Bush is in very big trouble. He lied to the people. If a President has one commodity to protect above all else, it is the trust of the people.
Daddy Bush ran a losing campaign against Bill Clinton on a combined platform of trust and character. I guess the people trusted Clinton more, and liked Bush senior’s character less.
George Junior would have done very well to remember this.
Had George W Bush said before the current invasion of Iraq, that he wanted to go ever there and depose Saddam Hussein because he was a bad guy, the American people would have said go yourself. Instead, he sold the war to the people on the guise of weapons of mass destruction.
I am furious with the President for making me believe there was a pressing and urgent need to beat up on a tyrant, where in fact, there was no proof of any eminent danger. Since he so blatantly lied to the people about the reason to go to war, how can anyone believe him now when he says he was misled?
And if he was misled, where are the heads that should be rolling?
If beating up Saddam was the right thing to do, simply because Saddam was a tyrant and a threat to his Ethnic communities and neighbors, why stop there? Or better yet. Why start there?
There weren’t any Iraqis on the flights that caused so much damage, suffering and death on 9/11. They were mostly Saudis.
It wasn’t Iraqis who blew up the USS Cole, it was TERRORISTS controlled by Saudis.
It wasn’t Iraqis who blew up the US Embassies in Africa. It was once again TERRORISTS controlled by Saudis.
It wasn’t Iraqis who blew up the US barracks in Beirut, it was Hezbollah Shiites, sworn enemies of Saddam Hussein financed and supported by Iran and Syria.
And finally: It was not Iraqis who blew up the World Trade Center in 1993. The principal perpetrators were caught in Pakistan and Egypt. Probably working under the control of Saudis.
So why go to war against Iraq, especially since Iraq was pretty much contained by the military noose imposed by the British and American forces, and the economic embargo after the 1991 Gulf War?
If George W Bush’s current reason for going to war against Iraq has any merit, the Americans and British should have also gone to war against all troublesome Arab states, starting with Saudi Arabia.
I believed Bush when he said there was an eminent threat from Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. I believed it because Saddam wanted the world to believe it. And because I didn’t trust the UN, which I still don’t. And Bush was very convincing.
And there is the “little” matter of history. Saddam Hussein did use weapons of mass destruction against the Iranian military and defenceless Kurdish civilians. We also can’t forget the unprovoked reign of TERROR he inflicted on Israel via Scud missile attacks in 1991 during the Gulf War of which Israel id not participate.
Because Bush lied; now we have a mess.
The Americans and British are in Iraq for all the wrong reasons. And even worse – they can’t leave Iraq; and they can’t stay.
If they leave, civil war breaks out before the last coalition soldier puts his or her foot on friendly soil.
If they stay, they’ll become even more-so the focus of anti-Western hatred, and the rallying cry of Arabs to unite against the Infidel occupiers.
And then there’s Iran, just itching to get their Shiite Mullahs established as the government of a once secular Iraq. What a mess!
At the very start of this war, I made it clear; the Americans and Brits had to get in, do their deed and get out. They beat the Iraqis in what seemed to be a weekend jaunt, and instead of declaring victory and coming home to cheering crowds in ticker-tape victory parades, they’re now in it up to their necks and sinking fast.
But all of this is only the tip of the bad news iceberg for Bush.
His administration has created the fastest escalating deficit in the history of the USA. His tax cuts are creating an economic recovery for the rich, with no jobs for the working class. And healthcare in the USA is even worse, if that can be imagined, 3 years after Bush, than it was the year Bush took office.
A couple of months ago, George W looked invincible, especially when it appeared he would be running against Howard Dean. But a month or two in politics is more than a lifetime where things change.
Bush is in serious trouble, and I don’t see it getting any better for him. New jobs are not on the horizon. The Iraqi insurgents and their Islamic buddies are not going to let up: meaning more Americans in body-bags. The people are getting somewhat tired with the Bush disconnect, his aloofness and many of the born-again fundamentalists who surround him.
In an earlier editorial, I remarked at how tired Bush’s White House appears after just 3 years in office. And with every passing day, it seems to look even more fatigued.
And now there’s John Kerry. Here’s a guy who’s no political neophyte. He has plenty of personal wealth. More guts than Dick Tracey. And is without question more than qualified.
In a statement he loves to repeat as often as he can to George W Bush: BRING IT ON! And he means it.
Bush seems lost and content to let other people do his talking for him, while an extremely confident and energized John Kerry is looking for a rumble in all the right places.
As I said before, a month or two in politics is like a lifetime, where anything can happen.
There’s still close to 10 months before the votes get cast and a new President is elected. But given all that we know today, Bush isn’t looking too good. And time does not seem to be on his side.