A Disassociated Press Editorial, November 27, 2005


By Eric Mader


The Bush Administration, whose Iraq war is a conflagration cloaked in a quagmire shrouded in a lie, has a great new idea.  The idea, like many of the ideas they've had, is quite a simple one: we start bringing the troops home, but still keep up our aggressive war against the insurgents.  And how do we accomplish this?  We do it simply by using more air strikes. 


The new plan, in short, involves a kind of strategic replacement scheme.  Where once we had American soldiers on the ground risking their lives, we can now just use guided missiles.


It seems so obvious.  It's a wonder nobody thought of it before.


Presumably this new idea about using more air strikes came directly from the Bush cabinet or some Bush-affiliated military think tank.


Now the Bush cabinet--as far as my studies have revealed--is basically made up of Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld.  Or at least these two long ago stopped listening to the State Department or anyone else that might have some point to make.


And as for Bush-affiliated think tanks, well, as far as I can tell, that would also basically be Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld.  Or at least there's nothing that any intellectual or expert could offer that these two men wouldn't be able to figure out on their own.  I mean you don't get to be Halliburton CEO just by being a pigheaded dope, now do you?


But I'm being facetious, I know.  What I'm doing is simplifying the really very complex process of making U.S. foreign policy by saying that it all comes directly from Cheney and Rumsfeld.  And I'm doing it just to make the Bush people look foolish.  As if they needed me for that.


Of course it's true that Bush policy is not made only by two men.  There is much more to it.  As Bush has implied on many occasions and perhaps even stated literally on one or two occasions, it was the Lord God who told him to invade Iraq.  From this we should infer that the Lord God is also part of the Bush cabinet along with Cheney and Rumsfeld.


I would like to listen in on one of their meetings some time.  Does the Lord always attend, or only for the important meetings?  Does He actually make His Face shown in the Oval Office, or does He join the meeting by speakerphone?  But these are Mysteries that only future White House historians will be able to answer.


Anyhow, the new idea is to win Iraqi hearts and minds and defeat the insurgency by slowly bringing troops home and replacing them with air strikes.  There will certainly be many advantages to this method, and even a non-military man like me can think of a few right off the bat.


For one, the way things are now, when our troops go out to fight insurgents they generally locate the insurgents and battle them directly.  The insurgents shoot back and so identify themselves as insurgents, and then our troops, with superior weapons and training, gun them down.  With the new air strike plan, there won't be any of this dangerous business of Americans taking enemy fire.  No, the missiles will simply come in from a distance and wipe out the insurgents en masse.


Also, the way things are now, Marines often have to sweep through neighborhoods looking for insurgents or insurgent weapons caches.  With the new plan, instead of having Marines kick in doors in the middle of the night and ransack Iraqi homes, causing the women to wail and the children to cry and cower in the corner, Iraqi civilians will simply have guided missiles blow the fronts off their homes and cause the roofs to collapse, and won't have to deal with wailing wives and cowering children because these will all be dead.


So the superior technology of guided missiles will win the hearts of more Iraqis because it will allow for less in the way of wailing women and crying children in the middle of the night.


But also, we all know that insurgents mix in with the population, they occupy rooms in buildings occupied by other people or in buildings adjacent to those occupied by other people--by Iraqi families and so on.   So it really is much better for us not to disturb these people with American soldiers in uniform causing all kinds of trouble in the neighborhood and making them feel like they are an occupied country.  Instead, with the new plan we can just call in a missile strike on the neighborhood and the insurgents and the buildings and families will all be gone in seconds.  The Iraqis, seeing this is how it is, will admire us for our resolve, and will immediately begin to build a new democracy on top of the rubble, modeling their democracy on what we as Americans expect a democracy to be--in other words, no laws based directly on the Koran.


We can expect Iraqis to do this because as Americans, and particularly as Bush supporters, we ourselves know how important it is to keep church and state separate.  I mean, just as we ourselves would not make legislation based on the Bible, so we can expect them not to make legislation based on the Koran.


Or at least that's what I guess Bush supporters think.  Bush supporters are patriotic Americans, aren't they?  They certainly know what's in our Constitution regarding the enactment of laws based on religion, no?  So if they insist that Iraq not start calling itself an "Islamic republic," they do so according to the same principle that make them stand up against anyone who would try to claim too vigorously that America is a "Christian Republic"--right?  This, at least, is only reasonable if we're talking about a modern democratic nation.


But I'm drifting somewhat.  To get back to the air strike plan, which is the real topic of this essay, the advantages, as I've said, are evident: fewer wailing women and crying children to disturb people; swift destruction of Iraqi homes and buildings, allowing for a smooth basis of rubble on which to build a New Democracy.  I am sure it is thoughts like these--that and the upcoming U.S. congressional elections--that have directed the minds of the Bush cabinet as regards this new idea of replacing soldiers with air strikes.


But of course I speak here only of the human minds in the Bush cabinet, because, as we know, the mind of the Lord God is inscrutable to men. 


Unless you happen to be the president, that is, in which case the Lord helps you make foreign policy.




The Disassociated Press--News for Nation Builders




DP Exclusive!!!




This recently leaked White House transcript of an October cabinet meeting between Bush, Cheney, and the Lord God will change our understanding of the lead up to war.




Seymour Hersch's New Yorker article "Up in the Air,"

regarding the new Bush plan:








This page is at