Rope-A-Dope Redone

My blogparents are fighting. How it pains a young boy like myself to hear their screams. I pretend to sleep as the yelling shatters the nighttime quiet. Oh, the agony I suffer, the hurtful words that I must desperately try to live in denial of. Surely, it's somehow my fault.

Well, OK, it's not that bad. I spend my nights crying myself to sleep over entirely unrelated matters. However, over the past week or so, Bill Quick and Stephen Green do seem to have made clear a significant difference of opinion regarding the Bush administration's plans against Saddam Hussein.

Quick is convinced that the Bush administration is not serious about persecuting a total war against the enemies of America. He views the White House moves over the past few months as caving to the hostility and obstructionism of the UN, and that we have slackened in our response to all the many threats we face. He seems to be firmly convinced that the Bushies lack any of the conviction that their earlier rhetoric demands. A list of his concerns are listed in this post.

Green disagreed with almost everything Quick had to say. He believes that things are, more or less, going on as they should, and that the one threat that we face that can easily be dealt with through military force will be being dealt with by the start of February.

Dr. Frank has titled it the Cockeyed optimist vs. the Clear-eyed Skeptic debate, and for the most part agrees with the Daily Pundit, but I don't see it quite that simply.

My $.02? The argument boils down to a choice between one of two possibilities: the Bushies have some kind of plan and goals in dealing with the greater threats facing the west, or they don't. We can only judge the administration's motives and goals from the information they've provided or through their actions. And our information set is still insufficient to make any kind of reasonable conclusion.

If there is an overall administration plan to deal with the ol' Axis of Vile Dipshits, it may not be what you or I may expect or want. Bush is still a politician, and always has eyes on reelection. This means any plans he makes will take two things in mind; 1) don't screw up the economy, and, 2) win any wars decisively. That means that, no matter how hawkish the administration is, we're not going to be invading Riyadh any time soon. There is no replacement for Saudi oil yet. The Bush administration has also, for the sake of dovish political sentiment at home and the whining throngs abroad, tried to dismiss the unilateralist cowboy image by working through the UN. How serious it takes these international attempts is unknowable to anyone outside of the inner circle.

If there is no plan (or worse yet, as Quick and Frank suggest, Bush has simply decided to let the status quo continue like a common European socialist), there isn't much to talk about, because we're fucked.

Since the beginning of this latest crisis, the administration has sent contradictory messages to Iraq, to foreign governments, and to the American people. One day Rumsfield is glibly bragging about how we're going bomb ol' uncle Saddam back to the stone age, and the next we have Ari announcing that the president still thinks there can be a peaceful solution. If we were to take all these various leaks, press briefings, and speeches at their face value, we do have a confused administration. However, that would entail taking politicians at their word, which is something I'm quite incapable of doing. The administration is lying (or is simply inconsistent, depending on how combative you feel towards Washington doublespeak today) about Iraq. It has been from the start, and it will continue to do so in the future. Whether this is actually rope-a-dope™, or just your average political filth is not clear as of now. 2004 is on the horizon, after all.

For now, I tend to be in the same camp as Vodkapundit. I see troops moving into position, hear the words "Material Breach" being spoken by none other than SOS Colin Powell, and I see action coming. The Carrier Battle groups are moving into position and reserves are being called up. One war at a time, and the right opponent at the right time. And Iraq is it for now. Then we can deal with other threats. Blind Optimism? Perhaps, but the alternative is not fun to think about.

My real hope is that the buildup will force one of Saddam's Colonels to put a bullet in the dictator's head and deliver the Hussein children to the US in hogties, thus saving needless deaths in an invasion. War is a nasty business after all, and we'd all prefer to avoid it. However, that ideal solution is not something we can plan on, and when the time comes, Bush has to decide to move forward.

Whether he does or doesn't, it's out of our hands for now. Bush has all the authority he needs to act; he has the consent of the US Congress. He will or won't act at the end of January.

As a final note on the subject of the wider struggle, Bill Quick writes at the end of the post that started it all:

So, rope-a-dopes, you call this sort of a thing a victory? I call it a mess we'll be fixing for the next generation, whether Saddam stays or goes. And you're more than welcome to it.

But this has been a generational mess from day one. Ever since the snooty colonials drew their squiggly little lines on maps and got the hell outta dodge, this simmering hatred of America has been building. Military force is necessary to weaken our enemies, to deny them funding, sanctuary, and safe haven and to protect our cities. Without these actions, we would be doomed. However, our offensives are really just the defense, holding the line and keeping the hoards at bay. Final victory won't come through missiles and guns, or crashing through dictator's bunkers, but will come instead through blue jeans, rock music, and Baywatch reruns.

Iran was the first nation to go fundamentalist in the Middle East, and 20 years of tyrannical religious rule is starting to crack as the young realize that their lives suck more now than their parent's did under the Shaw. We'll need to show the next generation of Islam that Islamofascist regimes suck all the joy out of life, and will kill their own in mass for minor offences, all the while stifling economies and keeping the populace in medieval conditions, whereas Western culture keeps bellies fed, families safe, and fun alive. This is a flippant view of the issue, of course, but I think a valid one.

Now, please, stop the fighting guys, you're frieghtening young Mojo!

 

Posted by Captain Mojo at December 23, 2002 02:38 AM | TrackBack