![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
penpusher*sigh*
Ok. So here's what happened.
President Bush had a huge surplus when he took office on January 20, 2001. After 9/11/01, he claimed that Iraq had WMDs and his "sources" confirmed this. Iraq was the next terror center that was going to take a shot at the USA.
How that all came about is muddy to say the least, but one thing we do know: Bush had an army, he had the funding, and he had motivation to jump in, before the United Nations could do a proper search to determine if there actually was anything there. Why would they be so keen to force the issue before they were sure? Well, again, that's another issue which we can't prove, but it sure seemed like the agenda was to get into Iraq whether or not there was any reason to do so.
By bombing Baghdad and moving troops in to secure the area, what was accomplished? Government contractors could be sent in to start rebuilding. Government "liberators" could be brought in to start liberating. And Iraq would presumably be in the USA's debt for all of the good works we were doing, and would need to pay us back in the most obvious way possible: that of the vast oil fields that are there, and the rights to pump that crude into the vehicles of all those SUVs that were so popular in the early part of the 21st Century.
But, as is always the case in any western involvement in the Middle East, things didn't go according to plan. And despite all of the time, energy, money and lives that have been given in this cause, it's the USA that has paid dearly for the involvement in this country and it doesn't seem like there is any hope of repayment by Iraq for what we have done. In fact, Iraq is very happy letting the US continue to spend our cash there to support this cause, while it sits on a very hefty surplus of its own.
That brings us to President Obama and his plans to fix things. The budget that is out there now is a problem because it is, for the most part, continuing what GWB started. Our military budget is still huge and our investment in Iraq doesn't seem to be going away.
My only thought about this is that maybe Obama has found some way to coax Iraq into giving us the oil, or at least paying in some other way in exchange for our continuing support, and that this will help balance things a bit. I can't imagine that he wouldn't work on reconfiguring the budget in some more significant way without that being a part of the equation.
My problem is that this feels a little bit like a gambler in a cold streak to me. We have been losing and losing at this Iraq table with Bush placing the bets of human lives and American money over and over for the duration of his presidency. Now Obama steps in, sees how far in the hole we are, and is somehow hoping that his luck will change everything around? He's going to keep betting there?
I mean, it's possible that Obama will have more success when it comes to this situation, through his diplomatic style and his better understanding, but I'm worried that this could backfire in a big way and that we'll be even more swamped, and the support he is enjoying from the American Public will evaporate.
This is a huge job; it's going to take a lot of work, planning, focus and tough choices. So, we need to be clear. How is this budget going to bring us closer to where we need to be and how is all of this going to play out for our military, our country and everyone in it?
Ok. So here's what happened.
President Bush had a huge surplus when he took office on January 20, 2001. After 9/11/01, he claimed that Iraq had WMDs and his "sources" confirmed this. Iraq was the next terror center that was going to take a shot at the USA.
How that all came about is muddy to say the least, but one thing we do know: Bush had an army, he had the funding, and he had motivation to jump in, before the United Nations could do a proper search to determine if there actually was anything there. Why would they be so keen to force the issue before they were sure? Well, again, that's another issue which we can't prove, but it sure seemed like the agenda was to get into Iraq whether or not there was any reason to do so.
By bombing Baghdad and moving troops in to secure the area, what was accomplished? Government contractors could be sent in to start rebuilding. Government "liberators" could be brought in to start liberating. And Iraq would presumably be in the USA's debt for all of the good works we were doing, and would need to pay us back in the most obvious way possible: that of the vast oil fields that are there, and the rights to pump that crude into the vehicles of all those SUVs that were so popular in the early part of the 21st Century.
But, as is always the case in any western involvement in the Middle East, things didn't go according to plan. And despite all of the time, energy, money and lives that have been given in this cause, it's the USA that has paid dearly for the involvement in this country and it doesn't seem like there is any hope of repayment by Iraq for what we have done. In fact, Iraq is very happy letting the US continue to spend our cash there to support this cause, while it sits on a very hefty surplus of its own.
That brings us to President Obama and his plans to fix things. The budget that is out there now is a problem because it is, for the most part, continuing what GWB started. Our military budget is still huge and our investment in Iraq doesn't seem to be going away.
My only thought about this is that maybe Obama has found some way to coax Iraq into giving us the oil, or at least paying in some other way in exchange for our continuing support, and that this will help balance things a bit. I can't imagine that he wouldn't work on reconfiguring the budget in some more significant way without that being a part of the equation.
My problem is that this feels a little bit like a gambler in a cold streak to me. We have been losing and losing at this Iraq table with Bush placing the bets of human lives and American money over and over for the duration of his presidency. Now Obama steps in, sees how far in the hole we are, and is somehow hoping that his luck will change everything around? He's going to keep betting there?
I mean, it's possible that Obama will have more success when it comes to this situation, through his diplomatic style and his better understanding, but I'm worried that this could backfire in a big way and that we'll be even more swamped, and the support he is enjoying from the American Public will evaporate.
This is a huge job; it's going to take a lot of work, planning, focus and tough choices. So, we need to be clear. How is this budget going to bring us closer to where we need to be and how is all of this going to play out for our military, our country and everyone in it?