Bush Is Waiting for An Iraq Solution That Will Never Come

By Larisa Alexandrovna, AlterNet. Posted December 22, 2006.

I am not sure who it is that The Decider is waiting for, be it Godot or a shaman. What is becoming increasingly clear, however, is that the US is in a holding pattern with regard to Iraq, stuck on stall while our soldiers and more Iraqis die. Yes, this administration is waiting for something, but what? I don’t think we will ever really know, but more and more people will die while this President stalls in his holiday-adorned mansion, having never seen combat and having suffered no personal loss in this war. Disregard for the urgency of time comes easily to those who are gambling with other peoples’ lives and other peoples’ money.

The plan to plan a plan:

The President claims he is listening to different voices of opinion, but anyone who has watched this arrogant, self-serving administration should know by now that the only voices Bush listens to are the ones that come with cash.

I don’t buy for a moment that this President is weighing all options and listening to all of the experts. Nearly four full years into this inferno we call Iraq, there has yet to be a well reasoned, thoughtful assessment of the situation or an adjustment to address conditions on the ground.

What thoughtful planning was done prior to the invasion of Iraq? That is to say, outside of painstakingly fabricating evidence to mislead a grieving nation into war -- what actual planning took place to secure Iraq after the invasion? What planning did this administration do to make sure our military had the resources it needed? Even now, our soldiers lack the necessary armor and equipment, and yet we are to believe this President is remotely serious about developing a winning plan?

What attention was paid to the aftermath of the invasion and securing the peace of a nation with three fully autonomous factions jockeying for power, ready to kill one another over control of the country? Who had the brilliant idea to dismiss the Iraqi army, still in possession of their weapons, so that military contractors could then "secure" Iraq? What prompted the idea to take jobs away from Iraqis so that Halliburton’s no bid contracts had a place to play out?

What genius decided that creating a palace-like US military base in Iraq took precedence over ensuring that the Iraqis had water and electricity? If this is planning of any sort, it is a plan for deliberate and catastrophic failure. And at each stage there was a milestone that would mark some sort of mission accomplished and victory delivered, only to allow for more stalling and more misery.

Even after the Iraq Study Group delivered its bipartisan edict of "blame it on Rumsfeld and save face," the President decided he would mull things over through the holidays, having first agreed to follow the group’s recommendations when he thought they would be different, somehow.

What is obvious now is that the removal of Rumsfeld was not a sign of a real commitment to change direction in Iraq. It was nothing more than yet another stalling tactic, which is why the news was delivered after the election, not before. The nomination of Robert Gates to Secretary of Defense appears also to be nothing but stagecraft to silence the angry public, because Gates, no matter his view, is still bound by the chain of command. If the leadership says "stall," then Gates can only stall or resign.

What are they waiting for?

The President’s latest tactic now being floated is to deploy 30,000 troops to Iraq, which will no doubt serve to add more dead bodies to the death toll but little else.

See more stories tagged with: iraq, exit strategy

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »