The Bush Speech

I caught a portion of it while flipping channels. I usually don't watch Bush on TV, because if I'm going to be lied to, I'd rather read the lies in print than watch them on C-Span. It's a time saver. Anyway, at one point Bush took time out to talk to me, saying that, now that we're in Iraq, the only options are victory and defeat, implying that I should just forget about how we got into the war and just go with him on his course without further complaint.

(I thought it was a laugh when Bush said he'd "heard" his opponents on the war. Sure he did. His wiretappers are pros.)

Okay, now I'm speaking to the President who B.S.'d us into a war:

The victory versus defeat choice is a false one. Very few wars result in total victory or total defeat. Most of the time they settle down to a political arrangement that allows hostilities to cease and both sides, who may still think of each other as absolute evil, to find more productive uses for their time. The task in Iraq is to identify the best realistic outcome we can envision, and determine what policies are most likely to move us toward that outcome. We have to decide whether the presence of our troops helps or hurts Iraq's stability. (I'd say it does much more harm than good to have them there now. The longer they stay, the less the Iraqi people will believe that the governments they've been voting for will fulfill their hopes for national dignity and sovereignty. If the troops are no longer useful in the job of bringing stability to Iraq, calling for their withdrawl is not defeatism; it's intelligence.

As for his wish for us to stop talking about how he got us into the war, Bush is conveniently forgetting something. His pre-war statements, to the American people and to the world, have everything to do with why we're finding it so hard to get international help into Iraq and why so many of our allies around the world hold us in so much contempt. Bush's lack of credibility on Iraq, and on terrorism in general, makes it harder for the U.S. in all phases of foreign policy. Fewer nations trust our judgement, fewer world leaders want to be seen with us, and fewer leaders take us at our word. And why should they? I don't know if Bush has figured this out yet, but crediblity is not something that comes with being an American; credibility comes from a diciplined, daily commitment to making sense.

I'm numbed to it now, but it used to amaze me how conservatives could be so upset with Bill Clinton's lies about oval office fellatio, while they're so casual about the torrent of untruths that spill out of Bush's mouth whenever he approaches a microphone. Which lies have been, in the end, more damaging to American policy and objectives around the world?

If we're ever going to recover the trust of the world, we have to begin by demanding that the truth about our decision to invade Iraq come out. Such an accounting will be very painful. It's never fun to admit you've been conned. (Don't worry. I won't say "I told you so" too loud.) Bush's lies couldn't have advanced so far if they hadn't played on the hopes and ideals of a great many people. But the sooner we start telling ourselves the truth, the sooner the rest of the world will regain their comfort with us as a great power. For Bush to lie to us is a crime and an insult; for us to lie to ourselves is an invitation to disaster.

And havent' we sent out enough of those?