‘Overextended, overexposed and surrounded’
Gene Lyons
Sooner or later, somebody’s going to have to be irresponsible enough to suggest a sane way out of Iraq.
The futility of expecting the Bush administration to acknowledge its epic bungling is obvious. The president speaks in tired formulas that no longer even seem calculated to persuade.
"The only way our enemies can succeed," George W. Bush said recently, "is if we forget the lessons of Sept. 11—if we abandon the Iraqi people to men like {Abu Musab al-}Zarqawi."
Most Americans now understand that occupying Iraq has made the U.S. more vulnerable to terrorism, sapping U.S. military strength while sowing fanatics like dragon’s teeth. Polls show that 66 percent believe, correctly, that Bush has no realistic plan to extricate U.S. troops.
Name-brand Washington Democrats aren’t much better. Ever since Bush bum-rushed Congress into writing him a blank check before the 2002 congressional elections, the "responsible" (i.e., safest ) position on Iraq has been to appear on TV yakfests prating about America’s commitment, sacrifice, determination, etc. Some even emulate GOP faculty lounge toughs, accusing skeptics of Bush’s noble plan to turn Mesopotamia into Iowa of lacking patriotism or failing to comprehend that terrorists are evil.
These lofty sentiments are made more acceptable because, apart from the uniformed military, nobody’s sacrificing a damn thing. (I’m a fan of "Operation Yellow Elephant," a tongue-in-cheek effort to get Young Republicans to enlist. Maybe they should try some Democratic Leadership Council keyboard warriors, too.) They disguise the reality that America’s first pre-emptive war has turned into a political and strategic disaster, and that the longer American and British troops remain in Iraq, the worse things are apt to get.
More:
http://www.ardemgaz.com/ShowStoryTemplate.asp?Path=ArDemocrat/2005/07/27&ID=Ar02501&Section=Editorial(get login/password at
http://www.BugMeNot.com)