On Guantanamo

National Journal asked for contributors to respond to the question "What Do To About Guantanamo?" There are currently 8 responses, all interesting in their own way, some more for what it says about the commenter than what it says about the conundrum of Guantanamo. Col. W. Patrick Lang (Ret.) of Sic Semper Tyrannis posted the following response:

Guantanamo has become a kind of national Rohrschach test for the American people.

It is a place seen within the mind's eye as a projection of what is inside us. I have been impressed since just after 9/11 with the depth of the illusion of personal security within which most Americans lived before the attacks. A friend called then from across the country to say that "now we all live in your world," referring I suppose to the life I had lead in the security services. The caller was a well traveled international businessman. The "blue funk" level was incredible for months. People acted as though each and every one of them stood on the ramparts on watch against the Saracen hordes. I remember repeatedly being stared at with hostility on the DC Metrorail system by men who could not take their eyes off the modest beard I then had. Supposedly grown up people would say things like "Say Muzlim, not Muslim!" Why? They imagined that to pronounce words correctly made one a kind of collaborator.

Now, we have the media encouraged phenomenon of the masses' inability to deal with the idea of prisoners charged, tried and imprisoned on our soil. This is fear of the boogy-man come back once again. This is behavior for children who need a night light. I heard a member of Congress from Kansas say on the floor of the US Senate that prisoners could not be sent to Leavenworth because the "purity" of the post and Army school at Ft. Leavenworth would be ruined by their presence. No matter that the federal prison that adjoins Fort Leavenworth is full of some of the worst people who ever lived.

And then there is the issue of the actual guilt or innocence of some of those now held without charge by the United States. When people here are asked if they think that all those held in our prison in Cuba are guilty, they generally fall silent, unable to respond. Of those who do, many of them clearly do not care if the imprisoned are guilty of anything. They might be... They are Muzlims... Keep them there and then my children will be safe...

Boumedienne, the Algerian former prisoner now living in France is a good person to remember. He, clearly, had done nothing wrong, but was imprisoned by us without charge for SEVEN YEARS. Neverheless, most Americans do not care...

It is going to take a long time for us to live this down. We should get on with it.

We should get on with it. This is what ties Guantanamo to Abu Ghraib to black sites and extraordinary rendition - the inability of the people in power and the faux-innocents in the public to come to terms with the fact that atrocities were performed by Americans under our flag as an explicit policy of our government.

We cannot pretend it didn't happen. We cannot continue to squall that we're just protecting ourselves from the current Big Bad of the zeitgeist. We cannot pretend that we're doing good by covering up the evidence of evil. We cannot pat ourselves on the back for being enlightened enough to elect a Black president while we obsess about the "Muzlim" other.

Guantanamo, and all the other festering pockets of national shame connected to it, will not go away on its own. It cannot be quietly swept away, which is what the current administration would probably prefer to happen precisely because it is a reflection of something that this nation is, not even some dark side or ignorant underbelly, something not-US. It is inherent in our language, which is to say in our way of life.

Wittgenstein's observation, "A picture held us captive. And we could not get outside it, for it lay in language and language seemed to repeat it inexorably," gets to the heart of the language game that is "Guantanamo." Using that (or Abu Ghraib, or extraordinary rendition, or war crimes) as a starting point, and you will be drawn into the hall of mirrors populated by those who both react to the images and create the new reflective surfaces that contribute to the sense of inexorability. There is the argument about security, there is the advice about not being hasty, there is the concern over precedent, there is the outrage over violations, each participant playing his or her role in the language game.

I do not mean that this is "just words" or that people are merely "playing" at being scared or cautious or concerned or outraged. Part of the language game, what makes it tenacious and gives it strength, it that it is real, the warp of the social fabric. Am I not now this very instant engaging in this game? If it was not real for me, I would not do this.

The picture, and especially the pictures, has its rules of enagagement, a known and familiar mode of objection, rejoinder, riposte, counter argument, and so forth, a mode of life fervently defended by the various participants in the language game that is "Guantanamo." This is what confounds Pat Lang's common sense advice to "get on with it" - the nation is invested in this mode of life, the opponents of this picture as much as the advocates and defenders.

