Bush Understands Iraq and Lebanon, Doesn't He?

Chicago1871 · Aug 23, 2006

What a Moronic Presidential Press Conference

Defeating terror by promoting freedom—it's "the fundamental challenge of the 21st century," [Bush] has said several times, especially when it comes to the Middle East. But here, from the transcript of the press conference, is how he sees the region's recent events:

"What's very interesting about the violence in Lebanon and the violence in Iraq and the violence in Gaza is this: These are all groups of terrorists who are trying to stop the advance of democracy."

What is he talking about? Hamas, which has been responsible for much of the violence in Gaza, won the Palestinian territory's parliamentary elections. Hezbollah, which started its recent war with Israel, holds a substantial minority of seats in Lebanon's parliament and would probably win many more seats if a new election were held tomorrow. Many of the militants waging sectarian battle in Iraq have representation in Baghdad's popularly elected parliament.

The key reality that Bush fails to grasp is that terrorism and democracy are not opposites. They can, and sometimes do, coexist. One is not a cure for the other.

Here, as a further example of this failing, is his summation of Iraq:

"I hear a lot about 'civil war'… [But] the Iraqis want a unified country. … Twelve million Iraqis voted. … It's an indication about the desire for people to live in a free society."

What he misses is that those 12 million Iraqis had sharply divided views of what a free society meant. Shiites voted for a unified country led by Shiites, Sunnis voted for a unified country led by Sunnis, and Kurds voted for their own separate country. Almost nobody voted for a free society in any Western sense of the term. (The secular parties did very poorly.)

The total number of voters, in such a context, means nothing. Look at American history. In the 1860 election, held right before our own Civil War, 81.2 percent of eligible citizens voted—the second-largest turnout ever.
Click to expand...

Personally, I think Fred Kaplan nails several points (the above only being a single example) regarding the policies as well as the approaches of the Bush White House when it comes not only to Iraq, but Lebanon, Hezbollah, and the war on terror as well.

I want to post the rest of the article, as it has several more points worth addressing, but hopefully people will come across them on their own.

MattR · Aug 23, 2006

I have often said that even if you agree with what the Bush Administration has been trying to do in the middle east, you have to disagree with how they've totally botched everything, and continued to deny that they've botched everything while continuing on the very same botched path.