Wednesday, April 25, 2007

Leaving Iraq: The W, Rove and Co Is Clearly Not Thinking Beyond The Politics of The Timeline

I had this epiphany early today on my morning run. Iraq has never really been about some kind off “noble,” “ideological” fight to the finish. Nor has it been truly about oil. The trouble for us (meaning America and all Citizens of the World) is that the US involvement in Iraq has never been about liberating an enslaved people either. Truly, it’s always been about politics and winning or losing elections.

The use of Military as a political arm of the US Government, we will learn in the long run, is nothing but pure folly, foolishness, and a downright inhuman administration of lethal might over large swaths of earth and her people. At the very least, the ignition of the war machine in the Iraq case is an indication of a true failure of diplomacy, and a hand full of other disastrous overt and cover ploys (read “The Confessions of An Economic Hit Man).

If you have read Sun Tzu, or even the milder Machiavelli, you would realize that there is nothing good about war. As a last resort, you should be in it to win. Losing is not an option, which makes the rightwing mantra so compelling. You know the one, “if you set some kind of deadline we will have lost the war.” But really, what’s wrong with that argument is that they almost always follow that up with a discussion of how if we pull out, they will follow us here.

Now, there is absolutely no way to prove that point or even disprove it. But it begs the question; could setting a timeline actually be used as a way to win the war? What we need is to remove the pussy cats leading this war and unleash the hounds of hell to finish this sooner than later, no? We need a more Sun Tzu oriented strategy here.

What if we were to set a time table for withdrawal from Iraq and then not follow it? Might it not suck all the terrorists to Baghdad and then we could seal it off and wipe them out? Why does setting a timeline necessarily have to lead to the tragic outcome the republicans suggest?

Sun Tzu said:
All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must seem inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near. Hold out baits to entice the enemy. Feign disorder, and crush him.
- Sun Tzu, the Art of War
Sun Tzu, who beheaded his Emperor’s favorite concubine in order to restore order in the house and prove that he had what it takes to lead the Emperor’s Army, might actually have some good advice. With the way this Iraq conflagration has been perpetrated, it’s clearly entirely political. If the generals on the ground wanted to try the deception strategy, they couldn’t because the politicos wouldn’t be able to get elected on the premise as it would mean deceiving the American People as well.

Why else would it be such a heated topic of debate on a comedy news show?

Any one who would suggest that there is a right way to finish this war and suggest that setting a time line is the wrong way to go has bought into the ploy fed by the W, Rove and Co. Really at this point in the game, the status quo doesn’t seem to be working. Perhaps what we really need is an “artificial timeline,” that looks real….that might just do it.

After they – whomever the “they” that the W, Rove and Co suggest are the evildoers in this case - swarm the place, we surround ‘em, and squash ‘em like the bugs they are….to paraphrase a Schwarzkopfian slogan from the first Bush desert gambit. Of course, if they don’t swarm the place, and much like Vietnam pull their country together, we would have saved a great deal (lives and taxpayer monies) in the process. So, in the end, perhaps the opposite of what the W, Rove and Co would have us suggest is really true – what we really do need is a timeline for withdrawal from Iraq.

What say you?

No comments: