I missed the video since I was late coming home from work, although I caught the audio on NPR. From what I could see on TV during the brief snippets shown on the network news shows afterwards the President seemed a visibly worn man. The presidency ages every incumbent, but five years of war have definitely left their mark on him.
I was struck by the framing, too – usually in these kinds of broadcasts, the speaker is embraced by the camera at fairly close range, maybe a bit of a gap at either shoulder and some room at the top. From what I saw, the camera angle was much looser – not quite a long shot, but the screen definitely capturing more of the room around him, the desk in front of him. He seemed smaller as a result, and somehow more alone.
Speaking of which, with the leadership of the Senate going out on a limb to bravely promise “symbolic votes” and the senior senator from Massachusets going on in front of the National Press Club about “Bush’s Vietnam,” I felt the need to ask the latter in return, “Well, whose Vietnam was Vietnam, Senator? Your brother’s, who got us in? Or was it Johnson, who made it our fight? Or Nixon, who brought us out? Or ultimately, was it the Congress, who with their fickleness secured the ultimate defeat of our allies?”
Marx, paraphrasing Hegel, said that history repeats itself – the first time as a tragedy, the second time as a farce. There are multiple layers of irony in “The Liberal Lion of the Senate” playing the lead role as the farcical fool this time around.
On the radio, the President seemed quietly, even doggedly determined, but it seemed to me that his voice no longer carried the ring of Pollyanish optimism. So much depends upon those who have too often disappointed us.
I remain agnostic on the issue of more troops, unless of course, the President is right and Nouri al-Maliki means what he says about disarming all militias, including the Mahdi Army. The news two days ago carried stories of these thugs “conscripting” every able-bodied man in the Sadr City slum to resist the coming test of wills, so it seems that Moqtada at least believes he means it.
If a unitary, mult-denominational Iraq is to survive, the state must control all levers of organized violence. There can be no state-within-a-state, no “Hezbollah” in the Bagdhad slums. This must be done.
Now, if the 535 member would-be council-of-war that is Congress can resist the overwhelming temptation to meddle for the next six months or so, we will determine if it can be.
The provincial reconstruction teams work well, so doubling them is a grand idea. And the oil-revenue sharing plan is a great notion that was far too long in coming. Putting Iran and Syria on notice cannot hurt.
This is, it seems to me, the last at bat of the last inning of this particular iteration of the great game, at least on this playing field.
I hope we either hit it out of the park, or go down swinging.
Lex,
I would love to hear Ted Kennedy’s reply to your questions about whose Vietnam it was.
Then again, I’d also love to hear his explanation about Chappaquiddick in 1969, and the suspended sentence he received, which by the way, was supposedly not permitted under the laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
Well said, Captain Lex.
About those symbolic votes. I am truly not being partisan when I ask: Is there any better way to reassure the enemy that support for this push is extremely shaky; that our Iraq policy is teetering and one good hard blow might suffice to knock it over?
Go, and go hard. The generals need to be given objectives, and then the politicians need to get out of the way.
Otherwise, bring the troops home, and start to build the army and navy we are going to need the fight the coming world war. Doing anything halfway will result in a prolonged bloody war with indeterminate results.
The only moral alternative would be to spare the world the coming bloodshed, surrender now, and help the Islamics buid the Caliphate.
I asked this before: who is going to man the new PRT’s? Yes, good idea, but where is the manpower coming from? Admittedly I am somewhat selfish in the pursuit of this question seeing as how I suspect us Navy reservists will man them, but still…
Oh, yeah, if Moqtada is not to go, then we must. He is NOT part of the solution. Go hard. Scorched earth for Sadr City…
At this point I am for the Dresden treatment for Baghdad.
However , that’s not feasible but I think the biggest weak point of the whole thing has to do with the fact it places a lot of faith in the Iraqi people. Their current track record does not really justify that faith. They are the weak point that can make this fail.
My own belief is that the Mahdai Army and others will read between the lines of what Malaki is saying and see it as code for “lay low and let me get the Americans to do our bidding against the Sunnis”. And they will lay low and wait-they know that time is on their side.
No matter what happens, the armed forces will need to get larger….I’ll beleive that when I see it.
I like what Jules Crittenden had to say about the address – go here – http://julescrittenden.blogspot.com/2007/01/leadership.html
In particular, he talks about the potential pitfalls in the plan:
“The most immediate pitfall I see looming is that enemy has a headsup, and will attempt to melt away, using its advantage as an irregular native force to cache its weapons and stand on the street corner, whistling and acting normal, to bide its time.
This is why there must be provocations to draw them out. For starters, the beseiging and seizure of Moqtada al-Sadr and other criminal leaders, responsible for the murder of thousands. Relentless raids on their stronghold neighborhoods. ”
As the President said: “…and there were too many restrictions on the troops we did have…”
As long as Maliki can keep his promise to end the sectarian and political posturing, it gives our troops the flexibility to do the job the first time. Let’s abandon the P.C. bullshit and “bring it on”, to quote the President. If it works, I predict carpet bombing of Sadr City coming to a news report near you, very soon.
One can only hope…
re the two comments:
“I predict carpet bombing of Sadr City”
“…the Dresden treatment for Baghdad.”
That isn’t going to happen. Unless….
Jus in bello. Recommend a little light reading on the subject at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_war
b2