Bush is Smart

Many have noted that this Spring's "Surge" in Iraq will most likely lead only to a surge in deaths. It seems very unlikely that it could succeed, whatever that might mean. It seems like President Bush is just doubling up on a bad bet. It seems that he has ignored all of the best advice and is just being stupid and reckless.

But if one examines the options, one sees that perhaps Bush is being much more clever than anyone has imagined.

First, there is the unlikely prospect of "success". Suppose that General Petraeus manages to create a "window" of security in Baghdad that (even more unlikely) is used by the Iraqi politicians to forge political unity that will lead to at least a truce in the civil war. We pull out and Bush claims victory. That's the least likely scenario, but Bush wins.

Bush is really brilliant because he can't be wrong: obvious failure will always be someone else's fault. Suppose the Democratic Congress finds enough spine (also an unlikely scenario) to withhold funding and force a withdrawal as the violence persists and increases in Iraq. Bush claims the Democrats caused the failure. Bush wins.

Suppose, Congress keeps funding the war, there is no security window, and violence in Iraq persists and/or increases. Bush still wins.

Because obviously it is Iran that is supporting the continuing civil war in Iraq. We need to attack Iran. Bush doubles his double bet. Congress fails to stop him. Bush wins. Or, Congress stops him. Then Congress is to blame for not addressing the root cause of continuing violence and loss of US troops. Bush wins.

The hardcore 20% in the US for Bush will support him until he robs a bank, to paraphrase a Gary Trudeau cartoon from the Nixon era. He can hold on until the next election. And if the Democratic party wins, they have to clean up his mess and be blamed for all of the consequences. Bush wins.

There is only one scenario in which he might lose: the military as a whole turns against him. Bush and the Republicans are perceived among their core, which includes the military families, as the great defender of the US military, against the "Pelosi Democrats", who would strip the military down to being school crossing guards if they could. That's the story the right-wingnuts have sold on the radio.

Suppose it begins to dawn on the military that Bush has actually sold them down the river? By shorting them on armor? By denying them benefits at home? By overstretching their resources so that the army no longer functions? By unfairly extending their tours? By putting them in an impossible situation? The last being known as a "meatgrinder"

Suppose the military starts to revolt? Let's keep checking AWOL and desertion figures. They rose by eight percent in Fiscal Year 2005 and then rose by 27 percent in Fiscal Year 2006. (New York Times, 3/23/07) If such a desertion rate in a professional army begins to approach the 5% rate of desertion from the draft army in the Vietnam war, that will be a signal that the Army as a whole has become dangerously demoralized. Even Fox News will be forced to report this to some degree.

There are military families against the war organizing. There is the petition of redress circulated within the military. There is the group Veterans Against the Iraq War.

What if active duty officers in Iraq begin to pull back on their own accord, even when funded by Congress, because they can no longer endanger their men for no good reason? What if General Patraeus were to bunker down and essentially abandon the security surge? What if the troops begin to disobey, in a sort of "sick-out", their orders? What if the Joint Chiefs were to reject explictly any plans to invade Iran?

But even then Bush wins: the military betrayed him. They didn't have his long-term vision and the courage to stay the course.

And we would all lose. The loss of civilian autority over the military is an even greater danger to the republic than Bush's narcissistic incompetence, though the latter is the cause. We're left depending upon the honor of our military to save us even though we've put them in a terrible dilemma.