, McCain et. al constantly exhorting us to achieve "victory" in Iraq and warning against "defeat" because they don't seem to ever clarify/explain to us what "victory" is or should look like at this point although many of us can certainly SPECULATE about what "victory" means to them and I think that we can all agree that whatever "victory" is to them is certainly NOT going to be good for our country nor the (surviving) Iraqi citizenry. I wish that we had more (are there any?) Democrats in Congress demanding answers from Bush, McCain et. al about what their vision for "victory" in Iraq is since they seem so committed to continuing it despite the aforementioned "goals" having been accomplished and all of the alleged positive results of Bush's "surge" strategy. I have long believed that Bush's underlying motivation for launching his invasion of Iraq and McCain's stated intentions of indefinitely continuing our occupation of Iraq is that being in a "state of war" makes it easier for them and people like them to continue consolidating power, justifying continued erosion of basic civil liberties, and, of course, stifling (if not outright crushing) dissent. THAT doesn't seem to be working for them as well as it used to but that doesn't mean that they won't continue to try of course. Our "freedom" and way of life isn't so much at risk from a ragtag band of terrorists halfway across the world as it is from people like Bush, McCain who (mis-)use such tragedies and/or use military conflict with another country to further enhance their own political agendas and authority at the expense of our freedom and way of life.
|