Home > Confronting the "Cut and Run" Slander of Bush’s Praetorian Guard
Confronting the "Cut and Run" Slander of Bush’s Praetorian Guard
by Open-Publishing - Sunday 1 October 20066 comments
Wars and conflicts International Governments USA
by Walter C. Uhler
With elections but little more than a month away, President Bush’s do-nothing Republican majority in both houses of Congress is up for grabs. And, thus, so is a genuine investigation into the Bush administration’s lies, deceit and crimes concerning Iraq — especially its "Chicken Little" clamoring about weapons of mass destruction and ties to al Qaeda that, as we would learn later, didn’t actually exist.
Also requiring investigation, however, is the extraordinary military incompetence at the strategic level - at the Rumsfeld level — that allowed an illusory "Mission Accomplished" to degenerate into: (1) widespread looting and infrastructure destruction, (2) an ever- flourishing and now unbeatable insurgency, (3) torture by American soldiers in violation of the Geneva Conventions, (4) tens of thousands upon tens of thousands of unnecessary civilian fatalities as well as untold massive and needless suffering, (5) growing Iranian influence, (6) the outbreak of civil war resulting in (7) torture that renders Saddam’s tame by comparison (8) more than 2,700 dead American soldiers, (9) more than 20,400 wounded, (10) the gradual destruction of the U.S. Army and (11) the most profound military defeat in U. S. history.
Yes, that’s the deal - what former U.S. Army Colonel and present-day scholar, Andrew Bacevich, calls "an American failure of immense proportions." Moreover, as Thomas Ricks amply demonstrated, in his book Fiasco, many senior military leaders, both active duty and retired, opposed either the very invasion of Iraq or its proposed execution - or both. Unfortunately, few of the many Americans who were so enthusiastic to "support the troops" were aware of this significant opposition by the troops’ very military leaders. They’re still unaware.
Rather than listen to the Bush administration’s self-serving, deceitful propaganda about America’s so-called successes in Iraq, I quickly turned to reputable military leaders for the truth. Moreover, because active duty leaders must mute their criticisms, for fear of destroying their careers, I turned to the retired military leaders, to whom the current generation of leaders once reported and still confide. Among the most prominent and respected — both as a military leader and a scholar — is retired General William Odom (a well-known conservative and normally a darling among conservatives and Republicans).
It was General Odom, as early as September 2004, who noted the extreme tension existing between the Bush administration and America’s senior military leaders, due to Bush’s decision to invade Iraq. According to Odom: "There’s a significant majority believing this is a disaster."
Moreover, as reported by Sidney Blumenthal in The Guardian, General Odom added: "Bush hasn’t found the WMD, Al-Qaida, it’s worse, he’s lost on that front. That he’s going to achieve democracy there? That goal is lost, too. It’s lost." Then Odom added: Right now, the course we’re on, we’re achieving Bin Laden’s ends." ["Far Graver than Vietnam," Sept. 16, 2004]
In fact, General Odom had the courage to confront the slimy, tough-talking Republicans — most of whom never served their country in the military — who implied that opponents of the war were cowards who simply sought to "cut and run." In his article titled, "Cut and Run? You Bet," http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=3430&print=1 , published in the May/June 2006 issue of Foreign Policy, Odom disposes of all the tough-talking arguments for staying the course by these chicken-hawks.
In addition, Odom notes that: (1) Invading Iraq was not in the interests of the United States. It was in the interests of Iran and al Qaeda," and (2) "the war has paralyzed the United States in the world diplomatically and strategically." He concludes by observing: "In fact, getting out now may be our only chance of setting things right in Iraq."
Odom’s article, "Cut and Run? You Bet," was written before Americans learned in September about the April 2006 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) that concluded that Bush’s invasion of Iraq has sparked the proliferation of global Islamic terrorism and exacerbated the overall terrorist threat since the September 11 attacks. Thus, the NIE exposed yet another lie propagated by the Bush administration, the lie that Americans are safer, thanks to his its invasion of Iraq.
