id probably be wiser to let this go than to tread into territory about which you feel so strongly, but im very truly wondering what it is that im missing here.
ive just finished re-reading his article for the seventh time since it was posted in ju. like a good number of other americans, herbert is clearly unhappy with the way the war has been prosecuted. but that--as you pointed out--is his right.
i dont get a sense that his compassion is insincere. like so many of us who were alive during the vietnam era, he lost friends to the war. because he was in the service then, there was an even greater chance of that happening. his reaction--to feel somehow guilty that he wasnt serving in vietnam--is understandable, not at all uncommon and there's no reason to dismiss it out of hand, if at all. he certainly has a basis for identifying with the friends and families who are suffering similar losses now. (i was truly mystified by your abrupt dismissal of his serivce as being irrelevant btw)
what's confusing me, more than anything, is i dont see him calling for the us to give up and go home--even by implication. maybe im currently in the throes of mid-to-late onset senility (if not permanently residing there
). what i do see is this:
We have completely lost our way with this fiasco in Iraq. The president seems almost perversely out of touch. "The idea of democracy taking hold in what was a place of tyranny and hatred and destruction is such a hopeful moment in the history of the world," he said this week.
The truth, of course, is that we can't even secure the road to the Baghdad airport, or protect our own troops lining up for lunch inside a military compound. The coming elections are a slapstick version of democracy. International observers won't even go to Iraq to monitor the elections because it's too dangerous. They'll be watching, as if through binoculars, from Jordan.
Nobody has a plan. We don't have enough troops to secure the country, and the Iraqi forces have shown neither the strength nor the will to do it themselves. Election officials are being murdered in the streets. The insurgency is growing in both strength and sophistication. At least three more marines and one soldier were killed yesterday, ensuring the grimmest of holidays for their families and loved ones.
One of the things that President Bush might consider while on his current vacation is whether there are any limits to the price our troops should be prepared to pay for his misadventure in Iraq, or whether the suffering and dying will simply go on indefinitely
a fair number of our fellow citizens see it that way. some of what he's saying--about the road to the airport, the murdered election officials, and the iraqi security forces--isnt reasonably disputable. his reaction to the president's assessment may not be the kindest interpretation but his concern isnt without basis. whether you agree with the president or not, that particular statement is incredibly overly optimistic. i may have my head up my ass as well, but even if that's the case, there is at least an even chance the upcoming election is going to be a fiasco.
while the last paragraph may seem to hint at withdrawing quickly, it can as easily--and reasonably--be construed as a call for bush to give more consideration to those former generals whose advice was (as reported by several sources, all of whom were present at one point or another when the war was being planned) cavalierly ignored.
i'd also like to explain my characterization of the administration engaging in what i unwisely described as a policy of 'manifest destiny'. i wasnt alluding to oil or territory but a pervasive 'imperialist' attitude that has been emphatically advanced by the project for a new american century and appears to have been equally enthusiastically adopted by the administration.