The only way to cease being captive to this picture is to invent, if you will, a new language game in which this artifact can both be made into us (something ineluctably American) yet shifted in such a way that we no longer look into the reflection of ourselves that brought us to this pass in the first place. Lang's observation, "They imagined that to pronounce words correctly made one a kind of collaborator," points at the socio-psychological construction of the game, how we understand that words make us complicit in this mode of life rather than that one.

Perhaps we will simply tire of the game and abandon it, like something with a few missing pieces offered for "$1 or best offer" at a garage sale. It would be the normal way a society disposes of an unpalatable picture. Again, it's not merely that "they" want to cover it up and "we" want to live in the truth and the light. It is that to "get on with it" may be a language game this nation is not capable of playing, from any position on the political spectrum.

The disappointment over Obama's performance on this picture (among others) stems in part from the expectation that he would be a game changer, crafting a new language game yet enabling us to recognize ourselves even as we are made different than we were. I posit that the deep well of left wing resentment against Bill Clinton stems from his failure to perform a similar transformation in how we imagine ourselves, while the resentment from the right shows how close he came to making the rules of the game change.

We remain captives of Guantanamo.

Anglachel

Pan's Labyrinth

I watched Pan's Labyrinth last night. Anything that mixes fantasy and politics is of interest to me. It was much more violent than I had thought it would be, but it made sense within the context of the film.

The movie's main theme was obedience to authority and the violence that will result when that condition is the primary virtue of the society. Ofelia is always put in the position of breaking her promise of obedience (an equivocal promise in regards to the Captain, a meaningful promise in regards to the faun) and both realms treat her with violence for her transgressions. The acts of her mother and of Mercedes, the housekeeper, all fall within the human realm and offer a more straightforwardly political perspective on the dangers of obedience.

It is a very timely movie.

Anglachel

Pots and Kettles

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Russia's attacks against the former Soviet republic of Georgia have "substantially damaged Russia's standing in the world," President Bush told reporters Monday after returning from his trip to Asia.

Bush also warned Russia against trying to depose Georgia's government, saying evidence suggests Russia may be preparing to do so.

Bush said Russia's invasion of Georgia and the threat to Georgia's democratically elected government "is unacceptable in the 21st century" and has "substantially damaged Russia's standing in the world."

"These actions jeopardize Russians' relations ... with the United States and Europe," Bush said.

Bush to Russia: Reverse 'unacceptable' course in Georgia

Of course, these protestations would have a little more oopmf if Bush hadn't done the same thing to Iraq with even less cause. Just a thought...

Anglachel

Diplomacy vs. Imperialism

Kevin Drum is going to catch hell for his post about Carrots and Sticks with regards to Bush's war, but he is fundamentally right. It's a little complicated, so read carefully.

He quoted James Fallows from The Atlantic saying that the NIE report, which showed that Iran's nuclear weapons program basically stopped in 2003 invalidates Hillary Clinton's argument in the recent NPR Democratic debate that good foreign policy takes carrots and sticks, which is why she voted for Kyl-Lieberman stating that the Senate considered the Iranian National Guard a terrorist organization. [Anglachel aside - I agree with that, the ING *is* a terrorist organization.] Fallows argues that since Iran abandoned the program in 2003, Hillary is wrong to be rattling the saber now.

Kevin then reminded us:

Iran's about-face on its nuclear program may have had nothing to do with Kyl-Lieberman, but surely 2003 rings another bell in the carrots-and-sticks department? There may have been multiple reasons why Iran shut down its bomb program, but I think you'd have to do some pretty serious special pleading to argue that our invasion of Iraq wasn't one of them. And if that's the case, it's pretty good evidence that sticks have a place in foreign policy, just as Hillary says.

This isn't an argument that the Iraq war was a good idea. It's an argument that once Bush made the decision to go to war, it was foolish not to take advantage of one of the resulting upsides. Iran was pretty clearly spooked after we crushed Saddam with such stunning ease, and was pretty clearly ready to do a deal with us. But the Bush administration was so blinded by its own world historical importance, and so dominated by triumphant neocon ideologues, that it refused to see the deal that was in front of its own face.

