Bush is a picture of defeat (GREELEY ALERT)

The presidential address last week was pathetic enough to make one feel sad for the poor dear man, as they say in the old country. With little emotional affect he read a lecture about his ''new strategy,'' which was in fact nothing more than a new tactic, growled at Iran and Syria, threatened the Iraqi government, and promised that the United States would emerge the winner in Iraq. The notion that 20,000 more American troops would pacify Baghdad was farcical. If one really intended to stop internecine war between two religious tribes, one would have had to promise a lot more Americans. John Keegan, the famous English military historian and commentator, estimated that pacification would take 50,000 troops. Various American military experts suggested that it would require at least 100,000 soldiers and Marines. If one calculates two American soldiers or Marines for every 1,000 people in a city, as does the Army's counter-insurgency manual, 140,000 fighting men (which excludes the half of the troops in Iraq who are not combat soldiers) would be required.

Some of President Bush's allies in government and the media (David Brooks in the New York Times, for example) contend the ''new strategy'' must be tried if only because there's nothing else to do. Republican senators insist the Democrats in Congress must suggest an alternative strategy if they expect to be taken seriously. How are we going to solve the Iraq Problem unless we have a strategy?

There are two answers to such idiocy: 1) There isn't an alternative strategy or any strategy that will clean up the Iraq mess, and 2) the Democrats do have a strategy: phased withdrawal, beginning now.

In fact, no one knows what will happen when American troops leave or what Iran or the Arab countries would do. One does know that the Arabs and the Persians don't particularly like one another and that the Sunnis want to run Iraq again and have little interest in re-establishing a caliphate presided over by Osama bin Laden.

In any event, the Middle East is always unstable. The Iranian president is unpopular with his people because he has not been able to transform the economic chaos in his country. The various Islamic factions are not likely to try to induce stability in their part of the world as long as a U.S. army is occupying one of their countries.

The president's apocalyptic descriptions of Iraq after ''we'' leave are transcriptions of neo-conservative memos. The neo-cons are high-level thinkers and brilliant memo writers. They provided the ideas that the president and his aides (none of them high-level thinkers) needed to justify the war. Although many of them are distinguished graduates of the University of Chicago and similar institutions, they seemed to know very little history. None of them anticipated what a cursory reading of Winston Churchill's book on Iraq would have predicted: the present civil war.

The most pathetic part of the president's talk was the peroration, a listless reprise of all the neo-con cliches from the last six years: war on terror, enemies who want to destroy our way of life because they fear our freedom, global cultural confrontation, the crucial battle of our time. For motivation to support his "new strategy," the president had to fall back on the conventional wisdom of talk radio hosts, conservative editorial writers, and the gurus of the Fox network.

No one ever offers hard proof that these horrors would occur. The battling Shiites and Sunnis are interested in killing each other in a struggle for power for themselves in Iraq. They may hate Americans, but they hate each other more. The only ones who can destroy American freedom are government officials who claim the right to read our mail, listen to our phone calls, bug our e-mail, and deny some of us the right to have lawyers to defend us. They are the real enemy.

For all the bravado of his words, the president did not seem to have his heart in the speech. He tried to sound tough, but really seemed like someone who knew deep down that he was a beaten man.

If one really intended to stop internecine war between two religious tribes, one would have had to promise a lot more Americans.

Oh yes, and I'm SURRRRRRRRRRRRRE you'd have supported that, right Andrew? Amazing isn't it when Democrats were proposing more troops for Iraq the media amen chorus was saying they were precisely right, that this is exactly what Iraq needed. Now that Bush is proposing it, it's "pathetic." Come on, you media types are such a massive joke you can't even see how laughable and see-through you all are!

This incessant and shrill Bush bashing by the media is becoming so knee jerk and cliched that one can't call it anything other than what it is, partisan polemics. It's not inspired commentary or astute observation. It's just propaganda of the lowest and most uninspired form, with one idiot Bush hater just echoing another. At some point it's going to create a backlash among more than just conservatives. Certainly it is a big reason newspaper circulation and TV news viewship are both taking a plunge.

Is there really NOTHING in a booming economy, record stock market, full employment and the fact that we've not had another terrorist attack on our soil for over 5 years that these media clowns can find in order to say that Bush has seen a great deal of success as president along with the shortcomings that are their soul focus?

If John Kerry were president right now and proposed 20,000 more troops for Iraq and the economy and national security situation were as favorable as they are, the media would be singing hallejuah choruses to his name and calling him a "visionary.

My e-mail to this flaming idiot, incorporating some of the comments I made in my post above--

Mr. Greeley:

You're seeing what you want to see in claiming President Bush is "defeated." President Bush isn't defeated. His critics who can't stop the partisan bomb throwing while offering no alternative vision are the ones who have to be said to be defeated. Those who are defeated are those who have given up. And Mr. Bush clearly has not given up. It is you and the others in the "retreat and defeat" crowd regarding Iraq who have given up. It is those who have nothing but negativity and mindless, knee jerk complaining who have given up, who have no solutions, nothing contructive, nothing substantive to offer in return. It's all about tearing down rather than offering solutions that would lead to progress. It's all about hoping for failure with your crowd.

It's always easier to be a critic than to be a visionary Mr. Greeley. History will not remember the professional carping class such as yourself and others, especially the partisan hacks who populate the Democratic leadership. The first woman Speaker is about all Nancy Pelosi will ever be remembered for. However history will remember a president who ultimately will be vindicated by what will result in process of time in the Middle East. History is kind to those with patience, fortitude and hope. History doesn't long remember the defeatist, the cynic, the naysayer, the mindless critic.

You say this in your column:

If one really intended to stop internecine war between two religious tribes, one would have had to promise a lot more Americans.
Oh yes, and I'm sure you'd have supported that, right Mr. Greeley? This is becoming a regular routine with you Bush critics. Attack him when he does one thing, attack him again when he does a 180 and does the opposite which you all previously said he should have done. If Bush were to have offered more troops, you mean to tell me you'd suddenly be thrilled with Bush's plan? I don't really find this criticism credible.

Amazing isn't it when Democrats were proposing more troops for Iraq the media amen chorus was saying they were precisely right, that this is exactly what Iraq needed. Now that Bush is proposing it, it's "pathetic." Come on, you media types are such a massive joke you can't even see how laughable and see-through you all are!

This incessant and shrill Bush bashing by the media is becoming so knee jerk and cliched that one can't call it anything other than what it is, partisan polemics. It's not inspired commentary or astute observation. It's not even loyal opposition. It's certainly not constructive criticism. No, to be constructive is not its intent. Its purpose is to be destructive.

No, far from being reasoned commentary it's just cheap propaganda of the lowest and most uninspired form, with one Bush hater just parroting another. At some point it's going to create a backlash among more than just conservatives. Certainly it is a big reason newspaper circulation and TV news viewship are both taking a plunge.

Is there really NOTHING in a booming economy, record stock market, full employment and the fact that we've not had another terrorist attack on our soil for over 5 years that these media clowns can find in order to say that Bush has seen a great deal of success as president along with the shortcomings that are their soul focus?

If John Kerry were president right now and proposed 20,000 more troops for Iraq and the economy and national security situation were as favorable as they are, the media would be singing hallejuah choruses to his name and calling him a "visionary.

Anyway Mr. Greeley, congratulations on being a cliche, a dime a dozen Bush basher among an already crowded field of anger merchants. I suppose you feel you're making a difference. But the truth is, and this is coming from one of the average Americans you're trying to reach, one not steeped in monastic and insular culture and self-congratulations of the news media: you're just noise, a bitter voice lost in the cachopony of a Lord of the Flies media yelping away as it senses its done in a president. But trust me when I say the worst damage you people have done is only to yourselves and your credibility.

MikeA

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.