Thursday, March 27, 2008

President Bush Stokes The Empty Rhetorical Fire And Thrusts His Political Agenda Forward On the Backs of 4000 KIA GIs

One thing is clear in this, the defining "ideological struggle of the 21st century," is that the president is a master of empty rhetoric. Take a look at this paragraph and let's unpack it.
But there's one thing that is consistent. No matter what shortcomings these critics diagnose, their prescription is always the same -- retreat. They claim that our strategic interest is elsewhere, and that if we would just get out of Iraq, we could focus on the battles that really matter. This argument makes no sense. (Applause.) If America's strategic interests are not in Iraq -- the convergence point for the twin threats of al Qaeda and Iran, the nation Osama bin Laden's deputy has called "the place for the greatest battle," the country at the heart of the most volatile region on Earth -- then where are they?
Here we see Bush set up his straw man again and knock it down in front of a captive audience corralled by the GOP orchestrators and choir directors.

No is suggesting that we "retreat" from anything. In fact, a prescription for success in Iraq as authored by George and his war time profiteering brainiacs was at one point inclusive of withdrawing troops. You remember, "they stand up, we stand down?" The fact of the matter is that simply by withdrawing troops does not mean that victory is theirs.

So, now by articulating the new slogan for the Bush and co, mouthpiece for the terrorists, is to link Iran and OBL (where is he by the way?) in this brilliant piece of propaganda labeling the "twin threats." So, does this mean that we have gone from the triple threat of an axis of evil to the twin threats of Iran and Al Queda that things have improved or gotten worse for America? Really, the man is all hat and no cattle.

Asking the question "is Iraq in the strategic interest of the United States" is the rhetorical equivalent of the "when did you stop beating your wife" sort of question. It's irrelevant because we are there. We have no choice in that matter. Bush made it the central front on the war on terror because he was reckless and could care less about the civilians in Iraq.

To answer his question, the vital interests in our country right now seem to be located in our country. This doesn't mean that Iraq becomes less important, but right now it is clear that he values Iraq over the US as he's pouring money into that operation while simultaneously killing the very fabric of our country.

If he really believed in the cause, after he finishes his term, he would dedicate the remainder of his life to fixing Iraq. But is he moving his family to Baghdad after he leaves in January as a statement of his belief in the country and his cause? Doubtful. But that would be a move that proves his statement. Don't hold your breath.

What is more reprehensible about Bush and his team of propagandists arming the "presidential propaganda catapult," is their never ending flogging of the KIA GIs in Iraq to support their political aims.
Four thousand of our finest citizens have sacrificed their lives in this mission. Every one of them was loved. Every one is missed. And we thank God for the gift of these brave Americans

-- and we ask Him to comfort their families. Every one of them will be honored throughout our history. But the best way to honor the fallen is to complete the mission, and lay the foundation of peace. (Applause.)
What exactly is that mission Mr. Bush? It's changed so frequently, I can't keep it straight. Please, stop levering dead GIs to keep the fuel pouring on the conflagration that caused their deaths. Please.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

What exactly is the mission?

Bush: ... this confrontation against those who murder innocent men, women and children to achieve their political objectives ...

Those who murder innocent men, women and children to achieve their political objectives. Wouldn't that be you, Mr President?