Friday, December 22, 2006

Impeach him!

There are times when it's hard to describe Bush's stubbornness and sheer pig-headedness in the stark terms that it deserves. The Baker Report has offered him a way out of Iraq, but he seems determined to ignore the advice given to him by that bipartisan committee and seems to think one last push will bring him the victory that has so far eluded him.

Let's look at this carefully. James T Baker, the man who is as responsible as any other for getting Bush elected after he guided him through the Florida recount, has said enough is enough. Bush is planning on ignoring him.

Colin Powell, Bush's former Secretary of State, has said the US is losing the war in Iraq and that the sending of more troops is no longer the answer. Bush is planning on ignoring him.

Gen. John P. Abizaid, his top Middle East commander, has announced his retirement and other generals have signalled that they do not agree with Bush's plans to increase troop levels. Bush is planning on ignoring them.

The change in tactic here is staggering. This is the same President who, up until now, has hidden behind these same Generals insisting that he is following their lead and that they are in charge of the military campaign. Now that they are saying something that he doesn't want to hear, Bush is planning on ignoring them.

Even Blair and Bush now appear to be showing cracks regarding the way forward as Blair has embraced the Baker report that Bush seems determined to ignore. Bush will now ignore Blair.

Astonishingly, Bush appears to be still in the thrall of the neo-conservatives who have led him into his present quagmire, and he appears to be still listening to them as they promise a way out through victory. Indeed, they have even prepared a paper on the subject entitled: Choosing Victory: A Plan for Success in Iraq.

The clear implication being that victory is there for the taking if the US simply apply themselves more. The old arguments surrounding Vietnam are once more being dusted down.

At this juncture we are looking at a President more isolated than any in recent memory. His Generals, his ex-Secretary of Defence, has father's friends and the British PM who has supported him to such an extent that he has earned himself the sobriquet "poodle" all now oppose what he plans to do next. And yet Bush, a man who has never served in any military capacity, now plans on ignoring them all.

Of course, if one reads Frederick W Kagan's paper one will find that, like most neo-cons, he is scathing about the way their plan for world domination was carried out rather than finding any fault with the grandiose plan itself.

The truth, of course, is that neo-conservatism died in Lebanon this summer. The idea that the US could shape any region it wanted through the application of military force was laid bare with Hizbullah's victory over Israel.

However, these buggers are not for lying down. They are certainly not for admitting defeat. A defeat that all but the most stubborn of conservatives now accepts as fact.

What does one do when a President ignores the advice of everyone around him and insists on sending more troops into harms way? Troops enlisted from the poorest quarters of his nation that do not include his children or the children of the elite neo-cons who support his insane new policy?

We are looking at a President who simply will not accept defeat and is willing to allow the children of others to die rather to admit what even his own supporters have admitted. He has lost. Even Ralph Peters has conceded that fact, although his reasoning for why they lost is simply garbage.

The state of affairs is truly grim
:

But the president has not only lost the "battle for hearts and minds" across the Arab world, he's lost it across the United States. The people of Bapchule and Oxford no longer believe his words or trust his judgment. Virtually everything he ever said to them about the war — from "Mission Accomplished" to "absolutely, we're winning" — has been wrong.

Once, Americans might have shared his vision of a free, self-governing Iraq, but not any more. He has squandered their trust and betrayed their patriotism. The parents of Thibodaux and Cheektowaga no longer want to sacrifice their children to a lost cause.
Bush is now insisting, despite his defeat at the polls, that more young Americans must die for a cause that all but he can see is lost.

There is only one thing to do when faced with such stubbornness. Impeach him.

For the sake of young soldiers being asked to die for a lost cause, impeach him.

The US now has no other choice. This is an isolated President embarking on a suicidal course, who has lost the support of even his own side and who has nothing to lose as he will never again face re-election.

Polite intervention from Baker and his colleagues has not worked. Blair distancing himself from the project has not worked. Powell speaking out has not worked.

There is only one course left open. Impeach him.

The most incompetent President in living memory needs to be saved from himself. This should now be done if Republicans are to hold on to any chance of re-election for the next decade. The party that allows this man to do what he is planning to do deserve the disapprobation of the entire nation.

For their own sake, they need to impeach him.

tag: , , , , , , , , ,

9 comments:

AF said...

What we need is a little boy to cry out "look the President's not wearing any clothes!"

Find the little boy, and we can end this sorry Pantomime!

Kel said...

Well, I've seen lots of former supporters crying that the President has no clothes but nothing short of impeachment will stop this particular President.

Erik said...

Sadly, impeaching Bush leaves Cheney, a far more dangerous and delusional individual, as President. Thus, impeachment won't happen. Maybe the answer is for Bush 41 and Jeb to grow some balls, fly to Washington, and have an intervention. As much as I disagree with both of their policies over the years, I have to think that they see what is really happening and how badly their dim-witted relative is messing up the world. Stop respecting the office and start respecting reality.

mistformsquirrel said...

So many problems... and the saddest thing is, much as I agree, we need to impeach him for a dozen and ten reasons...

It won't happen. Why? Because Democrats have this belief that they'll be labeled "bitter" or something if they were to impeach a Republican president. (Even though this is *exactly* the kind of situation impeachment powers were given to the congress for)

This is of course, in part the fault of Republicans who tried to impeach Clinton over an affair - to attempt to impeach a President over something so minor, makes it almost impossible to impeach his successor despite that that is the wise and correct course of action.

So because it is not politically convienent, it is unlikely he'll get impeached. Yes, that saddens me to a degree I can scarcely describe.

I hope to God I am wrong too - I hope that Nancy Pelosi realizes "Ok, politics are one thing, but this is just ridiculous"

I hope - but I don't expect. People will die over political inconvienence.

And of course we do have the problem of Cheney as well - with him in the driver's seat... dangerous...

Impeaching him too would be almost impossible - even if the guts for it were had; because then the Republicans would just say we were trying to install an un-elected President (Nancy Pelosi) etc...

So yeah... I think the better way, in all honesty, is for the congress to just shut off the money. I know that sounds terrible - but it worked in Vietnam, and as horrible as it is, that's the only way I can imagine this war ending before Bush is out of office. Barring that, we're stuck till '08. It's pathetic.

Kel said...

Erik and Mistharm,

I take both your points about Cheney being Bush's successor, however, I think Bush needs to be impeached simply because he has broken the law. Indeed, he is the first President that I am aware of who has admitted to a federal offence in public. His ignoring of FISA is a blatantly impeachable offence.

Nations should be run by laws, irrespective of who may be Bush's successor.

And I understand the argument about Cheney following Bush, but we must remember that the reason Cheney has pushed Bush down some of the paths he has gone down are because he wants to take back Presidential power that he feels was lost when Nixon was impeached.

Let Cheney take over. With the Dems in charge of both houses, lets see if he wants to face impeachment as well.

And let's be honest, things couldn't get any worse with Cheney in charge as the administration already bears all his hallmarks.

The law shouldn't be ignored because it's consequences are troublesome.

Anonymous said...

Nixon was never impeached.

Kel said...

gregoms,

I should have said when Nixon was driven from office under threat of impeachment.

Sophia said...

Hi Kel,

Just returned from Cuba. You will be happy to know that someone visited my blog from the US department of Justice through the page of this post of yours, a very good post.

Kel said...

Sophia,

Welcome back! Was the Cuba trip good? And what are the US Department of Justice doing going through either of our blogs?