How Long Do We Blame Bush For the War?

My short answer: not forever, but I'm not letting him off the hook just yet.

The White House blasted former Veep Dick Cheney for claiming that President Barack Obama is trying to pretend we are not at war.

"He seems to think if he gives terrorists the rights of Americans, lets them lawyer up and reads them their Miranda rights, we won't be at war," Cheney said in a statement. "He seems to think if we bring the mastermind of 9/11 to New York, give him a lawyer and trial in civilian court, we won't be at war. He seems to think if he closes Guantanamo and releases the hard-core al Qaeda-trained terrorists still there, we won't be at war."

Obama knows we're at war. He's made public statements about the war. But of course that's not the issue, and Cheney knows it. He's playing to the right wing as usual, hoping to distract people from the fact---unavoidable---that he and his President started this war, and had no idea how to win it. Sadly, this bait-and-switch actually works. Witness the following comment on CNN.com's article about Cheney's comments:

to Gary in Portsmouth who said: "I just hope the rest of America get's it. I am glad we don't have a President with a fast food mentality. I love intelligent well thought out decisions. There safe and reduces the possibilities of undue, unnecessary harm."

Well, I doubt the families of the 114 American's who died in Afghanistan during the 93 days it took for Obama to announce his "well thought out decision" see it the way you and your liberal friends do - and then add the additional American's who will also die over there in the extra months it will take to add the troops requested because of that delay.

For those of us with family members fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq, Obama's "dithering" was extremely stressful.

Actually, 117 Americans died serving in Afghanistan while Obama considered McChrystal's request for more troops. And 634 U.S. troops died in Afghanistan during Bush and Cheney's tenure, along with 4228 in Iraq, for a total of 4862, while Bush and Cheney did---what? Did they ever deign to show us what their strategy actually was? Explain what milestones they were trying to reach? Describe what their oft-discussed "winning" would actually look like?

No. Because "winning" in Iraq and Afghanistan was never the Bush administration's aim. Their aim was to democratize the Mideast so they could start making good old-fashioned American money there. These aims go back to the rarely-discussed Project For a New American Century (google it---but prepare to be disturbed), at least.

As long as the authors of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars are walking this earth, they'll be playing the same old Neocon bait-and-switch...at the same time casually trivializing the lives of the very American services members they so often claim to champion.