Odom’s article also was written prior to the publication of a poll which found that: "Majorities in all regions [of Iraq] except Kurdish areas state that the Multi-National Force-Iraq (MNF-I) [essentially the U.S. and Britain] should withdraw immediately, adding that the MNF-I’s departure would make them feel safer and decrease violence." ["Most Iraqis Favor Immediate US Pullout, Polls Show," Washington Post, 27 September 2006]
Do you get it, President Bush? Do you get it, conservative Republicans? Iraqis would feel safer if we left! In fact, they despise your invasion and occupation so much that six in ten Iraqis approve of attacks on American forces. Tell me again, which of you clowns said that we’d be greeted as liberators? Yet, having lost all of your credibility, you still have the gall to attempt to make political capital out of the phrase "cutting and running!"
Odom’s article about cutting and running also was written before Bob Woodward’s latest revelations. Woodward claims that the Bush administration "has not told the truth regarding the level of violence, especially against U.S. troops in Iraq." According to Woodward, "insurgent attacks on coalition troops occur, on average, every 15 minutes." More than 100 attacks per day! Such information also suggests that the mainstream news media has once again dropped the ball.
Woodward also claims that "the assessment by intelligence experts is that next year, 2007, is going to get worse." But, "you have the president and you have the Pentagon [saying], ’Oh, no, things are going to get better." ["Reporter Bob Woodward Says Bush Misleads on Iraq." CBS, 9/28/06]
Finally, Odom’s article appeared before the September 2006 poll by Harris interactive, which found that only 20 percent of Americans "are confident that U.S. policies in Iraq will be successful." ["Confidence in Iraq Policies Drops to 20% in U.S." Angus Reid global Monitor: Polls & Research, Sept. 28, 2006]
So there you have it. Lies got us into a war. Strategic incompetence guaranteed our defeat. Lies keep us there, as do smears about cutting and running. Yet, if one follows the implication of the NIE, staying in Iraq strengthens international terrorism and renders the United States less secure. And, now, all but 20% now see through Bush’s act.
Unfortunately, as Bob Woodward also has revealed, President Bush is so obsessed with Iraq that he has told key Republicans: "I will not withdraw, even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me." Thus, Americans have no recourse, but to remove him from office, before he completely ruins our country. But to do that, we first must confront the Republican’s "Chicken Little" cut and run alarmism — by removing Bush’s chicken-hawk congressional Praetorian Guard from office this November.
Walter C. Uhler.com
Walter C. Uhler is an independent scholar and freelance writer whose work has been published in numerous publications, including The Nation, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, the Journal of Military History, the Moscow Times and the San Francisco Chronicle. He also is President of the Russian-American International Studies Association (RAISA).
Forum posts
1 October 2006, 13:55
Having enraged much of the middle east ,if not the world,how best can the situation be resolved?Should the U.S. pull out?Where does Israel/Palestine sitaution fit into the equation?What to do about Iran?This is much worse than Vietnam as Kissinger must know.Is it possible for America to get out of this mess?
1 October 2006, 15:46
I really don’t believe the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld War Machine ever thought they could win a war in Iraq. I also think they knew quite well that few would be there to great them with flowers and hugs when they invaded. The whole idea really seemed to be just the opposite, to keep the war going as long as possible and bilk The System for every Billion dollars that can be stolen from the taxpayers, and to use the so called"war on terrorism" as a way to beat the citizens down so they can’t object to the killing and looting.
So what to do? I think the only "solution"( assuming there was really one sought after )is the Cabal is going to have to take it’s collective hand out of the cookie jar, realizing that trying to set there on top that pile of Black Gold and guard it all alone, and keep any other countries at bay is simply going to not be worth it in the long run at least if one REALLY values preserving what is left of "America". The administration and it’s oil soaked decision makers are going to have to let others in on the take and in a REAL way not just a token one. Though I doubt the Cabal will easily give up it’s death grip on Iraqi oil and territory I really think that’s the only way this conflict can diminish. Get the U.S. more OUT and get others perhaps Arabs in that REALLY want the best for Iraq and are not just easily recognized puppets of the Cabal’s interets that the people will NEVER accept. But then again this is all moot because as I said I don’t really believe PEACE was ever an objective. If the cabal had wanted that they would have simply taken the 2 trillion-plus stoeln taxpayer dollars and INVESTED them in the HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE of the Iraqi people, rather than in killing and poisoning them and destoying their country.
