:: When was it, exactly, that Congress enacted a Declaration of War on Iraq, much less Iran & Syria? ::

"In this situation, I do, yeah," Bush said.
"I fully understand they could try to stop me from doing it [on 'The Surge'].
But I've made my decision. And we're going forward."

We have a President and Vice President who, because they invaded Iraq, based on extremely false premises (the basis for which is and was filled with lies made up by said President and Vice President), and due to convincing Congress to 'authorize force against Iraq' due to the supposed production of WMD, etc., believe they have received a 'Declaration of War' against Iraq.  Based on this, the President, et al, also believe they have the Executive Powers vested in a President (their interpretation) to do whatever the hell they want, including invading yet another country  or two, Iran and Syria. (More on Iran and Dicks wish for a Iranian strike against us and anyone else they imagine may target.)

No matter what the plausibility of the administration's claims taken one at a time, they multiply with each other in ways that make me inclined to reject the whole package.  The administration retains the right to interpret away enacted and signed laws that impair the president's power; not to disclose its interpretations of the law; to hold prisoners without either the protections of the criminal law or the protections of the Geneva Convention, in undisclosed locations and for undisclosed reasons, etc. etc., adding up to an purported legal ability to hold and imprison in secret, using secret interpretations of laws, on the basis of secret evidence gathered in secret ways, subject to punishments that may not be constrained or inquired into by any outside body, and without disclosure even to the prisoner of what either the legal or the factual basis for the detention is. The historical core of the rule of law and constitutionalism was to reject that vision of executive power, and I cannot believe that the founders somehow recreated it by vesting "the executive power" in the president.

How can a President and his Administration be so dense as to not pay attention now, after a disasterous election (for them), a recital by a committee they put together to evaluate the situation in Iraq, and a Congress against them in almost every way  - and not get the fucking point?  That, my fellow American, is just insane.  Absolutely Insane.  (Remove them from office due to power mongering insanity?  These guys act like missionaries with a cause.)  At least Congress is attempting to do something.  But, it isn't nearly enough:

Members of the House and Senate yesterday outlined plans for legislation that if approved would put Congress on record opposing President Bush sending more troops to Iraq and possibly limit funds to allow the entire 21,500 deployment to take place.

Their goal?  Winning Losing at any price a conflict based on a series of lies that should have had this entire administration impeached by the end of 2003.  The mentality, such as it is, is this:  If I am going to fail, well so is everyone else, and very fucking painfully, regardless of the loss of life and property, regardless to the damage to an ancient civilization.  When you are a danger to yourself and others, isn't that the interpretation on insanity?  Glenn Greenwald concurs:

The most dangerous George Bush is one who feels weak, powerless and under attack. Those perceptions are intolerable for him and I doubt there are many limits, if there are any, on what he would be willing to do in order to restore a feeling of power and to rid himself of the sensations of his own weakness and defeat.

Paul Krugman on the Decider's Insanity:  One wonders if George the II took his ques from Neil the S&L scandal king.

The administration has spent the last three years pretending that its splendid little war isn’t a big disaster. There have been the bromides (we’re making “good progress”); the promises (we have a “strategy for victory”); and, as always, attacks on the media for not reporting the good news from Iraq.

Who you gonna believe, the president or your lying eyes?

Now Mr. Bush has grudgingly sort- of admitted that things aren’t going well — but he says his “new way forward” will fix everything.

So it’s still the Texas strategy: the war’s architects are trying to keep their failed venture going as long as possible.

The Hail Mary aspect — the off chance that somehow, things really will turn out all right — is the least of their motivations. The real intent is a form of looting. I’m not talking mainly about old-fashioned war profiteering, although there is no question that profiteering is taking place on an epic scale. No, I’m saying that the hawks want to keep this war going because it’s to their personal and political benefit.

True, Mr. Bush can’t win another election with phony claims of success in Iraq, the way he did in 2004. But escalation buys him another year or two to claim that we’re making progress — and it gives him another chance to prove that he’s the Decider, beyond accountability.

