There is discontent in the heartland:
Iraq, a possible early warning sign for
President George W. Bush in one of his most reliable strongholds.
When Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel traveled around his home state this week, citizens at every stop brought up Iraq policy and the inexorable rise in fuel prices.
If people are disappointed with the outcome of the war (we lost), and the high price of gas (not everyone lost), wait until they get the bill…
Hagel, a Vietnam veteran, acknowledged the U.S. military presence was becoming harder and harder to justify. He believes Iraq faces a serious danger of civil war that would threaten Middle East stability, and said there is little Washington can do to avert this.
“We are seen as occupiers, we are targets. We have got to get out. I don’t think we can sustain our current policy, nor do I think we should,” he said at one stop.
I think it has been obvious since about September of 2003 that the administration didn’t know what the fuck they were doing in Iraq, weren’t going to make meaningful changes, and that our efforts there were doomed to failure and ignominy. Hagel began mumbling sometime around then, but now he’s done. Maybe he’d like to switch parties and tell us what he really thinks.
“I don’t think there’s panic, I don’t think there’s cynicism. I think there’s this steady unsure sense about where is this all leading — the constant daily reports on Iraq, our people being killed there, the money being spent there,” he added.
What does it take to make a Nebraskan conservative cynical? Does George W. Bush have to walk right up and pinch their wallet?
Hagel said Bush faced a growing credibility gap. “The expectations that the president and his administration presented to the American people 2 1/2 years ago is not what the reality is today. That’s presented the biggest credibility gap problem he’s got,” he said.
“I hope he has some sense that something’s going on out in the country, that there’s a lack of confidence that has developed in our position.”
I find this all so frustrating. Why the hell did any of you people vote for these guys? What the hell were you thinking? When will you learn that they only TELL LIES. LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES. O’Reilly lies, Hannity lies, Cheney lies, Bush lies, Rumsfeld lies. They don’t even tell the truth when telling the truth would help their cause.
How in hell are we supposed to make it to 2009 with these criminally corrupt and incompetent sociopaths in charge of our treasury, our military, and our security?
Jeebus.
But at least the scales are starting to fall from some people’s eyes.
It’s interesting that there is no mention of all the killing and destruction we inflicted in furtherance of our “mission”. That isn’t even on their personal radar. People are only starting to wake up because they are personally feeling the effects rising gas prices. Very sad.
I guess we have to take comfort in the fact that at least 49% of us woke up before the gas prices went up.
I guess the way to a Repub’s heart is through his wallet?
War comes with the understanding there will be killing and destruction. It’s on everybody’s “radar”, including Hagel’s:
= = = = = =
Bottom line is this: our policy must be worthy of the young men and women we are sending out there. 1,725 have been killed. Over 13,000 wounded. It’s not good enough for me when I hear from some of the Generals, actually, we should be losing a lot more men. Well, that doesn’t make me feel better and I don’t think it makes Americans feel better. But that’s the kind of talk you hear…we actually should be losing more men. No we shouldn’t. No we shouldn’t.
[Address to the Nebraska American Legion Annual Convention, June 24th, 2005]
Shattered trust, not gas prices.
I really find this hard to believe….but at last, finally, at last they are awakening to reality!!!!!!
I wonder if peak oil theory has to do with all of this? Some people I talk to tell me that the neocons haven’t go that much sense and they’re just trying to deal with Iran by dealing with Iraq first and others tell me that they feel that control of the oil is the primary motivator.
Whatever is going on we certain not to know until the historians tell us 20 years on down the line because no one seems to have the guts to level with us now.
Some people I talk to tell me that the neocons haven’t go that much sense and they’re just trying to deal with Iran by dealing with Iraq first and others tell me that they feel that control of the oil is the primary motivator
I chuckle a bit when people say that it is all about the oil… You get the statement a little better.
It is about control… Control the flow of oil and natural gas. Yep, peak oil is real. BUT what the neocons want more than just the oil in Iraq (and Iran) is easier ways to get the oil they already own to the places they want to sell it to.
Iraq, then Iran, would have been the likely targets first if Bin Laden had not given them the Afghanistan reason to start it all.
Yep, they would’ve eventually gone after Afghanistan if they needed to later, (Unocal wanted natural gas pipelines, ya know?) but what they want is the Caspian sea as an easy way to get oil out of there, as well as the overland routes for pipelines, and the oil fields in Iraq and Iran are just the bonus.
What’s a poor neocon to do with all of that “oil/natural gas” and no cheap, easy ways to get it from the wells to the reefineries? Time to blow things up, huh?
Yes! Cheney and the PNACers want the oil as an instrument of power, not as fuel. Control of those resources would give them the ability to destroy the economic foundation of any nation or group of nations, (read China or the EU), who might challenge them for supremacy in the global arena.
Those who lust for empire typically eschew the idea of working toward the best interests of all. Empire enthusiasts always believe they’re “entitled” to whatever they can gain for themselves, regardless of who gets robbed or killed in the process. They prefer to adopt the “to the victor goes the spoils” mantra as the core justification for all their aggressions. And this sort of “victory dance” mentality also “gets them off the hook”, (in their own minds, anyway), from having to acknowledge any responsibility for the tragedies and suffering of those they’ve aggressed upon.
