Back to Main
June 19, 2005
Lyndon Baines Bush
Comments
I don´t think that this will be a try to show more of progress. The public has had enough talk of painted schools.
I believe the media strategy has changed to “blood, sweat and tears”. Consider these:
Newsday.com: Senior Bush official says insurgents likely to step up attacks as terrorists try to derail constitution, elections
During a terrible week for violence in Iraq, a senior administration official yesterday warned that the worst is yet to come.
…
“I think you’ll see it continuing up, because the terrorists know what’s coming,” said the official, speaking as peace demonstrators chanted outside the White House.
…
“We have a rough road ahead of us,” the official said in an unusual moment of openness by the Bush administration on the war. His comments appeared aimed at preparing a public – that polls show is increasingly disillusioned by the war – for even more bad news.
In his weekly radio address yesterday Bush said:
This mission isn’t easy, and it will not be accomplished overnight. … By making their stand in Iraq, the terrorists have made Iraq a vital test for the future security of our country and the free world. We will settle for nothing less than victory.
That is not much talk of progress. It is not yet Goebbels total war, but getting nearer.
“But out of the gobbledygook, comes a very clear thing: [unclear] you can’t trust the government; you can’t believe what they say; and you can’t rely on their judgment; and the – the implicit infallibility of presidents, which has been an accepted thing in America, is badly hurt by this, because it shows that people do things the President wants to do even though it’s wrong, and the President can be wrong.”
— H.R. Haldeman to President Nixon, Monday, 14 June 1971, 3:09 p.m. meeting. – Re: The Pentagon Papers.
Posted by: Outraged | Jun 19 2005 10:22 utc | 2
Lying for War
From Watergate to Downing Street
You wouldn’t know it from the recent media focus on Deep Throat, but the lies that Richard Nixon told about the Watergate break-in were part of his standard duplicity for the Vietnam War. It wasn’t just that the Nixon administration engaged in secret illegal actions against a wide range of peace advocates — including antiwar candidate George McGovern, the Democratic presidential nominee in 1972. Deception was always central to Nixon’s war policy. Thirty-three years after Watergate, echoes of his fervent lies for war can be heard from George W. Bush …
Posted by: Outraged | Jun 19 2005 10:26 utc | 3
All the information is right out there in the open. The only good thing I can say about the present administration is that it does not hide anything. They are arrogant enough to do things right in the open and assume that they can lie their way out of any situation.
This country is run by amoral people. Its President is a spoiled brat with Messianic delusions who gets whatever he wants and who never makes a mistake and who enjoys putting people to death, whether judicially or through endless wars.
The Vice President is engaged in stripmining government funds to benefit fatcats in corporate enterprises. None of the corporate thieves is punished, in fact, they are allowed to move up to better positions at the trough.
The Secretary of War is a sadist who enjoys torture.
The Sectretary of State loves power at any price and is very economical with the truth.
None of these people consider treaties to be worth a damn.
Bush still has a forty per cent approval rating since that same forty per cent of the American people subscribe to a death-worshipping religion that claims that there will be no need for anything much any more, since Armageddon is coming (it MUST come in their sick fantasies) and the Rapture is imminent, so why not rape other countries and our own for good measure?
There is a lot of writing about how the current administration resembles that of a certain central European country of the last century.
I maintain that the resemblance is to a different country than the one usually mentioned: Read Karl Kraus’ LAST DAYS OF MANKIND to see a true portrait of an out of control empire, Austria-Hungary.
This Empire was destroyed at the end of the First World War.
The language and situations, that Kraus describes in his (true) account are frighteningly identical to the language and situations we see in the daily papers.
Kraus believed that the perversion of language was the first step down the slippery slope of political perversion. He was right.
Posted by: armageddonouttahere | Jun 19 2005 10:36 utc | 4
It’s a very LBJ, rather Deja Vu Vietnam 1965 time.
At this time in Vietnam the VC insurgents had ~37,000 regulars and ~100,000 in support which roughly equates with the estimates of ~40,000 and ~80,000 insurgents and committed supporters currently in Iraq.
The insurgency is showing no signs of abating, there is no political solution on the horizon let alone serious indications of the insurgents leaders to enter into one (whoever those leaders may be), efficiency, losses and morale amongst the proxy troops is low.
LBJ’s decision time:
Do we withdraw and concede defeat to the inusrgency with all the consequences that entails ?
Do we stay the course with a strategy that has so far proved inconclusive and is deemd unsustainable in the long term ? or
Do we widen the war by escalating the conflict and the forces involved in order to achieve success decisively in the short-term (1-2 years) ?
Historically, at this point, LBJ escalated the conflict to ~184,000 US ground troops by the end of the year. Dramatically increasing the direct involvement and combat aggressiveness of the US ground forces by attempting to sieze the ‘strategic initiative’ from the insurgency with all the loss of life that entailed and making a future withdrawal that much more difficult …
GW Bush is currently being assailed to widen the conflict into Syria and or Iran to stifle direct and indirect support for the insurgency, to allocate the 300,000 troops that should have been in Iraq from day one of the Iraq invasion but denied by Rummy or to define the timetable for the draw down and ultimate withdrawal of US Forces from Iraq.
