Bush Totally Out of It on Iraq
You got to wonder how out to lunch Bush really is these days.
At the very moment that civil strife was escalating in Iraq, even as Maliki's forces were taking a beating in Basra and bombs were raining down on the Green Zone Bush declared that the violence in Iraq was "a very positive sign" because Maliki was stepping up.
Talk about a bloody silver lining. Maliki can't even travel without a caravan of decoy limousines, according to Patrick Cockburn of the London Independent.
Nevertheless, at Wright-Patterson air force base on Thursday, Bush said: "The surge is doing what it was designed to do. It's helping Iraqis reclaim security and restart political and economic life."
He added: "It is bringing America closer to a key strategic victory in the war against these extremists and radicals."
The reality, however, is that the huge uptick in violence in Iraq puts the lie to all the happy talk about the surge.
For the apparent success of the surge all along was due as much to the cease-fire by Muqtada al Sadr and his militia as it was to anything else.
And now that Maliki has gone after Sadr's forces, the violence all over Iraq is skyrocketing.
It's not just a case of the government going after a bunch of "bad guys," as bad as Sadr and his forces are. They've been known to throw acid in the faces of unveiled women.
Sadr's forces are among the most popular on the ground. And they are facing off against the rival militia forces of the SCIRI party. It's one Shiite militia against another, and the United States has done what it said it would not do: We're taking sides in a multi-sided civil war.
From here, things are likely to spin even further out of control, with even less political stability and even less economic activity (except for stealing oil), and even more deaths all around.
It is the surge, not the insurgency, that is in its last throes.
Matthew Rothschild is the editor of The Progressive magazine.
(c) 2008 The Progressive
Urgent. It's never been this bad.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission from the outset was simple. To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It’s never been this bad out there. And it’s never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed and doing some of its best and most important work, the threats we face are intensifying. Right now, with just two days to go in our Spring Campaign, we're falling short of our make-or-break goal. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Can you make a gift right now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? There is no backup plan or rainy day fund. There is only you. —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
You got to wonder how out to lunch Bush really is these days.
At the very moment that civil strife was escalating in Iraq, even as Maliki's forces were taking a beating in Basra and bombs were raining down on the Green Zone Bush declared that the violence in Iraq was "a very positive sign" because Maliki was stepping up.
Talk about a bloody silver lining. Maliki can't even travel without a caravan of decoy limousines, according to Patrick Cockburn of the London Independent.
Nevertheless, at Wright-Patterson air force base on Thursday, Bush said: "The surge is doing what it was designed to do. It's helping Iraqis reclaim security and restart political and economic life."
He added: "It is bringing America closer to a key strategic victory in the war against these extremists and radicals."
The reality, however, is that the huge uptick in violence in Iraq puts the lie to all the happy talk about the surge.
For the apparent success of the surge all along was due as much to the cease-fire by Muqtada al Sadr and his militia as it was to anything else.
And now that Maliki has gone after Sadr's forces, the violence all over Iraq is skyrocketing.
It's not just a case of the government going after a bunch of "bad guys," as bad as Sadr and his forces are. They've been known to throw acid in the faces of unveiled women.
Sadr's forces are among the most popular on the ground. And they are facing off against the rival militia forces of the SCIRI party. It's one Shiite militia against another, and the United States has done what it said it would not do: We're taking sides in a multi-sided civil war.
From here, things are likely to spin even further out of control, with even less political stability and even less economic activity (except for stealing oil), and even more deaths all around.
It is the surge, not the insurgency, that is in its last throes.
Matthew Rothschild is the editor of The Progressive magazine.
(c) 2008 The Progressive
You got to wonder how out to lunch Bush really is these days.
At the very moment that civil strife was escalating in Iraq, even as Maliki's forces were taking a beating in Basra and bombs were raining down on the Green Zone Bush declared that the violence in Iraq was "a very positive sign" because Maliki was stepping up.
Talk about a bloody silver lining. Maliki can't even travel without a caravan of decoy limousines, according to Patrick Cockburn of the London Independent.
Nevertheless, at Wright-Patterson air force base on Thursday, Bush said: "The surge is doing what it was designed to do. It's helping Iraqis reclaim security and restart political and economic life."
He added: "It is bringing America closer to a key strategic victory in the war against these extremists and radicals."
The reality, however, is that the huge uptick in violence in Iraq puts the lie to all the happy talk about the surge.
For the apparent success of the surge all along was due as much to the cease-fire by Muqtada al Sadr and his militia as it was to anything else.
And now that Maliki has gone after Sadr's forces, the violence all over Iraq is skyrocketing.
It's not just a case of the government going after a bunch of "bad guys," as bad as Sadr and his forces are. They've been known to throw acid in the faces of unveiled women.
Sadr's forces are among the most popular on the ground. And they are facing off against the rival militia forces of the SCIRI party. It's one Shiite militia against another, and the United States has done what it said it would not do: We're taking sides in a multi-sided civil war.
From here, things are likely to spin even further out of control, with even less political stability and even less economic activity (except for stealing oil), and even more deaths all around.
It is the surge, not the insurgency, that is in its last throes.
Matthew Rothschild is the editor of The Progressive magazine.
(c) 2008 The Progressive