Senator Feingold calling for an exit date might have had a little something to do w/ it.
Bush and Rove will threaten their masculinity and the idiots will go all primal and vote R.
Besides, they won’t get the bill. Their children will.
redwagon
(crabby)
They’ve probably seen this study (or at least you have):
Men overcompensate when their masculinity is threatened, Cornell study shows
ITHACA, N.Y. — Threaten a man’s masculinity and he will assume more macho attitudes, according to a study by a Cornell University researcher.
“I found that if you made men more insecure about their masculinity, they displayed more homophobic attitudes, tended to support the Iraq War more and would be more willing to purchase an SUV over another type of vehicle,” said Robb Willer, a sociology doctoral candidate at Cornell. Willer is presenting his findings Aug. 15 at the American Sociological Association’s 100th annual meeting in Philadelphia.
Never should have gone to begin with.
We were told lies to get us there.
Three Hundred Billion dollar boondoggle (and counting).
Thousands of US deaths, countless injuries and 100,000+ Iraqi casualties, and for what?
Disaster at every turn while we are there.
Gee, I wonder what we should do?
Mr B- my first post here– Thanks to your efforts. Short, simple and hopefully- to the point. You are right with just one proviso. We have to start with the knowledge that the bush and what is now called the gop base is at 40%! How many can we call “Our Base”?
billjpa@aol.com
welcome bill, good to have you here with us. do more posting and we will all enjoy your presence. welcome….
I hope we can trust Hagel … he likes to rattle his sabre, but …
You’re right about people becoming aware of the lies, followed by ever more questions. Now they’re asking if anything they said is true. When the discussion lands on the terrorist acts that started this juggernaut rolling – spawning the “War on Terror” – and administration’s record is shown against the promises made, their circle of loyal friends will shrink further.
I’m still “cautiously optimistic” about gaining a majority in Congress in ’06. Hopefully that’s early enough, ’cause if we have to wait til ’09 we’re f*cked.
I agree that more people are becoming aware of the lies, but I don’t think that many more people are yet ready to identify them as lies. I think many people are still thinking of the “lies” as “mistakes”, because they’re not yet able to acknowledge that those in such high authority would actually seek to deliberately deceive them on such a massive scale.
Think about the difficult quandary many religious parents were in when their children came home and told them the parish priest molested them. How many of these parents simply refused to believe such a thing was even remotely possible, and how terrible it must have been for them emotionally when reality finally came crashing through their “denial”.
This is where the half of the public that supported these psychopaths is now. They’re slowly being informed bit by bit that they’ve been duped and robbed, but they’re not yet ready to call the swindlers out on it.
Good description, but I do think they’ve finally moved beyond denial. This is also unfortunately the point at which the opposition needs a clear alternative. Last week Dean put it back on the President to determine a plan for withdrawal (Iraq).
First rule: if you’re getting the wrong answers, maybe you’re asking the wrong questions. You’d think the opposition leadership would catch on.
Sadly, the (what passes for) opposition leadership is much more a part of the problem than they are a part of the solution if for no other reason than that their political cowardice prevents them from standing up for principle until it looks like it’s politically expedient to do so.
I agree actually that many people have passed the point of denial, but my sense remains that they’re still not to the point where they can say the word “lie” out loud and in public.
As to the ideas of setting timetables for withdrawl, as useful as these concepts might be for the sake of stirring things up, I would much prefer to see some prominent Dems begin to frame the debate as to whether our presence in Iraq is making things worse by incentivizing anti-American sentiment or whether our presence in Iraq can be shown to be beneficial in any way by any measure. In short, we should be discussing whether our continued presence in Iraq is helping or hurting the so-called quest for Iraqi self-rule. (See this very good analysis by Gen. William Odom here.
(And of course, someone could ask the seminal question of the Bush regime whether they actually believe they can deliver a military defeat of all the (so-called) terrorists in Iraq or anywhere else. I don’t think any media person has asked that question.
As I wrote above, terrorism was the excuse, and should remain the focus. Odom is right on Iraq:
.
It’s not just the heartland, it’s even starting in the South – even in blood-red east TN! Here’s the quote from my congresscritter today in the NYT:
BTW, in the interests of full disclosure, Duncan voted against the war because of how much it would cost (in dollars, that is), being one of those financial hawk, balance-the-budget Republicans…
at least your repub. congresscritter did that, my blue dog democrat voted for the war….yet he got relected…go figure…I bet that if he ran now, he woudl have to get another pitch going now. shameful………..
Hagel is on with Wolfie
Last night, I was in the car trying desperately to amuse myself with the vast wasteland that radio has become, and I stumbled on this little gem, on some talk station. The host was actually left wing and was making the point that this administration is made up of oil whores and have us in Iraq because of oil. Someone called in to to tell him how illogical his argument was. The caller’s point: If we’re in Iraq for oil, why are we paying $2.50 a gallon at the pump? This kind of stupidity makes my head hurt. Apparently it continues to escape some peoples’ notice, as it did with the California crisis, that shortages and uncertainty actually increase the profits for energy companies.
It you were a CEO of a major oil co. would you want gas above $3.00 or below$ 2.00? Quarterly profits are in the 5-8 Billion dollar range, nice work if you can get it!