President Bush may have found a way to keep the Democratic Congress from calling the shots in Iraq. And the answer may have come from a Republican President who served 100 years ago.
Back in 1907, against the wishes of Congress, President Theodore Roosevelt launched the Great White Fleet as a global demonstration of US military might. Congress had refused to allocate funding for the expedition, but Roosevelt ordered the start anyway. When the ships were far from their home ports, Roosevelt informed Congress that the fleet would soon run out of fuel unless the funds were forthcoming. Rather than lose the fleet Congress authorized the money.
Legal analyst Jonathan Turley, speaking on MSNBC’s Countdown Wednesday night, said that President Bush could not thwart Congress’ intent regarding the Iraqi war in the same manner he has shredded previous legislation. A signing statement, like those previously deployed by Bush, cannot be used in a manner other than what Congress has authorized, Turley said. An attempt to do that would be nothing less than theft, the legal expert said.
The deployment of 20,000 or so additional troops into Iraq may be an effort by Bush to resurrect the Roosevelt tactic. And the fact that US warships and surface-to-air missals are being sent to the war-torn country suggest that something besides counterinsurgency efforts are under way. Patriot missals and aircraft carriers are ridiculously unsuited for the task of finding insurgents and improvised explosive devices.
But the hawkish Commander and Chief may have tipped his hand during Wednesday night’s address detailing "a new direction for Iraq."
The ships and the missals would be suitable in the event that Bush chose to invade Iran or Syria, two long standing members of Bush’s "Axis of Evil."
If such an invasion occurred the Democrat-controlled Congress would have little choice but to ante up the 6.8 billon that the President is requesting for this latest military misadventure, just as the isolationist Congress in 1907 had to acquiesce to Roosevelt.
Bush’s plan raises more question marks than it eliminates. In case you haven’t thought of them try these on for size:
- Just because the President is setting a new direction doesn’t mean it is the right direction. Consider a compass. True north is located at one precise spot. That means a potential for 359 wrong directions.
- The manpower demands for this new direction (especially if an invasion of Syria or Iran is contemplated) will exceed the current military’s amount of personnel. Boosting those levels by 65,000 soldiers and 27,000 marines won’t become a reality for at least 2 years.
- And how will this administration recruit those new soldiers? Already soldiers serving in Iraq and Afghanistan have had to endure multiple tours of duty in the dangerous Iraqi cities and countryside. This compulsory reenlistment makes a mockery of the United States’ "volunteer military."
- So pretend that you’re a recent high school graduate. The military recruiter comes to you and says that you can enlist to serve multiple tours of duty in a dry, dusty climate where you will be inadequately prepared to protect yourself from the multitudes of non-uniformed insurgents who are attempting to kill you. Oh, and by the way, the government is cutting back on some benefits that previous generations of soldiers took for granted.
- The typical recruiter will probably have more luck signing up members of a Russian roulette club.
- Then there is the issue of what happens if we do invade Iran. That nation is considerably larger than Iraq. Look how well the Iraqi invasion has worked out.
I have said this before and I will say it again. When the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. Loathed to try any tactic besides a military one, the Bush administration has left itself with only the hammer of military might to conduct its foreign policy.
Another expression that’s had a lot of use recently is this: When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging!
President Bush only wants a bigger shovel.