Boehner has never struck me as one of the brightest stars in the GOP firmanent. However, he has managed to position himself as Moronity Leader in the House, despite, or perhaps because of, his association with Abramoff and Delay. Boehner's machinations, such as his side-stepping the Foley scandal and placing all of the blame on Hastert, show him to be devious, but not necessarily smart. But he is a strong Bush apologist and Bush has used him to further his agenda in Congress. Boehner is in now leading a congressional delegation to the Middle East and is currently in Pakistan. Prior to that he was in Iraq when he made his infamous "small price" comment in an interview woth Wolf Blitzer.
I'm sure that Boehner must have had a number of meetings with Bush and other administration officials prior to his current trip to the Middle East. He is acknowledged to be the White House's point man in the House, as discussed in this article from Cleveland's The Plain Dealer:
He is also the Bush administration's point man in Congress, meeting every week with the president to plot strategy. He has emotionally advocated Bush's Iraq policies, and was key to thwarting Democratic efforts to set a withdrawal date for troops. In May, he choked up on the House floor during a speech defending the Iraq war, and in a private July meeting, he labeled Senate Republicans who questioned the war "wimps."
At a time when Bush's strategy in Iraq is coming under increasing attack and when the White House is looking for support in Congress to continue the war, it seems very likely that the administration would discuss that strategy with Boehner and how they might push their agenda in Congress and to the American public. Boehner's trip to Iraq would also be part of the plan to boost Boehner's credibility when he talks about conditions in Iraq. Boehner's comments are probably an accurate reflection of what Bush thinks about the sacrifices in Iraq, although the White House might have wished it had come out differently.
For years, Bush has been arguing for fighting terrorists in Iraq so we don't have to fight them here. At the same time he has been proclaiming that we have not had another attack on American soil since 9/11. Bush feels that our action in Iraq is the primary reason that we have not been attacked and for that reason alone, the administration would believe that the cost in lives and treasure is a small price to pay. They probably shared this philosophy with Boehner. There are other reasons, spelled O-I-L, why we are in Iraq, but I think that Bush really thinks he is keeping the terrorists at bay by our presence in Iraq, and in a way he may be right, but not for the reasons he thinks.
Another terrorist attack on American soil would be especially devastating to this administration. Bush has based his reputation on the belief that his policies have kept America safe. It would repudiate his entire reason for being in Iraq, while showing how woefully unprepared we really are six years after 9/11. Bush also points to Libya's disarmament as proof that attacking Iraq has changed the game by forcing state sponsors of terrorism to change their stance. It doesn't matter that negotiations with Libya started far earlier than the attack on Iraq and that invading Iraq had nothing to do with Libya's decision. But Bush ignores whatever facts do not fit into his world view and instead uses "gut instinct" as the basis for all of his decisions.
Bin Laden has stated many times that he wants to ruin our economy. The World Trade Towers were a symbol of our financial empire to al Qaeda. Destroying them was a symbolic gesture of destroying the American economy and the attack did cause a great deal of financial distress for the airlines at least and did negatively impact our economy. In August of 2004 a high level terror alert was raised after photographs of financial institutions in New York were discovered in a terrorist capture. The photos were old, taken well before our invasion of Iraq, indicating that this plot had probably been abandoned. But the targeting of financial institutions showed bin Laden's persistent desire to see our financial ruin. Bin Laden has always talked about how he forced the Russians to abandon Afghanistan after drawing them into a costly war. Now he seeing the same thing happen with the United States in Iraq.
Some analysts disagree with Bush's assessment and feel that we have not been attacked since 9/11 because our policies in Iraq are fulfilling bin Laden's goals without the necessity of any action on his part other than to call attention to our presence in Iraq. Our actions in Iraq are radicalizing young Muslims who now see bin Laden's jihad against the West as a noble cause. The 2-3 billion we are spending per week and the debt we are accumulating combined with our lack of focus on our own economic woes is leading us towards recession in line with bin Laden's wishes. Iraq also provides a haven for and a far better training ground for terrorists than any state sponsor could have ever provided.
Bin Laden has just released another video critical of Bush and Americans in general for re-electing him and failing to stop the war. Bin Laden suggests that we abandon capitalism and embrace Islam or follow the path to destruction. His video released in 2004 had a similar message, recounting the crimes of the West against the Middle East and explaining why he attacked us. Bin Laden warned us then that our security was not in Bush's hands or Kerry's. CIA analysts, according to Ron Suskind in The One Percent Doctrine, in performing an analysis of that video agreed that the video gave Bush an advantage in the election. Knowing that bin Laden acts very carefully and does not issue any messages without a purpose, many suspected that bin Laden wanted Bush to win the election. Bin Laden talks of a peaceful world under Islam, but he actually prefers killing infidels. In many respects, he is Bush's alter ego. Both are set upon the path to destruction and neither is willing to admit to the error of their ways.
And so the deadly dance continues with bin Laden baiting Bush and Bush unable to resist. Bush's ego will not let him admit to mistakes, while viewing the sacrifice of others as a "small price" to pay for advancing his cause, just as bin Laden sees the sacrifice of the mujaheedin as a small sacrifice to pay in the cause of spreading his brand of Islam. It has always been thus with tyrants and oppressors. The sacrifice of others is merely a means to their ends.