State of Bush's Iraq Deception

January 23, 2007


"It will take time . . ." -- Nominated commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, General David Petraeus, before Senate Armed Services Committee


We already know that Bush considers Iraq the "center" of his "long war" against enemies and would-be combatants everywhere who would challenge Bush's manufactured mandate to conquer. His latest 'plan' to escalate his Iraq occupation and deploy even more soldiers into the quagmire will be kicked off with a hard sell to Americans in his State of the Union Address tonight. So, it was no surprise that Bush's new commander in Iraq, Lieutenant General David H. Petraeus, wanted Senators on the Senate Armed Services Committee to know that his master's latest military muckraking in Iraq will take time . . .

"It will take time for the additional forces to flow to Iraq," Petraeus http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/23/world/middleeast/24petraeustextcnd.html?_r=1&pagewanted=print">told the Senators," "time for them to gain an understanding of the areas in which they will operate, time to plan with and get to know their Iraqi partners, time to set conditions for the successful conduct of security operations, and of course time to conduct those operations and they to build on what they achieve," he said.

In other words, the new forces, led by their newly ascended commander, will need time to crank up a new round of bullying to try and further intimidate the divided Iraqis into falling in line behind the new U.S. puppet regime. The 'plan' that Gen. Petraeus will direct our soldiers to execute will have the new additions to our occupying force kicking down doors and rounding up Iraqi men in no time. Whoever his beleaguered troops don't manage to kill and maim in Iraq in their arbitrary flexing of our nation's hijacked defenses, will be carried off to an indefinite detention without charges, representation, or trial in one of the new U.S. facilitated gulags.

Even as Bush speaks tonight of liberating and freeing Iraqis from the grip of a brutal U.S. supported dictator, he will be re-asserting himself as yet another self-serving orchestrator and administrator of bloody violence against Iraqis to satisfy his self-appointed posturing as the post-911 protector of the world. His new general shares his paternal delusion that the Maliki government, which assumed power under the protection of our military, somehow represents progress from the previous military dictatorship. The reality of the effect of the invasion and occupation on the lives of average Iraqis, however, has been nothing short of catastrophic.

The numbers of killings of Iraqis resulting from Bush's deliberate destabilization has rivaled those of the killings Saddam was accused of and ultimately executed for. The imprisonments, tortures, and state-sponsored repressions of Iraqis has surpassed the legacy of the reign of Iraq's last U.S. puppet. It's hard to imagine a more incompetent, or more corrupt manager of the 'democracy' Bush has tried to shoehorn into the Mideast. Iraqis have been the victims of a childlike manipulation of our nation's defenders who are being flailed about their country like toy soldiers; and as pawns in Bush's political gamesmanship with his new Democratic opponents in the U.S. Congress.

In Bush's cynical game, Iraqis are to be rescued from the chaos and violence he, himself, fostered and encouraged by inviting all who would oppose his military expansion into that region to "bring it on" and "fight them there." All Bush has managed to bring to Iraq is an extension of the terrorist violence of 9-11. There is no democracy in Iraq for our forces to defend. There is only a bastion of U.S. pride which Bush has deposited into the troubled region to somehow rival the warring factions in their intimidating violence. But, no one is really intimidated; they're just aggravated to strike out with their own violent expressions of liberty and self-determination which Bush disregards as mere obstacles to his puppet regime's consolidation of power.

To Bush, the elections which were held under an increased occupation were the definitive expression of support for his new regime. However, the very electoral process he trumpets as democracy were singled out by his new commander, Petraeus, as an instigating cause of the sectarian violence, telling the Senate committee that they "actually intensified sectarian divisions in the population." That's an amazing admission, considering that he's set to intensify our nation's defense of that original folly.

The present regime has served under 'emergency powers' for the majority of its term, with the new Iraqi constitution that our soldiers fought and died to facilitate and defend, suspended, and, of no use to the average Iraqi. There is nothing of the original scheme which remotely resembles any of the ideals Bush claims we are defending in Iraq with the over-burdening of our resources and defenses, and with the ultimate sacrifices of our soldiers.

These two veterans of the "long war" in Iraq, Bush and Petraeus, are among the dwindling minority of Americans who still believe there is something in Iraq to defend, much less, to "win" something or another there. Tonight, Bush will try to convince Americans to sit still for his latest round of aggression against Iraqis as he molds them into a compliant state behind the sacrifices of our soldiers. It's another deception that Bush has reserved for his annual State of the Union posturing. In his address, Bush will shift from his discredited fearmongering about WMDs and uranium tubes, to frightening Americans about the prospects of blowback from the consequences of his paternal abuse of Iraq.

Everyone will be asked to assume responsibility for his failure tonight as Bush urges us forward in his bloody game. Most of the world will take heed, and nonetheless, concern ourselves more with demanding accountability from our epic deceiver as he presses the rest of us on to his deadly bidding.


http://journals.democraticunderground.com/bigtree

If I was on the committee, I would have asked him who wrote his opening remarks--Stephen Hadley or Karl Rove. He was under oath. If this guy is serious about having our soldiers "bunk" in Iraqi police stations where the police aren't even safe, he is not taking command for anything but personal gain. Good luck, (future) Senator Patraeus. Make sure that you don't venture out of the green zone too often.

He's an insurgency 'expert'. Some expertise there, huh?

every Iraqi, and all of the American troops there, just to show that nobody can tell him what to do. It's a tragedy. It's lunacy to let ourselves be brought to ruin as a country, just because a sociopath managed to seize control of the presidency. Impeach him NOW!

He'd take us all down with him if he could

That's why I'm so in favor of impeachment. Bush needs no other reason than that people are opposed to his policies, to stubbornly insist that those policies be carried out. I don't think most Americans realize yet that we are dealing with an unstable sociopath, who can't be expected to act rationally.

Iran is the new mantra. Iraq is so last year... :sarcasm:

There is nothing more responsible for, and enabling of, Iranian influence in Iraq than his destabilizing invasion and occupation. But, Olberman reported tonight, there is very little actual evidence of Iran in Iraq . . . except for the close relationship of his own junta leaders with the Iranian regime. Go figure.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_ron_full_070123_state_of_bush_s_iraq.htm

and a kick :kick: