The price is right

The interviewee with the real insight is interim Iraqi Prime Minister Ayad Allawi, who complained that the media are "talking only about the negative aspects" of Bush's war. You know, he's right. We ought to be celebrating all the happy things that come about as a result of invading a country, bombing it to bits, and causing the deaths of tens of thousands of men, women and children, not to mention 1,040 and counting of our troops, several aid workers and journalists, and more than 25 civilian hostages, some of whom ended up there because they couldn't find a job in Bush's America.

Instead, everybody has to make this big huge deal about Bush receiving a classified National Intelligence Estimate in July, which said that the prospects for Iraq were grim. Or was it bleak? OK, grim and bleak -- whatever.

But does anybody bother to mention the best case scenario offered in that same estimate? For your information, it says that if things suddenly take a turn for the better, pigs become airborne and the Red Sox win the 2005 World Series, we might actually see an Iraq whose "stability would remain tenuous in political, economic and security terms." That's right, pal, tenuous, and proud of it.

And what's all this criticism because the Bush administration never had a concrete plan for postwar Iraq? Hello, isn't the war still going on? And isn't it likely to go on for years at this rate? So what does Bush need with a postwar plan? It's like Lt. Gen. William Wallace said, "We're making this up as we go along." Works for me.

Speaking of military, I'm getting a wee bit tired of all these so-called experts weighing in. Like the Pentagon planners with their little whinefest in August 2003 about "Oh, you didn't give us enough time." Apparently, these guys aren't clear on the concept of "rush to war." I tell you, those Joint Chiefs of Staff should just stay out of it, find a hobby and leave the strategy to Dick and Donald. Oh yeah, and that Chalabi guy. Now he knew how to move things along.

But oh, no. Even Republican Sens. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and Richard Lugar, chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, have to put in their two cents about "incompetence in the administration." That's Lugar, who also said, "Our committee heard blindly optimistic people from the administration prior to the war and people outside the administration -- what I call the 'dancing in the street crowd' -- that we just simply will be greeted with open arms. The nonsense of all that is apparent. The lack of planning is apparent." Then Hagel goes all, "The fact is, we're in trouble. We're in deep trouble in Iraq." So? You don't have to get all stressed about it.

Besides, I think we need to remember what Bush's war is all about -- Bush's lifelong quest for a flourishing democracy. Look, all the poor guy is trying to do here, folks, is "build a community of peaceful, democratic nations." And if he has to sacrifice every last one of "the bravest among us" to do it, that's just the price he's willing for others to pay.

And as an added bonus, he's thrown in extra helpings of human dignity. Said so right there in his speech to the U.N. No wonder he ran out of time to present his thoughts on the torture at Abu Ghraib. Surely, reasonable people would agree that if you just punch out the phrase "human dignity" enough times, you've pretty much covered your ass. Give the guy a break.

That's right, I'm talking to you, U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan, you and your fixation on rule of law. Can you believe that guy? He strolls right out there, opens up the 59th session of the U.N. General Assembly like he ran the joint, and lets fly with this kind of reckless talk: "Every nation that proclaims the rule of law at home must respect it abroad. And every nation that insists on it abroad must enforce it at home." Nice, very nice, Kofi. Did your mother teach you to talk that way?

Wait, it gets worse. "Yes, the rule of law starts at home but in too many places it remains elusive. Hatred, corruption, violence and exclusion go without redress." He even contends that there are countries where "the powerful manipulate laws to retain power and accumulate wealth. " Oh, come now, who would do that?

• View blog reactions