Y'all, Undie Lib talked about this already, but I find I'm really disturbed by the implications of what Josh Marshall has so brilliantly summed up:
For the president a one in a thousand shot at some better outcome is well worth it, no matter what the cost. Because at least that's a one in a thousand shot at not ending his presidency with the crushing verdict history now has in store.
On first reading I was mainly struck by the accuracy of Josh's insight, but now it scares the hell out of me. He's right: nothing matters to Bush now but justifying our previous efforts in Iraq. There's no such thing for him as cutting his losses. Since the situation is Iraq is irredeemable, we are now looking at a scorched earth policy regarding what's left of our military, our economy, our international reputation, and our posterity.
The other verdict of history will be on the American public's passive stance regarding the blatant criminality of its highest elected officials. I can't speculate on it, because I haven't begun to understand it myself, but I'm afraid it will mean having the lowest possible opinion of people's hearts, or minds, or both. Nothing to look forward to there, unlike the shining possibililty of war crimes trials for Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld in the Hague in 2010.
--divageek
August 26, 2007
Yes, you smell something burning.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Bush will never be on trial for any of the atrocities that he has committed. Before he became King, he had never visited another country, and the chances of him leaving after he gives up his kingship are nil. Therefore the court in the Hague will never get a chance to grab him. Reality. Money talks and other people die.
A girl can dream, can't she?
Maybe he will find himself extraordinarily rendered to Holland, in the same tender fashion as he caused innocent people to be kidnapped and imprisoned at the CIA black sites for crimes they had not committed.
Yeah dg, it's POSSIBLE (NOT probable, but possible) that IF things drag along in Iraq and slowly get worse that MAYBE the US sheeple might actually want to punish somebody and -- in an act of 'coincidental justice' - - they might actually blame "W". Kind of like the New Yorker on the street who was interviewed after 9/11 and replied 'I don't care WHO, but we got to bomb SOMEBODY' (as reported by Jeff Cohen of FAIR), IF the economy gets real bad people might accidentally correctly blame "W". The US electorate is notoriously fickle - - I remember that asshole Nixon sweeping 49 of 50 states back in 1972, only to end up with record low ratings (until W surpassed him) and resigning in disgrace a couple of years later...
I'm not going to be picky. I doubt he'll be impeached unless he gets a blow job from Lieberman on live TV, so my next best hope is The Hague.
Post a Comment