Why am I not surprised at this?
Four months after announcing troop reductions in Iraq, President Bush is now sending signals that the cuts may not continue past this summer, a development likely to infuriate Democrats and renew concerns among military planners about strains on the force.
Mr. Bush has made no decisions on troop reductions to follow those he announced last September. But White House officials said Mr. Bush had been taking the opportunity, as he did in Monday’s State of the Union address, to prepare Americans for the possibility that, when he leaves office a year from now, the military presence in Iraq will be just as large as it was a year ago, or even slightly larger.
The officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said Mr. Bush wanted to tamp down criticism that a large, sustained presence in Iraq would harm the overall health of the military — a view held not only by Democrats, but by some members of his own Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Gee, d’ya think he was just kidding when he talked about troop reductions last September?
The family systems dynamics of this presidency speak to a dysfunction deeper than any Carter-era “malaise.” It’s as if the American people are the “little woman” who needs to be told enough baloney to keep her quiet so Georgie can get out for some fun with his good ole boys. Even when the good ole boys (the Pentagon) have clearly had enough, Georgie wants, so Georgie gets.
“Golly, honey, It’s just a little surge. It’ll be just like old times again soon enough. Even better. Trust me. OK?”
And when the lie comes out as a lie, the “little woman” rages, scolds, storms off to bed, and within a few days everything goes back to “normal.”
As we know, for this dynamic to work, one needs at least one enabler.