POSTWAR IRAQ….Matt Yglesias is concerned about whether George Bush is really committed to success in postwar Iraq. He’s not the only one: Republican senators appear to be worried too.
Bush’s conduct toward Iraq continues to be something that I just shake my head over. He lost my support before the war because I eventually became convinced that he wasn’t serious about postwar reconstruction. After the war, it became clear that my suspicions were well grounded and that virtually no serious postwar planning had been done. And now, his continuing refusal to admit that we need more troops in Iraq or to make any effort to rally the country behind the time and money it will take to do the job right is simply inexplicable.
Obviously he realizes that failure in Iraq would be an enormous blow both to the U.S. and to the war on terrorism. And he ? or his advisors, at any rate ? must realize that we can’t do it with the troops and funding we have in place now. There’s just too much contrary evidence for him not to realize that.
So what is he doing? His reluctance to involve the UN or the rest of the world is at least understandable given his worldview, but his reluctance to do anything just boggles the imagination. Even accepting the world on his terms, his actions make no sense.
At this point, I simply have no idea what he’s up to. He’s in the process of losing the war he was so eager to fight six months ago, a loss that could have a devastating impact on American security, and he doesn’t show any signs of caring. He’s seemingly more interested in protecting his tax cuts than he is in making sure that our victory in Iraq remains a victory.
What can he possibly be thinking? Snarky comments aside, does anyone have any ideas?