Mainstream Baptist points us to John Dean; "If Past is Prologues, George Bush is Becoming an Increasingly Dangerous President" who predicts an October Surprise. (The only surprise would be no surprise.) He also predicts that, given the past risks GWB has taken, this will be a stupid, expensive, and dangerous ploy to maintain power in the face of his inability to maintain his credibility and earn the trust of the electorate.
Crooks and Liars points us to Col. Sam Gardiner who revealed to CNN what that "surprise" is; a war in Iran, that may well already be underway, reminiscent of Nixon's illegal, clandestine and ultimately tragically futile Cambodian incursion.
Sam Gardiner: Bush's Secret War on Iran
Gardiner thinks that decision has already been made and surmises it could be catastrophic for the Middle East.
"Colonel Sam Gardiner is the retired colonel who taught at the National War College, the Air War College and the Naval Warfare College and who found more than 50 instances of demonstrably false stories planted in the press in the run up to the war, back in 2003. He was just on CNN:...read on"
The secretary[sic] point is, the Iranians have been saying American military troops are in there, have been saying it for almost a year. I was in Berlin two weeks ago, sat next to the ambassador, the Iranian ambassador to the IAEA. And I said, "Hey, I hear you're accusing Americans of being in there operating with some of the units that have shot up revolution guard units."
He said, quite frankly, "Yes, we know they are. We've captured some of the units, and they've confessed to working with the Americans."
The evidence is mounting that that decision has already been made, and I don't know that the other part of that has been completed, that there has been any congressional approval to do this.
My view of the plan is, there is this period in which some kinds of ground troops will operate inside Iran, and then what we're talking about is the second part, which is this air strike.
Raw Story has more...
And TPM says in A Resolute Fantasy World:
What is so notable (but unsurprising) here is the reaction of Bush followers to the extremely unusual and extraordinary event of seeing retired Generals criticize not just specific strategic decisions, but the overall mismanagement of the war, and in some cases, the wisdom of the war itself. As I pointed out yesterday, the fact that a bunch of generals hold a certain view does not, by itself, mean that the view is correct, including on military matters. But contrary to the deceitful attempt of Bush followers to pretend that this is some sort of commonplace event ("Generals are always griping about something"), it is remarkable, and significant on at least some level, for this many Generals to make these types of overarching and very public criticisms while a war is still ongoing.
In response, Bush followers have publicly speculated about every defamatory motive which could be fueling these Generals -- they have embraced every possible explanation except for the possibility that these Generals might actually hold these views sincerely. This behavior really illustrates, more than anything else, exactly how we were led into a war that has been a disaster on every front, and how we have stubbornly remained on the same course well past the time it became objectively apparent that this course was leading to nothing but abject failure.
It would be no great difficulty to compile more and more on this general topic from a wide spectrum of people who share little but an instinctive distaste for almond - flavored Kool-Aide.
There are a number of things I've learned in my life, and the one that is most important is this: I do not have to justify disbelief today if I caught you lying to me yesterday.
The other principle comes from an old Russian proverb, which I will probably mangle; "If one man says you are drunk, perhaps it's an insult. If a hundred people call you a drunk, perhaps you should lie down."
I can only suggest that honest skeptics consider the depths of doubt and the arguments against trust, and compare that honestly with the substance of arguments in favor of "staying the course." That alone would be enough, in my mind. But we also have the objective results.
If I'm to be wrong - I think erring on the side of prudence is the best course. That very simple concept is also one of the key concepts of Conservativism, and something it's prudent to assume that a conservative president would do.
But then, that is possibly the second most fundamental lie. The single biggest lie he's told is also the least believable - that he is a "Christian."
tag: george w. bush, october surprise, John Dean, dangerous president, sam gardiner, secret war, iran, iraq, lies, torture, ethics, miserable failure