Bush's Historical Blueprint

From Bob Woodward we learn that Bush is simultaneously not concerned about history's judgement while he fancies himself the creator of a blueprint for waging war.

Asked by Woodward how history would judge the war, Bush replied: "History. We don't know. We'll all be dead."

The president told Woodward he was cooperating on his book because he wanted the story of how the United States had gone to war in Iraq to be told. He said it would be a blueprint of historical significance that "will enable other leaders, if they feel like they have to go to war, to spare innocent citizens and their lives."

"But the news of this, in my judgment," Bush added, "the big news out of this isn't how George W. makes decisions. To me the big news is America has changed how you fight and win war, and therefore makes it easier to keep the peace in the long run. And that's the historical significance of this book, as far as I'm concerned."

Not surprisingly, I think Bush is wrong. I think the news IS how George W. makes decisions. It is important, I think, that George W. is unfamiliar with a little document called The Constitution of the United States of America.

In the summer of 2002, Bush approved $700 million worth of "preparatory tasks" in the Persian Gulf region such as upgrading airfields, bases, fuel pipelines and munitions storage depots to accommodate a massive U.S. troop deployment. The Bush administration funded the projects from a supplemental appropriations bill for the war in Afghanistan and old appropriations, keeping Congress unaware of the reprogramming of money and the eventual cost.

After the U.N. Security Council passed a resolution authorizing the resumption of weapons inspections in Iraq, Bush became increasingly impatient with their effectiveness and the role of chief weapons inspector Hans Blix. Shortly after New Year's 2003, he told Rice at his Texas ranch: "We're not winning. Time is not on our side here. Probably going to have to, we're going to have to go to war."

So let me see if I've got this straight. The blueprint that Bush advocates for future leaders is this: Without informing either the people of a democratic nation or their elected representatives, secretly spend large sums of money and make preparations for a war that has not been approved by the constitutionally designated body authorized to make such decisions. Later, once the Congress has provided authorization to use military force after the failure of diplomacy, let impatience drive the decision to commit the nation to war.

Lying. Deceit. Impatience. It may be a good thing that Bush will be dead when history's verdict is rendered.