From top to bottom, the U. S. military loathed his predecessor, Bill Clinton. They seem genuinely to adore Bush. I saw this on a Thanksgiving trip I took with him to Fort Campbell, home of the 101st Airborne. When he arrived to speak to a sea of Screaming Eagles, they literally were screaming. The president, wearing a bomber jacket for the occasion, beamed like a man in his element. It was like a rock concert, star and audience as one.
msnbc.com
Another big inning for Bush
By Howard Fineman
SPECIAL TO MSNBC.COM
WASHINGTON, April 9 — Like the rest of the world, I’ve just watched (live) a historic moment: a statue of Saddam Hussein crashing to earth, pulled from its pedestal by relieved GIs and jubilant Iraqis. Grave challenges lie ahead in the war on terrorism, to be sure. But since I cover American politics, I’ll focus on what I know, which is this: It’s George W. Bush, in a sense, who toppled that statue. The guy doesn’t play small ball; he goes for the Big Inning — and doesn’t waver. Bush is what I’d call a disciplined radical, pursuing sweeping aims with an almost blinkered determination. At least for now — since Sept. 11, 2001 — it’s working. A month ago I wrote in this space that never had so much blood and treasure been risked on the hope that people would smile. Well, watch MSNBC. There they are.
THE LAST THREE weeks of the Big Inning Presidency have been a roller-coaster of emotion in the cable TV green rooms of the Commentariat. The war went from “cakewalk” to “quagmire” and back again in the eyes of retired generals and other experts second guessing every move in every way. On Day 13, one very senior retired general privately had me convinced that Tommy Franks was a fool and that disastrously thin American forces would be butchered wholesale in Baghdad. Non-military types, from Hollywood to the Hill, tauntingly wondered where the Happy Iraqis were — the locals Bush believed would celebrate in the streets.
Throughout this dark time, I nagged my White House sources, trying to glean what little I could about the president — his mood, his orders, state of mind. A few outsiders not in position to know (and who loathe his war policy for various reasons) spread word that he had grown snappish and weary. I think they were wrong. My sense is that he burrowed deeper into himself (and ran extra miles on the treadmill), steadily monitoring the war but never losing faith (or sleep) about his momentous decision to take out Saddam with a U.S-U.K coalition.
Why such confidence? I’ve written a lot about it. As a family, Bushes think they are born to lead. This particular Bush relishes decision-making. He picks people he trusts and trusts them to make the right call. He tends not to sweat the details, thereby avoiding the ups and downs of any one hour or day. His religious faith gives him a disciplined belief in the rightness of his cause. All the spin about his dedication to diplomacy notwithstanding, this is a guy who is more than comfortable at war. He likes the role of commander in chief. He’s more comfortable in it than any other presidential mode. The fall of the Twin Towers, it turns out, found a man in the White House who likes the idea of leading troops in battle.
But which battle? Going into Iraq was not an Easy Call, though no one, not even the French, argued that Saddam Hussein was popular. The first level of doubt had to do with the prospects of military success. You remember: The force was too light. The supply lines were too long. The lack of a Northern Front was a “show stopper.” The CIA, in a leaked memo, supposedly warned in advance that the Fedayeen Saddam would be a deadly force.
A SUCCESS BY MOST MEASURES
Militarily, even the president’s harshest critics would have to call the war a success. But, for his part, Bush never took public issue with any of the nay-saying. He let it all play out. He stayed largely out of sight except for a series of quick forays to American military installations. The aim was twofold: to inspire the young troops and (though the White House didn’t say so) to inspire the president. It is, after all, a mutual admiration society. From top to bottom, the U. S. military loathed his predecessor, Bill Clinton. They seem genuinely to adore Bush. I saw this on a Thanksgiving trip I took with him to Fort Campbell, home of the 101st Airborne. When he arrived to speak to a sea of Screaming Eagles, they literally were screaming. The president, wearing a bomber jacket for the occasion, beamed like a man in his element. It was like a rock concert, star and audience as one.
There are risks in a Big Inning Presidency. One is arrogance. If you think you’re right and the world says “no” and you win more initial successes than expected, you can get cocky. Iraq isn’t yet pacified, let alone civilized. Sadly, more soldiers and civilians will die there. Proving critics wrong on one issue doesn’t mean they should be ignored on everything.
ENOUGH PATIENCE?
Go-it-almost-alone military solutions don’t work everywhere. There has been progress in Afghanistan, but how much remains open to question. The story of Iraq is only beginning. The question is whether the president will have the patience and devotion to detail for the next chapter.
And if you score big in one inning you can pursue the strategy too far — and strike out. Europeans with whom I’ve spoken in recent days are worried that Baghdad is just the first stop on an even more ambitious Bush Plan to bring “regime change” to Teheran and Damascus, the latter being the last stronghold (other than, perhaps, Tikrit), of the Baathist Party. The Europeans may be right to be concerned. “If I were a mullah in Iran or Bashir Assad in Syria I’d be thinking ‘I’m next,’” a leading American expert on the region told me. “But the Iranians are much smarter and craftier than Saddam. The next step would be tougher.”
The biggest risk is that the Big Inning strategy — a combination of sweeping aims (the democratization of the Arab world) and military might — won’t achieved the desired result, which is to rid the world of terrorism. “I wish I could say for sure that getting rid of Saddam will make us safer,” said the expert I just spoke with. “It could. It should. I can only say, I ‘hope.’”
But give Bush credit: He said that Iraqis would be smiling. Right now they are. The urgent question, of course, is: for how long?
Howard Fineman is Newsweek’s chief political correspondent and an NBC News analyst. |
