Violence down—all dead

Sooner or later, all the glib talk about the success of the Iraq ‘surge’ and the drop in violent attacks is going to collapse in the face of reality. Yesterday’s barrage of mortar rounds aimed at the Green Zone gives us a taste of how flimsy that set of fantasies always was.

I loved the official spokesman’s comment that the attacks caused ‘no deaths or major injuries’ in the hyper-protected area, meaning that an unspecified number of ‘minor’ injuries did occur. Those State Department and DoD employees must be filing their combat pay claims at this very moment.

It is all so pathetically reminiscent of the 1980s when the criminals in the Reagan administration argued that since death squad murders and kidnappings were going down, things were really perking up in El Salvador. Of course, there was no one left to kill or torture, but the ever-loyal U.S. news media didn’t linger on that salient point.

Similarly, the American occupying forces in Iraq, who as the conquering power were and are responsible for securing the country and protecting its citizens, could not stop the ferocious outbreaks of sectarian violence that ethnically cleansed virtually all Baghdad neighborhoods. Once that was over, violent incidents naturally dropped off. This is the peace of the cemetery.

I anticipate a Tet Offensive Moment in which all the illusions collapse, and the hold-out supporters of this historic disaster come to their remaining senses. If there’s a God, it will happen while John McCain is running for president.

Meanwhile, isn’t Dick Cheney wonderful? I love the Republicans—they’re so bracingly clear about who they are. People have turned against the war, an interviewer told him. ‘So?’ replied the inimitable V.P. as in, I should give a shit? Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, hides her support for the war party beneath layers of sympathetic b.s. I don’t know which one is more dangerous.