SOTU-PTSS

I had to give some thought as to what I wanted to say about Bush in regards the SOTU, over and above the usual off the cuff remarks, because winging it on such a serious subject doesn’t lend itself to objective analysis.

But really, there isn’t that much to say, because there wasn’t anything that different. A lot of it is more of the same things he said before that sounded pretty good, but what ever became of his last promise to, for example, invest in alternative energy sources? The only thing different here is just in the implied extra amount to invest. Again, it sounded good, but will anything really come of, for example, his remarkable goal to cut gasoline consumption by twenty per cent over a twenty year period?

And does anybody believe for a minute that Bush believes in global warming? Hell, I’m not sure I really believe in it, I know he doesn’t, or if he does he either doesn't really care that much, doesn't really think it has anything to do with the use of fossil fuels (despite the fact that, yes, he said this), or doesn't really think it's possible to do anything about it.

This is a president that seems to think he can say what people want to hear and bask in the applause, and after the show is over and the curtain has closed on the latest performance, they will all go home to their lives and forget all about it, if only for a while, or until another issue commands their attention.

To Bush, Presidential politics and even government is one big Mardi Gras.

By the same token, I want to give Bush credit for one thing. He has increased by a significant degree the amount of money spent on research to cure AIDS, and especially the amount spent to combat the scourge of that hideous disease in Africa. Therefore, when he speaks of the need to further increase funding for such programs as this, it is easy to take him seriously, because he has a track record here to speak of.

Unfortunately, some things that Bush can be taken seriously on are not necessarily anything to feel cheerful about. When he says that we must come up with a comprehensive strategy to secure the border and that this must include temporary worker permits, I visibly cringed, because I fear he is all too serious. Both parties are wrong on this issue, and the majority of the American people know it. Most of us want the border secured first. Then, and only then, can we possibly willingly consider temporary workers visas. But Bush’s business supporters want that cheap labor, and the Democrats want those Hispanic votes, so the rest of us can go to hell, and if we don’t like it they think they can play the racist card on us and we’ll shut up about it.

No more. Not this time. Not on this issue. This is too serious and the long term consequences too potentially devastating and more than likely irreversible.

Now we come to the war, and Bush's determination to increase the level of troops in Iraq. Despite his obvious setbacks, he sounds confident, and he makes a good case for what he portrays as a necessary change in policy. But if enacted, will it amount to any more than a surface change? Congress is skeptical. Not only the Democrats, but a good many of Bush's party. Even a lot of Bush's voting base are anquished over this issue, as in a good many others where they feel that Bush has let them down.


Here is the major problem with the Iraqi War that few people if any ever really touch on. We’ve heard over and over about the expense in terms of our national treasure and blood, about the mountain of debt incurred and the selling of debt to foreign countries, especially to China, due to Bush and the Republicans reluctance to raise taxes to fund the war. We’ve heard about the damage to our international reputation. We’ve heard about the incompetence and corruption that has been on display for all the world to see. We’ve been told over and over about how this war is a vital front in the war on terror, and how if we don’t succeed in Iraq it will result in grave consequences for the region, for the world, and for America.

All of these concerns are valid ones, but here is the one you almost never hear mentioned, if you ever hear it.

What if they throw a war and nobody comes? I don’t mean that facetiously, I am asking in all seriousness, how likely is it that the American people are going to support another war effort, regardless of how necessary it is deemed to be. What will it take to get the American people on board? Will it take an attack on our so-called “vital interests” overseas? How do you define those interests? A military base? An embassy?

Surely such an assault would warrant a major military response that the American people would be solidly behind, right?

Well, don’t bet on it. Remember Ronald Reagan's response to the bombing by Hezbollah of the marine barracks in Lebannon? This was a decade after the end of the Vietnam War, which the American people were still in a state of anquish over. Because of the reluctance of the American people to become involved in another major (or even minor) military operation, Reagan reacted by withdrawing from Lebannon, even though he would have been well within his rights and responsibilities as Commander-In-Chief to have engaged Hezbollah militarily.

Clinton as well would have been more than justified in going all out to smash Al-Queda after the first WTC bombing, the bombing of our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania,and the bombing of the USS Cole, etc.

Because of the incompetence, corruption, expense, and loss of lives resulting in our ill-advised invasion of Iraq, we might be seeing a return to the days of those kinds of responses to terrorist attacks and even to outright military threats. The American people are angry, they are afraid, and they are saddened. In fact, we are collectively in the beginning stages of the same kind of Post-Traumatic Stress Syndrome that affected us after Vietnam.

It might take another 9/11 to shake us out of it. And I’m not really sure even that would do it if this goes on much longer. That is why it is incumbent on, not just Bush, but the leaders of both political parties, to work together in earnest to work out a comprehensive solution to this problem, assuming it is not already too late.