Carrots and Sticks

Um, well, kinda. Hussein didn't allow the inspectors back in until after the AUMF (AUMF joint resolution on October 10, UN Resolution 1441 on November 8, weapons inspectors back in Iraq November 27, 2002). Iran had a double incentive to discontinue their program - Hussein's bluff was called and the US was sitting right on their border with an army itching for a fight. In addition, Khatami was in power and he was looking for a way to normalize relations and further undermine the mullahs. If a normal administration had been in charge at that time, it could have been a win-win-win situation - the Taliban ousted, Hussein's bluff called and him humiliated, and Iran willing to come to the table to talk seriously about ending their weapons program.

It was not until after Bush had declared he didn't care what the inspectors said that we heard from Richard Clarke, who let the public know that the tue goal of the Bush administration all along had been Iraq. And, by then, there was a war juggernaut in place and rolling.

So, before dismissing anyone who supported AUMF, it is crucial to remember the difference that Bush brought to the table - a willingness to lie and misrepresent to get the most slender thread on which to charge forward into war.

I think Kevin goes too far in saying that the actual invasion of Iraq was in any way counter-balanced by the the cessation of the Iranian weapons program. The actual invasion was so completely beyond the realm of justifiable behavior that any positive side effects are cancelled out by the butchery inflicted on Iraq. Also, we have to look at how much Iran benefitted from the invasion in ways that do not brign advantage to anyone else.

But what the NIE demonstrates without a doubt is that serious diplomacy and strategic use of threats do work.

Anglachel

It's not about them, it's about us

ABSOLUTELY NOT WORK SAFE.

The Rude Pundit cuts through the crap and tells us what the unwillingness of this nation to reject torture really means:

If you haven't yet read the New York Times article on just how deranged the Bush administration is about covering its ass over torture, do it and then come back here. The Rude Pundit will wait...

Yeah, yeah, it's long. Get the fuck back there and finish it. Jesus, short attention-spanned motherfuckers.

You done? Good. Let's get going here:

In essence, what that article by Scott Shane, David Johnston, and James Risen said is that conversations went on in the White House and the Justice Department in the United States that went something like this: Bush might say, "Hey, all that fucked-up shit we've been doing to prisoners, how much of it can we still do?"

To which some random bloodthirsty Yoo or Addington would say, "Oh, fuck, we can do whatever the fuck we want."

And some plaintive Comey or Goldsmith would say, "Umm, we kinda got treaties and shit, maybe a few laws that might say we should back off."

And some Cheney or, to a lesser extent, Gonzales would say, "Yeah, right, fuck you, Comey or Goldsmith. Yoo or Addington, kick out the enhanced interrogation jams and tell those CIA pussies who wanna know if shit's legal that we got their backs."
....

And some Cheney or, to an even lesser extent, Gonzales would go, "Call the CIA. Tell 'em naked, drownin', sleepless brown people is a-okay."

And Bush would say, "I'm glad we decided we're not war criminals. Now lemme go tell Umerka we done made 'em more securer."

And then in some brightly-lit metal cell at Bagram Air Base or Gitmo, ice cold water was thrown on a naked man from Iraq, with the water tosser feeling assured that what he was doing was good and right for God and country.

A few years back, a social worker friend gave the Rude Pundit a simple moral question that seems so obvious once it's said, but it hangs over the Rude Pundit constantly. He was looking for absolution for some betrayal of trust he wanted to commit. The friend said, "You have to ask yourself, 'At the end of the day, what kind of person do I want to be?'" The Rude Pundit decided he wasn't that kind of person. No, he ain't a saint, but he ain't outright cruel.

The Rude Pundit has not been one of the loud drum beaters for impeachment out here in Left Blogsylvania because of the practicality of achieving it. But he has to say that the longer these depraved motherfuckers get to go unpunished, the more obvious it is that the Congress and, indeed, the citizens of this fallen nation have decided what kind of people they are.

I don't think there is any way to force Bush and Cheney from power before the end of the term, so the focus has to be on two things:

1. Elect a president who has a freaking clue about foreign affairs and international law. That means Edwards, Kucinch and Gravel are out. Period. Not even VP material.
   
2. Elect as large a majority in Congress, particularly the Senate, as we can get to keep the Rethugs sidelined. The prospects are looking better by the day.

If we want any hope of help on extricating ourselves from Bush's war without having our military destroyed in the process, we have to show that we're serious about upholding the Geneva Conventions and destroying Cheney's imperial framework. Otherwise, we'll be left to our own increasingly isolated and powerless devices. Failure to do so, and we will get what we deserve.

Rejection of the Cheney doctrine is the first step to the refoundation of the republic.

What Bush has Done in Six Years

Courtesy of Eric Alterman on Altercation:

"September 11, 2007: "How I Spent the Last Six Years," A brief list that might easily have been written by George W. Bush.

Regarding the attacks:

• Ignored persistent warnings of an imminent terrorist attack.
• Continued reading The Pet Goat ...
• Went up in Air Force One after having been informed it was a likely target.
• Spent the day in a panicky runaround, leaving it to others to reassure and inform a shocked nation.
• Later sold photographs of self on same day for purposes of Republican fundraising.
• Purposely misled rescue workers and volunteers about the safety of the air quality around Ground Zero.
• Declared, like Wyatt Earp, to capture Bin Laden "dead or alive."
• Told the rest of the world either they were "with us or against us," like Superman or something ...
• Ignored the fact that most of the hijackers were from Saudi Arabia; pretended they were from Iraq.

Regarding Afghanistan:

• Refused the help of NATO.
• Squandered numerous opportunities to capture bin Laden, allowing him to escape at Tora Bora and elsewhere.
• Rejected a more effective strategy of police work and targeting killings for mass bombings that helped alienate the population.
• Allowed the Taliban to regroup and rebuild.
• Allowed Al Qaeda to regroup and rebuild.
• Allowed heroin production and exports to increase.
• Allowed country to lapse back into chaos and threaten nuclear-armed Pakistan.

Regarding America:

• Insisted on the right to arrest American citizens and hold them indefinitely without right to habeas corpus, thereby invalidating virtually the entire Constitution.
• Kidnapped individuals for the purpose of "rendition" and certain torture, violating national laws at will.
• Opened secret torture prisons in former police states and lied about it.
• Wiretapped American citizens without warrant or lawful authority.
• Monitored the actions of loyal patriotic organizations without warrant or lawful authority.
• Attacked patriotism of everyone who questioned mindless path to self-destruction and attacked media sources who informed Americans of the actions of their government as having "blood on their hands."
• Set up ineffective, scandal-plagued Department of Homeland Security.
• Failed to protect obvious targets like nuclear and chemical power plants, ports, and the like.
• Hyped phony arrests of unserious nutcases as victories in war on terrorism.
• Refused New York City sufficient funds to protect itself from future attack.

Regarding Iraq:

• Lied about evidence of weapons of mass destruction.
• Lied about ties to Al Qaeda.
• Lied about Iraq's nuclear weapons program.
• Lied about infamous "Prague meeting."
• Lied about lying about all of it.
• Attempted to destroy reputation of loyal government servant, Joe Wilson.
• Lied about willingness to fire anyone involved with doing so.
• Failed to provide troops with sufficient body armor, vehicular protection.
• Insisted on repeated stop-loss orders.
• Cut medical spending for wounded veterans, resulting in substandard care for the wounded.
• Refused to allow photographs of honored war dead.
• Refused to attend funerals of killed soldiers.
• Refused to give a military recruitment speech.
• Told Americans to go shopping; offered further tax breaks to the wealthy, asking sacrifices of no one but soldiers and their families.
• Opened and maintained a prison at Guantánamo that violated U.S. and international law, branding the United States as a rogue nation.
• Misled Congress for purposes of securing war authority.
• Failed to send sufficient troops for post-invasion occupation.
• Failed to heed any postwar planning recommendations.
• Failed to ensure restoration of order, post-invasion.
• Failed to secure weapons sites, post invasion.
• Failed to reach out to population.
• Refused to count numbers of civilian dead and wounded.
• Failed to set up functional government, police force, etc.
• Arrested innocent individuals for the purpose of torture.
• Lied, once again, about ties to Al Qaeda.
• Failed to re-assess failed strategy, refused to replace incompetent subordinates.
• Failed to heed message of 2006 congressional elections to draw down war, escalated it instead.
• Failed to heed both Iraqi and U.S. population's repeatedly polled preference for withdrawal.
• Squandered sympathy of entire world, drastically sinking global opinion of the United States.
• Squandered hundreds of billions -- and, ultimately, trillions -- of dollars, destroying a functioning nation.
• Strengthened Iran.
• Strengthened Syria.
• Strengthened Libya.
• Weakened Israel.
• Weakened Jordan.
• Weakened Egypt.
• Killed more than 3,000 Americans.
• Wounded nearly 30,000 Americans.
• Killed and wounded untold hundreds of thousands of Iraqis.
• Provided recruitment material for terrorists the world over.
• Continually attacked the patriotism of those who suggested alternatives that might have avoided much of the above.
• Redoubled "determination," "strength," "grit," etc., every time any of the previous disasters was discovered.

And perhaps most amazingly of all: Got most of the mainstream media to go along with almost all of it ..."

So much destruction in only six years. Breathtaking in its own way. We are weaker, poorer, less safe, on the verge of several disasters (economic, environmental, military), and yet a morally and intellectually retarded rump group in this country has just enough power at the polls and in the media that we cannot impeach this bastard.

Riverbend and Her Family Are in Syria

Back in April, Riverbend, author of the Baghdad Burning blog, announced that she and her family were going to leave their home in Iraq because it was not possible for them to remain:

There are moments when the injustice of having to leave your country, simply because an imbecile got it into his head to invade it, is overwhelming. It is unfair that in order to survive and live normally, we have to leave our home and what remains of family and friends… And to what?

It's difficult to decide which is more frightening- car bombs and militias, or having to leave everything you know and love, to some unspecified place for a future where nothing is certain.

Since that post, I have checked her blog every few days, hoping to see a post that showed she and her family had not become part of the death statistics. This morining, I saw a post. It deserves to be read in its entirety:

Leaving Home...
Two months ago, the suitcases were packed. My lone, large suitcase sat in my bedroom for nearly six weeks, so full of clothes and personal items, that it took me, E. and our six year old neighbor to zip it closed.

Packing that suitcase was one of the more difficult things I’ve had to do. It was Mission Impossible: Your mission, R., should you choose to accept it is to go through the items you’ve accumulated over nearly three decades and decide which ones you cannot do without. The difficulty of your mission, R., is that you must contain these items in a space totaling 1 m by 0.7 m by 0.4 m. This, of course, includes the clothes you will be wearing for the next months, as well as any personal memorabilia- photos, diaries, stuffed animals, CDs and the like.

I packed and unpacked it four times. Each time I unpacked it, I swore I’d eliminate some of the items that were not absolutely necessary. Each time I packed it again, I would add more ‘stuff’ than the time before. E. finally came in a month and a half later and insisted we zip up the bag so I wouldn’t be tempted to update its contents constantly.

The decision that we would each take one suitcase was made by my father. He took one look at the box of assorted memories we were beginning to prepare and it was final: Four large identical suitcases were purchased- one for each member of the family and a fifth smaller one was dug out of a closet for the documentation we’d collectively need- graduation certificates, personal identification papers, etc.

We waited… and waited… and waited. It was decided we would leave mid to late June- examinations would be over and as we were planning to leave with my aunt and her two children- that was the time considered most convenient for all involved. The day we finally appointed as THE DAY, we woke up to an explosion not 2 km away and a curfew. The trip was postponed a week. The night before we were scheduled to travel, the driver who owned the GMC that would take us to the border excused himself from the trip- his brother had been killed in a shooting. Once again, it was postponed.

There was one point, during the final days of June, where I simply sat on my packed suitcase and cried. By early July, I was convinced we would never leave. I was sure the Iraqi border was as far away, for me, as the borders of Alaska. It had taken us well over two months to decide to leave by car instead of by plane. It had taken us yet another month to settle on Syria as opposed to Jordan. How long would it take us to reschedule leaving?

It happened almost overnight. My aunt called with the exciting news that one of her neighbors was going to leave for Syria in 48 hours because their son was being threatened and they wanted another family on the road with them in another car- like gazelles in the jungle, it’s safer to travel in groups. It was a flurry of activity for two days. We checked to make sure everything we could possibly need was prepared and packed. We arranged for a distant cousin of my moms who was to stay in our house with his family to come the night before we left (we can’t leave the house empty because someone might take it).

