A lonely bush in Iraq

Last night's address by President GW Bush was another example of how the current White House is tone deaf to the voices of Americans. It was also an example of 'if force doesn't immediately solve the problem, apply more force.' Instead of presenting a new strategy for addressing the Iraqi quagmire and how America can help set Iraq (and America) on the right course, it was an exercise of flogging a dead horse. While his words sound nice, the implication of his speech is "same old, same old". Only this time he's added a few twists.

Dan Froomkin, writing in the Washington Post is quickly becoming one of my favorite columnists. In yesterday's article [Tuesday] he discussed what GWB could make of his address. In Wednesday's, which I assume was actually written prior to the address, he offered a critique of the expected points to be made.

From my perspective, Bush's address failed the "Froomkin test."

Both the results of the mid-term elections in November and the current opinion polls provide a clear message. The war in Iraq needs to be fought without outside (read American) military forces. The refusal of the administration to acknowledge the errors that got the US so deeply into the war and their refusal to acknowledge the generally accepted 'reality' of the situation in Iraq and, thus, creating a withdrawal plan for the US troops, coupled with their general (typical) arrogance to either engage Americans (especially those who don't agree with them) in a real discussion/debate about American priorities or listen to actual experts and the American people, has left the administration with an abysmal approval rating and a dearth of trust. The "bubble president" is finding himself behind his own brick wall (dare I see 'iron curtain'?). He seems to have created his own little world and reality, which psychologists refer to as "psychosis."

Instead of proposing to send more US troops to address the civil war/ insurgency in Iraq, he should have publicly acknowledged that it's the American presence that is the driving force behind the deterioration in Iraq. Redeployment of the active forces to outside of Iraq is in the best interests of the US:

1. It will take away the raison d'etre for many of the insurgent groups. Instead of uniting against their common enemy -- America -- they will be forced to address their differences and hopefully become convinced of working together to create a peaceful Iraq (maybe even a democratic one).
2. It will allow the US to free up its military forces to address other conflict areas or promoted "American interests". Say, confronting rouge nuclear countries like North Korea or Iran, promoting global security like places like Africa (Darfur and Somalia), confronting international terrorism (al Qaeda et al) and prepare for the new world order -- the growth of China and Asia as well as assisting in emergency situations (e.g. natural disasters like the tsunami of 2004).
3. It could help reduce the anti-Americanism and general anti-West feelings throughout the developing world.

"Staying the course", or whatever the current Bush phrase is, will only leave America and its articulated values weaker.

Hopefully, the Congress will exercise its constitutional powers of oversight and help keep America strong until the end of the Bush presidency.