1 October 2006, 17:16
Screw Israel, they helped get us in this mess. Pull out of Iraq and let them (Israel Government) get what they deserve. Israel is the number 1 terrorist country.
2 October 2006, 19:28
Answer to question #1: You pull out of a country that never attacked, us, sir or madam. Why? Because it is the only right thing to do. Let me make this as simple as possible: If home invaders had taken control of your home, forced your family to live under miserable conditions, killed anyone that didn’t automatically obey them, would the invaders be ’cutting and running’ if you forced them out of your home? NO of course not, you would rightfully consider this an outrageous and ludicrous statement.
Would they be ’cutting and running’ if you demanded that they leave your home, a home that did not belong to them? NO, the very idea would make any red-blooded, decent human madder than hell. It is as simple as this. No mind blowing ethical quandary about this situation at all.
You leave countries that do not belong to you. Staying and occupying countries that do not belong to the attacking, aggressor state is simply the action of criminal nation-states. Pull the wool from your myopic eyes.
Pre-emptive attacks are the strategy of criminal minds, invading and occupying a sovereign nation that never attacked the US is the act of an aggressive nation keen on annexing territory and expropriating the natural resources that rightfully belong to others. The ’WAR ON TERROR’ is in essence a war of aggression, annexation and thievery. The US mass media can spin as many lies as it wants, but the world knows better. The reason why the White House can obfuscate so easily on these issues is that the fact that we force ourselves to use the lexicon of the neo-fascists, a lexicon that equates war with peace, freedom with tyranny and ignorance with strength. It is simple to combat them by sticking to one’s one Webster’s, by sticking to one’s own core values and telling them to take their newspeak lexicon and shove it up their collective ass.
NOTE: neo-con is a misnomer. There is nothing new about them, since there is nothing new about con artists and they are definitely not Conservatives; they are for all practical purposes FASCISTS. Barry Goldwater must be spinning in his grave to hear that his beloved movement has been expropriated by criminals, charlatans, Trotskyites and corrupt parasites.
The US’s actions in Iraq these last three years have been nothing but a thinly disguised effort to acquire, control and annex territory that does not belong to the US, capice? Why else have KGB and Halliburton build six permanent bases in Iraq if the US’s actions were truly honorable? Why else spend billions of dollars on a ’green zone’ in the middle of Baghdad STRICTLY FOR US PERSONNEL if the US did not plan on staying in Iraq and permanently making Iraq a puppet state of the US?
This is why this war is considered CRIMINAL by so many and it never was a WAR ON TERROR, another two-faced word straight out of the neo-fascists dictionary. Why are Americans like yourself so afraid to call a spade a spade?
Do you really believe that our leaders in the White House and in the Pentagon are a bunch of saints out to make the world a better place? Anyone with knowledge of US actions throughout the world in these last 6 decades after WWII couldn’t with any honesty call our country ’the beacon of liberty’. Do you know nothing about recent American history?
How naive most of my countrymen are about not only how the real world works, but about how their own political leadership has duped them repeatedly by calling US military actions ’fighting for our freedom’, all the while they are busily destroying our liberties behind our backs, all for the Almighty Dollar.
1 October 2006, 16:52
Arrogance, impatience, petulance, egotism, sociopathy, secrecy, deceit, preemption are the hallmark of the Bush administration. The cabinet lies at every opportunity. The Republican senators are weasel sycophants, all kneeling down behind Bush to kiss his behind and get their money. Cabal of thugs is more their style, with aggression, stealth, and hypocrisy their tactics. This is the do-nothing Congress of Shame that will go down in history as approving torture and saying that the nut-case Bush could interpret International Law as he pleased. Cowards and shysters, out for an easy dollar, hang together or hang separately. They have betrayed our country for the neocon dream of world domination and quick profit.
1 October 2006, 17:10
The Bush neo-cons would rather destroy America than to admit a wrong. Bush has a mind of a child. If you watch him he throws fits like a child. What do we do with unruly children?