Monday, June 02, 2008

Gen. Rick Sanchez also slams Bush as a "leader"

The question I have repeatedly ask is why Bush invaded Iraq, why he refuses to draw down the number of troops in what is clearly a war that has no benefit for America or Iraq and what it means to win there. Most of us blow off the ridiculous talking point from the administration that the reason we are there is to bring democracy to Iraq in the heart of the Middle East.

It appears logical to most of us that such a goal is unattainable. But a quote from Bush reported by Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez strongly suggests the we should take the administration at their word. Bush really does take the "Bringing democracy to Iraq and the Middle East seriously. The Washington Post has reported this quote from Lt. Gen Ricardo Sanchez in his new memoir that clarifies all of it:
Getting lost in the media furor over McClellan's memoir is the new autobiography of retired Lt. Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez, the onetime commander of U.S. troops in Iraq, who is scathing in his assessment that the Bush administration "led America into a strategic blunder of historic proportions."

Among the anecdotes in "Wiser in Battle: A Soldier's Story" is an arresting portrait of Bush after four contractors were killed in Fallujah in 2004, triggering a fierce U.S. response that was reportedly egged on by the president.

During a videoconference with his national security team and generals, Sanchez writes, Bush launched into what he described as a "confused" pep talk:

"Kick ass!" he quotes the president as saying. "If somebody tries to stop the march to democracy, we will seek them out and kill them! We must be tougher than hell! This Vietnam stuff, this is not even close. It is a mind-set. We can't send that message. It's an excuse to prepare us for withdrawal."

"There is a series of moments and this is one of them. Our will is being tested, but we are resolute. We have a better way. Stay strong! Stay the course! Kill them! Be confident! Prevail! We are going to wipe them out! We are not blinking!"


A White House spokesman had no comment.


[h\t Laura Rozen at War & Piece.]
Any good management consultant will tell you that when you see an organization in disarray - as the U.S. government clearly has been since 2001 - the first place you look for a cause is at the person at the very top.

Bush's confused pep talk demonstrates that Bush has no clue how to command troops or be a leader of any effectiveness.


So what does this tell us about why Bush wanted the Iraq invasion and occupation, and why he refuses to pull troops out when it is clear that they are fighting and dying for no American purpose?

What Sanchez states Bush said in his pep talk is very revealing. It clearly displays what Bush thinks the invasion and occupation of Iraq is all about.

While the White House sold the war and occupation as going after Saddam's WMD's, Bush's repeated claims that this is a war for Democracy strongly suggests that he seriously believed and probably still does believe that he is taking Democracy to the Middle East. Bush thought - and apparently still thinks - that he could turn Iraq into a demonstration project that would reform the Middle East. Not a new thought, I know, but I think that was Bush's primary reason for invading Iraq, not WMD's. But more than that, his reference to the lesson from Vietnam shows how he thinks it is going to work.

Bush's statement shows that he is a right-wing true believer who thinks America lost Vietnam because of a lack of will. He thinks that America lost in Vietnam because we did not do everything necessary to win and instead simply got tired and impatient and quit.

This is the reverse of what most of us think. Most of us think that Vietnam was unwinnable and had no purpose, so America decided that the killing and the cost was unnecessary and we left. But since Bush believed (and apparently still believes) that the lesson of Vietnam was to pull out all the stops, not allow any consideration of human rights to deter us and to never quit. A key part of that is to do whatever it takes to win - abu Ghraib and Gitmo, anyone? If we pull out all the stops, do whatever is required to win in Iraq and don't leave until we win, then we will win there. And what does he think it means to win? That's why he invaded Iraq in the first place. He intends to bring democracy to Iraq and to the Middle East. Bush thinks that the Maliki government which America installed is the democracy we are fighting for. Flawed, corrupt, but still democracy.

It explains the often repeated story about Bush believing that history will vindicate him. Bush considers himself to be the embodiment of the "will to win" and the refusal to "lose" Iraq by leaving. Bush appears to define "winning" in Iraq as creating a sustainable democracy there. Bush is fighting as very hard to influence America to stay the course even after he leaves office, and at teh same time do whatever it takes to "win". Bush sees the current period as merely being a test of America's will to win. So he is also doing everything possible to tie the hands of the next President so that he cannot pull out of Iraq either.

All of that is states or implied in the confused pep talk that Lt. Gen Sanchez has reported.

No comments: