What About that 800 Pound Gorilla?

When I spout off about local issues, I'm always sure I'm right, i.e., mistaken at the top of my voice. And I'm still utterly brilliant when I speak about peak oil or global warming. But my certainty fades when I think about us, the 800-pound Gorilla, and our military misadventures in Iraq.

That's how the world views us, you know. We're as bad as King Kong traipsing through the jungle, knocking down everything in our way. In fact, we're worse. At least you could feel sorry for King Kong.

And the Baghdad blunder has done far worse than simply alienate us from the rest of the world. It has also divided Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds within Iraq. They are obviously in a civil war no matter how the senseless slaughter is spun by the suits in D.C. One third of Iraq's parliament has stopped showing up. The Middle East is far less stable than before we brought freedom to Iraq, killing around 45,000 defenseless civilians in the process.

Oopsie! "We don't do body counts."

Perhaps worst of all, the continuing conflagration has also divided many in this country, more so than at any time since the Civil War. I'm conflicted myself. I'd like to explain how I feel, but am interested in your comments because I really don't have an answer.

I opposed the war long before it started, participated in several useless candlelight vigils, and vainly attempted to get my local government, Northampton County Council, to adopt a resolution opposing military intervention. I was part of the "Cities for Peace" movement Nobody in Lehigh Valley government wanted to take a stand. Calls to many local leaders were not returned. But those yellow magnet ribbons sold like hotcakes. It was a shameful abdication of moral responsibility, especially by local Dems.

Once the "shock and awe" started, most of us were thrilled. Better than a video game! Around this time, I did my first gig on WGPA 1100 AM as a radio talk show host, filling in for my friend, the conservative Ron Angle. At this time everyone was saluting each other and flying flags, and AM radio listeners were in no mood to hear Rush or GW contradicted. It was two weeks of torture for me and my listeners. In two short weeks, I nearly ruined Angle's show. My co-host and I were practically tarred and feathered because everyone was bloodthirsty back then.

President Bush taunted Iraqis, saying "Bring them on." In true John Wayne style, he snarled "You're either with us or against us." Rummy disparaged France and Germany as "old" Europe. Team Bush even launched personal attacks against those who challenged the war's flimsy justifications. Chickenhawks chuckled as real war heroes like Kerry and Max Cleland were swiftboated.

Given this unAmerican behavior, I knew Bush would never be re-elected. Later, when Bush signed an executive order suspending parts of the Geneva Convention, essentially authorizing torture, I questioned whether this war criminal could last a single term.

After all, Clinton was impeached for getting a lousy BJ, but Bush screwed the entire country. He would eventually be impeached or lose a reelection bid.

But that 'taint what happened. The politics of fear and hate won the day for Team Bush. Family values. And GW's not going to be impeached, no matter what happens in Congress. We're stuck with the dude.

Over time, I've begun to realize people of good will can look at the same facts and reach completely different conclusions. I believed military intervention in Iraq was a big mistake, but it was wrong to vilify those who disagreed with me. Neocons who slandered dissenting voices were also mistaken. We're all Americans.

Most of us now agree Iraq was a mistake. We're no longer saluting each other. We get plenty of shocks but are no longer awed. The thrill is gone. And it has even become quite fashionable to mock President Bush. He said "nucular." Ha. Ha. Stephen Colbert put Bush on notice. Hee. Hee. Snide remarks about Bush show just how clever we are, right?

But Bush has supposedly recognized the inflammatory nature of some of his earlier remarks, and now acknowledges it was a mistake for the leader of the free world to say things like, "Wanted, Dead or Alive." Maybe he's not an evil monster, just a harmless frat boy.

He may be a frat boy, but I don't consider him harmless. At times, Bush plays a very earthy guy for a rich aristocrat. He tells fart jokes, and will even drop a few here and there for the benefit of junior staffers. But GW has an undeniable dark side.

Bush may be on a first name basis with Jesus, and holy roller Pat Robertson is his pal. But Bush is also a killer who actually enjoys it.

When he was governor of Texas, born-again Bush mocked murderess Karla Faye Tucker. "Please ... please don't kill me," he mimicked as he ignored the condemned woman's petition for clemency. And when he argued against hate crimes for people who murdered their victims, the "compassionate conservative" proclaimed (with a sneer),"It will be hard to punish them any worse after they get put to death."

I don't think the Almighty would approve of Bush's shallow regard for human life. Maybe he's not in the same league as Stalin, Hitler or even Pol Pot, but he definitely could give Nixon a run for his money. He's no harmless frat boy. And we elected this bastard. Twice.

Hallelujah! Praise be to Jesus!

We're stuck with a bible-thumpin', tea-totalin', frat boy who loves fart jokes. He got us into a war that has crippled our military. And given his low regard for human life, it's understandable that he would regard the Geneva conventions as an "quaint" annoyance. And GW farts and then commands us to "stay the course."

Thanks to former Congressman Foley, Katrina and about a gazillion other Republican mis-steps, Bush will finally lose his stranglehold on government this November. We might actually be able to control what happens in Iraq.

But I don't envy our new Congress. What do we do? Do we stay the course with a mean-spirited frat boy? Do we really cut and run, just like that?

Leaving might be as big a mistake as it was to get involved in the first place. The only thing that keeps that area from blowing up is our presence. Six hundred thousand soldiers, American and Iraqi, may be the only reason why other countries have not attacked. A sudden withdrawal would certainly invite more violence and death. People who supported us would be left holding the bag, again. Syria, Turkey and Iran would certainly try to step in. The Middle East would become even more of a tinder box than it is now.

We broke it. Shouldn't we fix it? I don't like the idea of permanent military bases and don't want us there one second longer than necessary. But when we leave, shouldn't the region be at least as stable as it was before we stuck our nose where it doesn't belong?

Senator Biden has this suggestion: "We must ensure Iraq does not become what it wasn’t before the war: a haven for terrorists. And we must do what we can to prevent a full-blown civil war that turns into a regional war." This sounds a lot like the Bush approach with an important difference - honesty. No more lies. That's one of Team Bush's specialties. One day, Rummy will tell us there are 200,000 trained Iraqi soldiers. A few months after that, he'll tell us there are less than half that number. A few months after that, he'll double it again. And that's just one example of many lies by many Bushies.

I can't fault politicians who seem confused when they talk about this matter. I'm pretty confused myself. It's a bad situation. Do you have an answer?