At this point in the Vietnam conflict it was determined that the Army would be unable to sustain combat operations without a dramatic increase in reserves, effectively a doubling of the then draft. It’s already formally acknowledged the exhaustion of the viability of the available combat troops in Iraq and the imminent inability to sustain force levels via recruitment, retention and combat losses (i.e. KIA/WIA/Other) compounded by having already called up the reserves, National Guard and rolling Stop-Loss orders. Many soldiers and especially marines will shortly be entering thier third combat tours in Iraq. There currently is no draft.
So, will the Prez maintain the status quo when the Army is being ground to dust and cannot sustain the current level of Ops indefinitely without self-destructing, withdraw from Iraq or escalate the conflict in order to score a ‘Win’ ? We all know what LBJ decided …
The situation in Vietnam and the similarity of the political and military considerations at the strategic and political levels:
The Pentagon Papers
Gravel Edition
Volume 3
Chapter 4, “American Troops Enter the Ground War, March-July 1965,”
pp. 389-485
Posted by: Outraged | Jun 19 2005 12:31 utc | 5
Similar yet different. Johnson didn’t start his war and rather the neocons he was being pushed by a bunch of senior southern congressmen and senators. And, his grasp of all things was on an order or two of magnitude greater.
Posted by: ken melvin | Jun 19 2005 13:43 utc | 6
From American Conservative’s Justin Raimondo
State of the State Secrets
Larry Franklin wanted to sway policy, not just spill intel.
Posted by: Uncle $cam | Jun 19 2005 14:10 utc | 7
Heh.
The lies he and his whole crew told the whole world to get his war on are starting to blow back home. And when the whole enterprise is built on lies – rotten from the rafters down — when it starts to come apart, it implodes faster than you would have ever dreamed possible.
So am I making any promises? What, do I look stoopid?
But when I squinch my eye closed reeel tight, and let my imagination off the leash for a little run, I can easily see the Summer of 2006 and Bush exiting the White House under protest – maybe under guard – and it sounds just like this…
Bush a.k.a. The Jerk
Posted by: Voodoo | Jun 19 2005 14:15 utc | 8
So what will that 40% who supposedly support the same “rape the world” philosophy do when they’ve been told the price of the easy-to-ignore war has gone, way, way up — along with the price of gasoline?
Posted by: mm | Jun 19 2005 14:38 utc | 9
Dead American troops hung from lampposts as savage fighting continues in al-Qa’im Saturday.
Posted by: Uncle $cam | Jun 19 2005 15:26 utc | 10
Folks,
For another good take on the eerie parallels between Vietnam and Iraq, take a look at “Tomgram: Jonathan Schell, Down the Iraqi Rabbit Hole” at http://www.tomdispatch.com.
Tom has a great line about how they’re “mainlining” Vietnam in Washington.
When I look at the quotes I’ve seen today from Chuck Hagel and Leslie Gelb (posted at Atrios and Daily Kos), this truly is deja vu all over again.
And now we have the president going on TV to try to sell the war to a finally skeptical public — 1,700 deaths and two years after he starts it. I bet we won’t be seeing any codpiece struts or missing WMD jokes now, will we? And don’t expect to hear him plead for parents to enlist their kids in the military for the Great Republican Cause either.
Billmon, your Lyndon Baines Bush photo tells volumes!
Posted by: Phil from New York | Jun 19 2005 15:27 utc | 11
The Tinker Bell defense started before the war itself and those of us who didn’t clap hard or long enough should expect to carry the blame for defeat. The 101st fighting keyboarders will flip through their well worn copies of the “Art of War for Full On Dumbfucks” to find the chapter on “Defeat through lack of belief by backstabbers”. “Aha” they will grunt, “our brilliant strategy had one flaw – our good and true natures made us fail to fully comprehend the betrayal of the liberals”.
Posted by: citizen k | Jun 19 2005 15:38 utc | 12
Other differences:
Regarding LBJ, few remember that he actually was the answer to the now famous “Last Man” question posed by John Kerry. By 1973, at least he probably had enough conscience to plan it that way. Not expecting the same from Bush.
Posted by: bcf | Jun 19 2005 15:55 utc | 13
@ken melvin
Somehow I’m not reassured by your observation that the current Prez, Bush, will make the right strategic decisions on the basis that he’s less well-informed, did willingly make the decision to start this war and is being pressured by the neocons and far right Repugs to expand it … nope, I’m not reassurred at all …
@Uncle $cam
No shortage of propaganda, and not only from the US re Zarqawi … hmmm, three helicopters shot down in a 48 hour period and at least one by Strela man portable SAMs ? Heavy on rhetoic, lacking in details …
Given the tone and wording of the report it may well be prudent to await corroboration from other sources before giving it much credence.
Posted by: Outraged | Jun 19 2005 15:59 utc | 14
@Uncle $cam, sorry for the double post on the open thread, didn’t see your link.
Posted by: Fran | Jun 19 2005 16:30 utc | 15
I agree outraged, who knows whats “real” anymore
as Bill moyers says “One of the biggest changes in my lifetime is that the delusional is no longer marginal.”
@Fran
prot a noblem 😉
Posted by: Uncle $cam | Jun 19 2005 17:36 utc | 16
Posted by: Nugget | Jun 19 2005 21:33 utc | 17
b @ June 19, 2005 04:45 AM;
So many times, I’ve seen so “Senior administration officials” float diverging views, usually getting only cursory MSM coverage. I long ago came to conclusion this is Rove’s way of measuring how different messages “play”.
I think this change of message, if it actually happens, is a consequence of too much reality cathing up with them: they have no choice… a majority no longer believes them.
* polling is baaaaaad
* congress is making nasty noises
* Soc Sec “reform” his a noose around W’s neck…
I think the country would revolt if W’ tried to expand war. I’m guardedly concluding the worm is slowly turning.
Posted by: JDMcKay | Jun 20 2005 0:39 utc | 18
JUNE 20, 2005 By John F. Burns The New York Times
Commanders concerned for their careers have not thought it prudent to go further, and to say publicly what many say privately: that with U.S. troop levels – 139,000 now – they have been forced to play an infernal board game, constantly shuttling combat units from one war zone to another, leaving insurgent buildups unmet in some places while they deal with more urgent problems elsewhere.
U.S. commanders, their army bottom-heavy with support units, have at most 60,000 U.S. and allied combat soldiers available, and only a fraction as many Iraqi soldiers rated combat-ready. Recent U.S. intelligence estimates put the insurgents’ strength from 12,000 to 20,000.
The scope of the problem can be taken from the garrison in the Baghdad area. Major General William Webster, commander of the 3rd Infantry Division, recently gave a rundown of the troops available to meet the surge of suicide bombings, buried roadside explosives and ambushes that have killed more than 600 people in the city since the new Shiite majority government took office in early May: 27,000 U.S. troops, 15,000 Iraqi policemen and 7,000 Iraqi soldiers.
Saddam Hussein, he said, had a regular garrison for the same area of 80,000 troops and 50,000 police.
The pattern of thin force levels seems to be replicated, in differing ways, almost everywhere Americans confront insurgents. The exceptions have been those occasions, like the battles that restored government control of Najaf last August and Falluja in November, when U.S. commanders concentrated thousands of troops to crush the rebels.
But high-intensity operations like the one at Falluja are like driving a stake into a hornets’ nest, many U.S. officers say. They scatter the insurgents, who regroup and return as soon as U.S. troop concentrations are reduced. Seven months after Falluja was recaptured, in ruins, pockets of insurgents still operate in the city.
But whether there are too many U.S. soldiers or too few, a feeling is growing among senior officers in Baghdad and Washington that it is only a matter of time before the Pentagon sets a timetable of its own for withdrawal.
These officers point to the effect on American public opinion of the slow disintegration of the 30-nation, U.S.-led coalition, and to frustration on Capitol Hill with the faltering buildup of Iraqi forces.
These officers also cite the recruiting slump and fear that the risk is growing that the war, like Vietnam, will do lasting damage to the army and the marines …
Posted by: Outraged | Jun 20 2005 4:54 utc | 19
82 Iraqi MPs Demand Occupation Pullout
June 19, 2005 IslamOnline.net
Eighty two Iraqi lawmakers from across the political spectrum have pressed for the withdrawal of the US-led occupation troops from their country.
The Shiite, Kurdish, Sunni Arab, Christian and communist legislators made the call in a letter sent by Falah Hassan Shanshal of the United Iraqi Alliance (UIA), the largest bloc in parliament, to speaker Hajem Al-Hassani, reported Agence France-Presse (AFP).
We have asked in several sessions for occupation troops to withdraw. Our request was ignored, read the latter, made public on Sunday, June 19.
It is dangerous that the Iraqi government has asked the UN Security Council to prolong the stay of occupation forces without consulting representatives of the people who have the mandate for such a decision, it said.
Therefore we must reject the occupation’s legitimacy and renew our demand for these forces to withdraw, it added.
Posted by: Outraged | Jun 20 2005 5:06 utc | 20
Hey you, Whitehouse, ha ha charade you are.
You house proud town mouse, ha ha charade you are.
You’re trying to keep our feelings off the street,
you’re nearly a real treat, all tight lips and cold feet,
and do you feel abused?
You gotta stem the evil tide,
and keep it all on the inside.
Mary, you’re nearly a treat, Mary, you’re nearly a treat,
but you’re really a cry.
Big man, pig man, ha ha charade you are.
And when your hand is on your heart,
you’re nearly a good laugh, almost a joker,
with your head down in the pig bin,
saying, ” Keep on digging”, pig stain on your fat chin.
What do you hope to find, when you’re down in the pig mine?
You’re nearly a laugh, you’re nearly a laugh,
Posted by: Uncle $cam | Jun 20 2005 5:37 utc | 21