Diary: IRAQ- Bewildered Bush and the Bad News for the New Year

"The strong and the weak cannot keep company well." --Aesop (620 BC-560 BC) No words were ever truer than when the White House this month defended the president's rare use of a body count to describe Iraqi insurgent deaths as a way to show Americans that U.S. troops are fighting hard in Iraq, having great success relative to their sacrifice. Bush has recently said that U.S. and Iraqi forces had killed or captured 5,900 of the enemy during the months of October, November and early December. It was a rare use of a body count of the 'enemy' by this president and came after public opinion polls said many Americans are concerned about rising U.S. casualties and believe the United States is losing the war in Iraq. White House spokesman Tony Snow said one reason Bush gave the body count number was to offset concern about U.S. casualties and deaths that included 103 in October alone. But, please note this: Modern American presidents have shied away from giving body count numbers ever since the practice was discredited during the Vietnam war. During the Vietnam War, the U.S. military publicized Vietnam body counts as a way to show progress, but it led to inflated numbers which damaged the Pentagon's credibility. Bush has not learned this lesson and seems intent on making it his part of his 'new' policy. Yet, it seems Bush is still eager to show signs of 'progress' at a time when Americans have become disgusted with the Iraq war, and wants to demonstrate that his policy has not been stalled by his plans to change Iraq strategy early next year. Totally irrational and irresponsible thinking, again! Bush is likely to propose an increase in U.S. troop strength in Iraq to 'change' the mission there from fighting insurgents to supporting Iraqi forces to be more effective on the ground. Isn't that what they say has been the policy to date, anyway. Go figure. The Washington Post has reported recently that the Joint Chiefs of Staff DO NOT favor adding significant numbers of troops to Iraq (though, it is not an option endorsed by Republicans like Sen. John McCain and others. Republican leaders instead want to strengthen the Iraqi army to stand on it's own- by adding more of our troops???). The Joint Chiefs' position is more in line with a recommendation from the bipartisan Iraq Study Group that proposed adding more U.S. trainers to Iraqi units and put the United States in position of withdrawing most combat troops from Iraq by early 2008. This is the position that the confused White House has badmouthed repeatedly- through 'strategic' leaks, of course. Bush has refused to set a timetable for having U.S. troops out of Iraq, and it looks like he will continue to do so. Nixon redux! ---------------------------------------------------- While the strategic outlines of official White House policy is clear, there are a lot of decisions with "significant strategic ramifications", to quote Tony Snow, yet to be made- again. We are to expect Bush's delayed 'strategic' decision to be announced early in January. The administration doesn't not have a clue- again. Sad, sad, sad for all of us.

(Image by Unknown Owner) Details DMCA