James Kroeger exposes George Bush's twisted stay the course logic with
an analogy:
Imagine that you and a friend are walking with George Bush on his ranch. After the three of you have stopped to take in the view and chat for a while, you suddenly realize that you are being bitten by ants. George has led you to a place where the ants have been living for quite a while. You shout out, “Ants!” but George quickly intervenes when he sees that you are about to jump away from the ant hill.
He insists that you must hold your ground and try to kill all of the ants that are daring to try to bite you because you wouldn’t want them to think that they succeeded in forcing you to move away from their land through their fierce attacks.
George cautions that even daring to discuss with your friend the option of leaving the ants’ land would encourage the ants to continue to attack you. He explains that the only thing that will convince them to stop their attacks is if they believe that nothing they can do will ever make you move. They need to understand that RESISTANCE IS FUTILE.
All we’re saying in the peace movement, George, is that we want to get off the anthill, now. Let the ants do what they want with their land. We don't care if they have disputes with other ant colonies. Getting ourselves involved in the disputes of ants has caused a lot of pain while doing nothing to improve the security or well-being of the American people. Besides, we live over here, dammit. Why do you have our sons and daughters standing in an ant hill way over there?
George Bush's ultimate reason for staying the course in Iraq has nothing to do with any concerns he might have for the lives of Americans and Iraqi civilians. Of much greater concern to him is the possibility that The Enemy might think about us in a certain way if we were to leave. He is afraid they might think that they had forced a great defeat on us, that they had kicked our butts.
He leads us to the Land of Ants and then worries that if we step off of their ant hill, they might think that they had conquered a Great Giant. What kind of insanity is that? He finds the prospect of insurrectionist gloating so horrifying, he doesn't care how many more American soldiers might have to die in order to put off that moment of 'humiliation', of denied boasting opportunities.
What pro-Bush soldiers and military families need to understand is that there is no shame in retreating from a battle that you were incompetently led into. We're talking about a war that was never necessary to begin with. Bush loyalists in the military are angry at Cindy Sheehan for using words that seem to "threaten the honor" that they see in their actions. What they don't understand is that it is their Commander-in-Chief who has dishonored them.
George Bush has dishonored America's soldiers through association. The soldiers have not dishonored themselves. It was George Bush who 'rushed us into war' when there was no legitimate reason to be in a hurry. It was George Bush who misread the resistance to America's occupation that was waiting to happen. It was George Bush who believed that 'shock and awe' would put the Iraqi's in a compliant frame of mind, eager to follow our direction.
This kind of incompetence dishonors America's soldiers because they are acting at his direction. If your Commander-in-Chief has ruined your country's reputation throughout the world through his reckless guesses and simplistic reasoning, then you-as-a-soldier are being deprived of an opportunity to be proud of your country, because your leader represents your country to the world. He is an embarrassment to you.
The anger that many members of military families have felt toward Cindy Sheehan has been misdirected. If you're a good soldier who has been a victim of incompetent leadership, then you have a right to be angry. But your anger should be properly directed at the one person who is primarily responsible for having brought shame upon your country.
George Bush.
Excellent.