by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright May 26, 2006
All Rights Reserved.

cting like the lamest of lame ducks, President George W. Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair mercifully completed their last joint news conference, continuing to justify colossal mistakes in Iraq. Blair showed the off-the-cuff temerity to lecture the press about the dubious link between the Iraq War and global terrorism. Bush frequently refers to Iraq as “the central front in the war on terror,” repeatedly associating Iraq with Sept. 11. Blair's attempt to do the same demonstrates that the two transatlantic leaders speak from the same talking points, insisting that sacrificing the blood and treasure has been worth the price. Blair offers no apology for the fraudulent intelligence on which the war was based, citing past mistakes as old news. Bush and Blair see no exit strategy other than ramping up Iraq's new military to take over security from U.S. and British troops.

      Neither Bush nor Blair discuss the infiltration of Iraq's new military by loyalists to radical Shiite cleric Muqtada Al Sadr, whose 10,000-strong Al Mahdi militia controls the streets outside Baghdad's fortified Green Zone, where the U.S. military and new Iraqi forces find a safe haven. Despite hurting Bush and Blair's popularity, both leaders refused to signal possible troop reductions, insisting that the job isn't complete. “The American people need to know that we'll keep the forces there necessary to win,” said Bush, responding to press reports about a future draw-down. Bush never says what “winning” looks like, except repeating, “when the Iraqis stand up, the U.S. will stand down,” something he's been saying since the war began March 20, 2003. Two months ago Bush and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld cited proof of U.S. progress with lowered U.S. casualties.

      U.S. casualties more than doubled in April underscoring the undeniable reality that the insurgency, which Vice President Dick Cheney said was “in its last throes” March 31, 2005, remains as strong as ever. Newly minted Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Maliki promises to get tough, also refuses to accept infiltration by renegade Shiite and Sunni factions into his security services. Bush and Blair's predictions haven't come true, costing both countries real casualties, cash and hardship. Bush and Blair have squandered political fortunes on Iraq, unwilling to admit failure for a misguided policy. Scouring Iraq for weapons of mass destruction and toppling Saddam Hussein wasn't where they went wrong. Once Saddam was no longer a threat, the U.S. should have dished security to Iraqis, whether or not the country descended into civil war. U.S. and British forces haven't stopped the sectarian violence and civil war.

      If U.S. and British forces haven't slowed the insurgency, it's unrealistic to believe Iraq's new government will have better success. Bush has already signaled he won't give up on his watch, meaning there's at least two-and-a-half more years before the policy gets reevaluated. U.S. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a possible GOP presidential frontrunner, has already signaled he'd dramatically escalate troop strength. No Democratic challenger, including presumed frontrunner Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), has taken a decisive position on Iraq, fearing adverse voter fallout. “It's important for the American people to know that politics isn't going to make the decision as to the size of our force level,” said Bush, dismissing what most Republicans fear that the November election will be a referendum on Iraq. It's easy for lame ducks like Bush and Blair to dismiss the polls.

      Blair has the audacity to suggest that battling insurgents in Iraq keeps terrorists off British and U.S. soil, when there's no evidence that terrorists in Iraq had anything to do with foreign operations. Osama bin Laden, the ultimate mastermind of Sept. 11 and more recent attacks in the U.K. and Europe, continues to direct terrorist operations from tribal areas of Pakistan. His most recent communiqué refuted U.S. claims that convicted terrorist, French-born Moroccan Zacarias Moussaoui was involved in Sept. 11. Moussaoui was convicted May 4, for his role in Sept. 11 hijackings, something Bin Laden and Moussaoui's defense team rejects, landing him a life-sentence. Miscalculations caused the U.S. and Great Britain to embark upon the most costly nation-building project since the Marshall Plan following WWII. Bush promised he would never use the military for nation-building.

      Bush and Blair were hard-pressed to point to concrete progress in Iraq. Both know that it's wildly optimistic to expect Iraq's new military to takeover security operations in the next 18 months. Bush talked about his regrets but never acknowledged prewar miscalculations that have cost nearly 2,500 lives, 20,000 injuries and $400 billion from the U.S. treasury. It's easy for Blair to talk about staying the course when the U.K. endures a fraction of the pain. So far, Bush and Blair have been wrong in virtually all their predictions about Iraq. “You will find probably, over the next few months, there will be a real attempt by the antidemocratic forces to test them very, very strongly,” said Blair, referring to the tough road ahead and Maliki's optimistic expectations. While Bush and Blair have their own exit strategies for their political careers, they need to deal with reality in Iraq.

About the Author

John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He's editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.

©1999-2005 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.