And, then there is the business side of the equation that makes Krugman's argument even more feasable:  The War Profiteers , the Energy Fascists and ultimately bankrupting the country to make those folks rich beyond belief and control the world with all that power in a few hands.  From Tom Dispatch:

This January, Tomdispatch has been focusing on the Pentagon, the imperial path, and militarization. Last week, Nick Turse explored the way Pentagon strategists, having taken possession of our future, are writing their own dystopian science fiction scenarios about how to fight in Baghdad 2025 and other urban megaslums of the planet (as American troops may soon be doing in Baghdad's huge Shiite slum of Sadr City). Then, Frida Berrigan considered the massively profitable business operation the Pentagon was running off fictional futures and the all-too-real weapons systems that will result from it.

Today, Michael Klare, an expert on resource wars and the author of the indispensable Blood and Oil: The Dangers and Consequences of America's Growing Dependence on Imported Petroleum, offers a startling vision of the grim energy future that the Pentagon is actually helping to create -- as well as the ruthless scrambles for energy resources, the Great Power energy races, and the kind of Big Brotherhood that may lie in our near future. This is the first of a major two-part Tomdispatch series on the possible emergence of a new phenomenon in our world that Klare dubs "Energo-fascism."   [read it all]

And, let's look at ourselves (historically)in this matter.  Well, the Bush Regime supporters in any case, which I do not count myself amonst.  Regardless, we will and are tarred with the same brush and look like what we are as a country, despite people like me yelling from the rooftops, "What the fuck are you immoral assholes doing?"  As a reminder, those in power (from the individual human to those that head corporations andgovernments) take every advantage to do the wrong fucking thing ,for the wrong god-damned reasons.  Every time.  It is a rare instance that isn't the case; it is merely moderated at various levels of power.  Humans are not particularly 'good.'  Just look around.

How did this happen again? After all, we're Americans -- practical, common-sense people who know how to get things done. Or so we'd like to think. In truth, we are ethnocentric to a fault, certain of our own superiority, convinced that others see us as we do, blithely indifferent to cultural, religious, political and historical realities far different from our own. These failings -- more than any tactical or strategic errors -- help explain the U.S. catastrophes in Vietnam and Iraq.

Do you feel shame after reading that?  If not, there is no hope for you.  None.  Not even your 'god' can help you. 

Who pays the price for all of this hell?  Certainly the Iraqis and those still alive in Afghanistan after 20+ years of war.  Certainly us and not our administration:

Boxer wasn't attacking Rice for being single or childless. After all, she began by saying, "Who pays the price? I'm not going to pay a personal price. My kids are too old and my grandchild is too young."

Boxer, in other words, was repackaging the familiar chicken-hawk attack. At its most elemental, this is the charge that President Bush and his associates were too cowardly to fight in Vietnam and now, while their own children choose not to serve, are cavalier in risking the lives of others.

It's a line of attack that can lead to fair and troubling questions. As the professional military becomes more isolated from the nation's governing elite -- or the other way around -- do our leaders have sufficient appreciation of the horror and unpredictability of war? What role should empathy for the individual soldier play in the gut-wrenching decisions of a wartime leader?

This little video summarizes our situation perfectly in the Middle East and the Bush Administration:

"Duendes"

The title of this short in which something takes an extraordinarily long time, by writer and director Jesús Hernández, is "Duendes." The track is by Malaventura. The film, with a decidedly "Reservoir Dogs'" feel, is produced by Nysufilms, based out of Fuengirola, Spain. You can check out their Website here.

 

tag: Politics, Policy, Bush, War, Iraq, Terrorism, FUBAR, Bush Administration, violence, video, Xenophobia, Unclaimed Territory, news, reality, Iran, Syria, Middle East, Afghanistan, Iraq, troops, surge, duel, Cheney, Bush, war profiteers, armiment, war, conflict, executive power, Congress, Sinequanons Journal