Salon examines the reasons for Dubya’s continued public support despite the WMD shenanigans. “Just imagine how much shock and complaining there would be if we learned that ‘American Idol’ had been rigged. But Bush and his comrades can use deceptive means to launch a war and to pass trillion-dollar tax cuts that bust the bank — and then skate away.” In related news, the New Republic offers a concise overview of the story to date.
Tag: Dubya Diplomacy
Dropping the Other Shoe.
In a strange moment of candor, Wolfowitz tells Vanity Fair that the WMD argument for overthrowing Saddam was chosen “for bureaucratic reasons,” since “it was the one reason everyone could agree on.” (He also lends credence to the argument advanced in this Fred Kaplan article that removing troops from Saudi Arabia was one of the central purposes of the Iraq war.) Meanwhile, in the same AP story, the head of US Marines in Iraq says of the WMDs, “they’re simply not there.” Looks like the Bushies have some explaining to do…If they follow the usual pattern, I suspect they’ll answer any tough question with a flurry of 9/11-esque horror stories.
Quid Pro Quo.
Exhibiting yet again the Dubya administration’s flair for hypocrisy, recent documents reveal that Dubya’s top three fundraisers in 2000 were made Ambassadors of Switzerland, the Slovak Republic, and France respectively. Well, as long as they didn’t take tea in the Lincoln bedroom, I’m sure everything checks out.
Hedging their Bets.
In the wake of Dubya’s embrace of preemption, historian Joyce Appleby wonders whatever happened to Congress as a center of foreign policy. As James Madison put it, “The constitution supposes, what the History of all Govts demonstrates, that the Ex. is the branch of power most interested in war, & most prone to it. It has accordingly with studied care, vested the question of war in the Legisl. But the Doctrines lately advanced strike at the root of all these provisions, and will deposit the peace of the Country in that Department which the Constitution distrusts as most ready without cause to renounce it.” Looks like recent experience has proven him right.
Francophobia.
Utilizing a technique he learned in his fratboy hazing days, Dubya decides to freeze France out for her opposition to the war in Iraq. Along the same lines, Bushies are now trying to deride Kerry by saying he looks French. (Why not tell the American people he’s got cooties, while you’re at it?) Yes, folks, these people run the country.
Blast from the Past.
With the war in Iraq wrapping up, former President Clinton derides the failures of Dubya’s amateurish diplomacy. “Our paradigm now seems to be: something terrible happened to us on September 11, and that gives us the right to interpret all future events in a way that everyone else in the world must agree with us.” He also takes time to call out the recently-lowered but still-lousy Dubya tax cut. Hopefully, this’ll serve notice to the other Dems (besides Kerry) to get off the fence and release the hounds.
Here We Go Again.
Second verse, same as the first. With the war in Iraq coming to a close, Dubya’s hawks start turning up the heat on Syria. “I think that we believe there are chemical weapons in Syria,” Bush said yesterday. Boy, that rationale never gets old, does it? Even with India now latching onto Dubya’s “preemption” to justify possibly bombing Pakistan back into the Stone Age, the Bushies don’t even make an attempt to forge a casus belli more in tune with international diplomatic precedent. Let’s just hope China also doesn’t decide to “preempt” terrorism in Taiwan anytime soon. (Second link via Follow Me Here.) Update: Bush and Blair try to kill the Syria war hype, for now.
Ends and Means.
Well, I must admit, the fall of Saddam’s regime occurred much more quickly than I had ever expected. (Ten bucks says the Iraqi cabal card decks are all over Ebay in six months.) But, as Michael Kinsley notes, our victory doesn’t answer the tough questions about why we got involved in the first place. And while the images of liberation coming out of Baghdad right now are undeniably stirring, my doubts about this conflict – and the amateurish diplomacy that preceded it – remain…and particularly if Gulf War II spills over into Syria or Iran.
By George, he’s right.
“During his presidential campaign Bush cried, ‘I’m a uniter, not a divider.’ As one critic put it, ‘He’s got that right. He’s united the entire world against him.'” George McGovern goes house on Dubya, and it’s definitely worth a gander. (Via Looka.) And, if Dubya approaches his religion with anything more than born-again zeal, perhaps he’ll take a moment’s reflection on this: “We will, of course, win the war with Iraq. But what of the question raised in the Bible that both George Bush and I read: ‘What does it profit a man to gain the whole world and lose his own soul,’ or the soul of his nation?“
Running the Table.
Although Saddam’s regime appears to be on its last legs, the Bushies have not yet begun to fight. In fact, this administration now seems recommitted to the task of destroying whatever remaining credibility America has left in the Middle East and the international community. For, despite recent setbacks in Afghanistan, Rummy, Wolfowitz, and the rest of Dubya’s neocon hawks now turn to Syria as the best candidate for our next splendid little war, a war that even England is loath to enter. And one has to assume Iran, Irkutsk, and Yakutsk are next. (Then maybe the Bushies will be content to take a card.)