Thanksgiving Photo Op?

Since Bush's visit to Iraq on Thanksgiving, although the Democrats who vie for his jof have pretty much left him alone, there has been some press coverage (particularly from overseas) and a lot of domestic discussion which criticizes his trip - some of it rather harsh. The leading criticisms seem to be:

1. His trip wasn't very "brave" because of the secret manner in which he whisked into (and quickly whisked out of) the country. (Variant: It wasn't really a visit to Iraq, because he didn't actually see anything but the interior of a military base.)


2. Bush has the time to jet in and out of Iraq, but can't find the time to go to the funeral or memorial service of even one soldier who has been killed in Iraq.


3. He grabbed a turkey centerpiece for a photo op, although the troops were served from steam trays.


4. It was yet another extraordinarily expensive media stunt, to provide footage for an election commercial.

One pundit suggests that, when confronted with this type of situation, Bush's critics should take a step back and ask themselves, "How would I react had Clinton done this?" Hm. Perhaps not the best test. Had Clinton secretly jetted to Iraq for a quick "rally the troops" moment, I have no doubt that he would have been skewered by right-wing commentators, and I personally would have likely viewed it as a media stunt.... (But then, perhaps that reality check works best with people who loved Clinton.) Okay... this much - I would not have accused Clinton of orchestrating a media stunt had he "hammed it up" with the Turkey centerpiece, so I will grant Bush (whose reputation for "hamming it up" in similar circumstances is substantial) that one on the basis of the "Clinton" test.

But even accepting the criticisms, there's cause to believe that some good can come from Bush's Thanksgiving junket. First, he again put the prestige of his office behind the U.S. efforts in Iraq, and behind obtaining a positive outcome for the people of Iraq. For those of us who believe that finding a positive resolution of this situation is necessary to stabilizing the region and not endangering future generations, that's worth something. Even Bush's ardent cynics, while sometimes posing it as a character fault - refusal to acknowledge that he has made a mistake, or to change a publicly declared course of action, for fear of being weak or less than perfect - recognize that he does tend to stick to the positions he declares. His declarations make it harder for him to orchestrate a "cut and run", even if - perhaps particularly if - the war starts to hurt him in his upcoming election campaign.

Also, the U.S. military can sustain its presence in Iraq indefinitely, even with the current casualty rate. That means that one of the leading factors in the continued success of the mission. Higher troop morale should correlate to lower U.S. casualties, and I would hope also to lower Iraqi civilian casualties. Miserable troops are more likley to make mistakes, or to otherwise act inappropriately. If Bush's trip helped boost the morale of U.S. forces in the region, that's a good result.

Comments