Just when you think George W. Bush has plumbed the depths of goofiness, he bests himself. In a speech today (reported on CNN), Bush said that:
Saddam Hussein, not continued U.S. involvement in Iraq, is responsible for ongoing sectarian violence that is threatening the formation of a democratic government.
When in doubt, blame the guy in jail. So, at what point did George discover that Saddam’s previous grotesque behavior spawned sectarian strife? Is there any chance he heard about this before launching the invasion in 2003 or was he still reading from the script that promised Iraqis, regardless of their sectarian beliefs, would be dancing in the streets?
It would be nice to get an answer on this point. Why?
If the President truly believed that “Saddam was a tyrant and used violence to exacerbate sectarian divisions to keep himself in power, and that as a result, deep tensions persist to this day”, then why did he fail to send enough troops to keep the warring factions under control? Since our invation in 2003, almost 2400 of our brave sons and daughters have died in this misadventure. I think it is appropriate to ask President Bush to explain why he was unprepared to deal with the sectarian strife since he knew that Saddam’s dictatorial polices sowed the seeds of civil war. Or, is this something he just got briefed on. Maybe the new Chief of Staff, Josh Bolten, gave him a heads up.
From the perspective of the average Sunni or Shia in Iraq, however, the days of Saddam’s rule are looking like the good old days. Sure there was a risk that Saddam could come into your house at night, arrest you without a warrant and haul you off to Abu Ghraib, but at least Saddam kept the lights on, pumped the oil, and provided security. And he was known for brutally killing those who got out of line or threatened him. It was an authoritarian state, but so is Egypt and Pakistan.
Now the Iraqis, particularly the Sunnis who live in and around Baghdad, face US and Iraqi troops who come into their house at night, arrest them without warrants, and haul them off to Abu Ghraib. Only, we are not keep the lights on, the oil pumping, or the torture centers closed. Those are still operating, unfortunately.
Too bad George Bush did not paid attention to history. Perhaps if he had remembered what happened in Yugoslavia when General Tito–the tough guy dictator–kicked the bucket, Bush would have understood that without a strong leader, people accustomed to an authoritarian regime resort to ethnic and sectarian war.
In the face of dozens of daily disappearances, multiple car bombs, ambushes, and mayhem (not to mention infrequent water and lights), it should be no surprise that Iraqis are looking first and foremost to family and tribes in order to protect themselves. The priority now is survival. So who is pulling the strings that allows the insurgents to thrive? Not Saddam.
Blaming Saddam is a pathetic gesture by an embattled President. Josh Bolten needs to smack the speech writer who allowed this drivel to come out of Bush’s mouth. Up to this point the Iraqis may have believed the chaos in Iraq was part of a covert plan we were executing without clueing them in on our true intentions. With this speech they may finally realize that George Bush really does not know what he is doing and is making it up as he goes along.
