A War President's Job (Washington Post/George Will)

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A56305-2004Apr6?language=printer

A War President's Job

By George F. Will

Wednesday, April 7, 2004; Page A31

After last week's murder of four American civilian contractors in Fallujah, U.S. leadership in Baghdad promised that the response against that city would be "precise" and "overwhelming." But precisely who is to be overwhelmed, and what will be the metric of success at overwhelming? How many troops will it take to find those involved in the killing of the contractors? And on the basis of what intelligence?

As this is written, headlines speak of 1,200 Marines "encircling" Fallujah, which is as populous as Newark, N.J. It is a sign of things falling apart that common language seems unable to get a purchase on Iraq's new reality -- a civil war defined by the uprising of many Shiites against the U.S. occupation.

(snip)


When Sadr's forces took to the streets with assault rifles and rocket-propelled grenade launchers, many of the freshly minted Iraqi security forces took flight. It is too late for debate about being in Baghdad. And the (relatively) pretty phase of empire -- the swift dispatch of an enemy army -- is over. Regime change, occupation, nation-building -- in a word, empire -- are a bloody business. Now Americans must steel themselves for administering the violence necessary to disarm or defeat Iraq's urban militias, which replicate the problem of modern terrorism -- violence that has slipped the leash of states.

(snip)

Since Sept. 11, 2001, Americans have been told that they are at war. They have not been told what sacrifices, material and emotional, they must make to sustain multiple regime changes and nation-building projects. Telling such truths is part of the job description of a war president.

[e-mail]

© 2004 The Washington Post Company

[Old and In the Way]

1. This ain't good for the Dimson Administration.

When the pundit-rats start scrambling for the lifeboat, you know the ship is taking on serious water.

[bemildred]

2. Yup. One scapegoat coming right up.

Shrub is about to be sacrificed for the greater good.
We will soon start to hear about what an anomaly he was
and how this could never happen again. You are getting
very sleepy, restful, you will not remember any of this
when you wake up ...

[Old and In the Way]

3. I just read on another thread, some of the other "snips"

I'm taking back what I said...it appears that he's preparing us for a whole lot more of the same. POS.

[bemildred]

4. He's not going to leave willingly.

Bush and his minions will never give up, never shut up,
never admit any wrongdoing, never admit there are insurmountable
problems, never. A few dead soldiers mean nothing to them.
Take a look at Nixon. There will have to be open rebellion and
political trench warfare. He will have to be thrown out. But
he will be, he and his minions are a liability to the US
oligarchy, and they will have him removed to protect themselves.

[rpannier]

5. Put It Best

In this column George Will puts it better than anyone I have read. He is right on so many points. Especially about how poor a job the shrubber did in explaining what we would have to do to achieve this elusive "victory."
But don't blame the Shrub. Because it doens't do any good. He never accepts any blame. If a hurricane hit DC tomorrow he'd blame Clinton.

[bpilgrim]

6. It's MOAB time!

is that what this freak is try'n to say :puke:

peace

[yellowcanine]

7. Yep, George "Family Values" Will may be getting cold feet

about Shrub's splendid little war. Maybe we should send him some socks.

[samsingh]

8. should a war president be allowed to take a vacation

during the war. i think not.

does bush taking a vacation mean that we are no longer at war?