Last night I watched a good portion of the Frontline program, "Bush's War." It was a frustrating reminder of the many, many inhumane decisions that led to the US war in Iraq. Then, this morning, I saw this piece in the NYT, describing how Bush is essentially going to maintain force levels (so much for the "temporary surge") through the end of his term, continue his deeply irresponsible denial, and just hand off the war and all of its problems to the next president.
Two things stand out in all of these shameful stories: the stunning arrogance and ignorance of the top decision-makers, Bush, Cheney Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, etc; but also the cowardice of other important leaders, people who could have chosen to not participate in the process of war-making by resigning their high level positions and becoming public critics. Why did Colin Powell not walk away? He knew what was likely to happen. Why didn't more military men and intelligence agents resign and say what they could publicly? Were they too worried about pensions and professional standing? Were they elevating loyalty to a single leader above loyalty to broader national principles? Given what has happened in Iraq, they should all be working against McCain now, who seems oblivious to the disaster and is pressing for further military action against Iran. But they're not, not most of them at least. They are just not noble-minded in a Confucian sense:
It's clear from this that Confucius deplored anyone enriching a ruler who didn't practice Humane government. And he deplored even more those who waged war for such a ruler. In wars for land, the dead crowd the countryside. In wars for cities, the dead fill the cities. This is called helping the land feed on human flesh. Death is not punishment enough for such acts.
Hence, those who excel at war should receive the highest punishment. Next come those who form the august lords into alliances. And finally those who open up wild land hoping to increase profits. Mencius, 7(4A).14
I'm not advocating capital punishment for Bush and Cheney, nor do I think Mencius is, either. The point is to remind us just how horrible their actions have been. Impeachment for both would suffice, and application of relevant war crimes statues.
Indeed, watching the long, sad documentary (part two is tonight) and remembering Cheney's central role in the whole mess, these words came to mind:
There's only one way to know if people are good or evil: look at the choices they make. Mencius, 11(6A).14
Cheney has shown us, by his choices, that he is not a good man.
I can see what is going to happen: Bush will "stay the course" in Iraq, hand off the mess to president Obama, and then, when Obama has to make the necessary choices for withdrawal (which could usher in a period of increased violence) the right-wing will blame Obama for "losing Iraq." but the reality is that Iraq is already lost. Violence will continue whether we are there or not. It may be refracted by our presence, but the underlying political conditions that produce it are not receding. It is a no-win situation, so we must find a way forward to the least bad loss.
But one thing must be remembered in all of this: Bush lost the war.
Comments