It was a tearful farewell as we left the house. One of my other aunts and an uncle came to say goodbye the morning of the trip. It was a solemn morning and I’d been preparing myself for the last two days not to cry. You won’t cry, I kept saying, because you’re coming back. You won’t cry because it’s just a little trip like the ones you used to take to Mosul or Basrah before the war. In spite of my assurances to myself of a safe and happy return, I spent several hours before leaving with a huge lump lodged firmly in my throat. My eyes burned and my nose ran in spite of me. I told myself it was an allergy.

We didn’t sleep the night before we had to leave because there seemed to be so many little things to do… It helped that there was no electricity at all- the area generator wasn’t working and ‘national electricity’ was hopeless. There just wasn’t time to sleep.

The last few hours in the house were a blur. It was time to go and I went from room to room saying goodbye to everything. I said goodbye to my desk- the one I’d used all through high school and college. I said goodbye to the curtains and the bed and the couch. I said goodbye to the armchair E. and I broke when we were younger. I said goodbye to the big table over which we’d gathered for meals and to do homework. I said goodbye to the ghosts of the framed pictures that once hung on the walls, because the pictures have long since been taken down and stored away- but I knew just what hung where. I said goodbye to the silly board games we inevitably fought over- the Arabic Monopoly with the missing cards and money that no one had the heart to throw away.

I knew then as I know now that these were all just items- people are so much more important. Still, a house is like a museum in that it tells a certain history. You look at a cup or stuffed toy and a chapter of memories opens up before your very eyes. It suddenly hit me that I wanted to leave so much less than I thought I did.

Six AM finally came. The GMC waited outside while we gathered the necessities- a thermos of hot tea, biscuits, juice, olives (olives?!) which my dad insisted we take with us in the car, etc. My aunt and uncle watched us sorrowfully. There’s no other word to describe it. It was the same look I got in my eyes when I watched other relatives and friends prepare to leave. It was a feeling of helplessness and hopelessness, tinged with anger. Why did the good people have to go?

I cried as we left- in spite of promises not to. The aunt cried… the uncle cried. My parents tried to be stoic but there were tears in their voices as they said their goodbyes. The worst part is saying goodbye and wondering if you’re ever going to see these people again. My uncle tightened the shawl I’d thrown over my hair and advised me firmly to ‘keep it on until you get to the border’. The aunt rushed out behind us as the car pulled out of the garage and dumped a bowl of water on the ground, which is a tradition- its to wish the travelers a safe return… eventually.

The trip was long and uneventful, other than two checkpoints being run by masked men. They asked to see identification, took a cursory glance at the passports and asked where we were going. The same was done for the car behind us. Those checkpoints are terrifying but I’ve learned that the best technique is to avoid eye-contact, answer questions politely and pray under your breath. My mother and I had been careful not to wear any apparent jewelry, just in case, and we were both in long skirts and head scarves.

The trip was long and uneventful, other than two checkpoints being run by masked men. They asked to see identification, took a cursory glance at the passports and asked where we were going. The same was done for the car behind us. Those checkpoints are terrifying but I’ve learned that the best technique is to avoid eye-contact, answer questions politely and pray under your breath. My mother and I had been careful not to wear any apparent jewelry, just in case, and we were both in long skirts and head scarves.

Syria is the only country, other than Jordan, that was allowing people in without a visa. The Jordanians are being horrible with refugees. Families risk being turned back at the Jordanian border, or denied entry at Amman Airport. It’s too high a risk for most families.

We waited for hours, in spite of the fact that the driver we were with had ‘connections’, which meant he’d been to Syria and back so many times, he knew all the right people to bribe for a safe passage through the borders. I sat nervously at the border. The tears had stopped about an hour after we’d left Baghdad. Just seeing the dirty streets, the ruins of buildings and houses, the smoke-filled horizon all helped me realize how fortunate I was to have a chance for something safer.

By the time we were out of Baghdad, my heart was no longer aching as it had been while we were still leaving it. The cars around us on the border were making me nervous. I hated being in the middle of so many possibly explosive vehicles. A part of me wanted to study the faces of the people around me, mostly families, and the other part of me, the one that’s been trained to stay out of trouble the last four years, told me to keep my eyes to myself- it was almost over.

It was finally our turn. I sat stiffly in the car and waited as money passed hands; our passports were looked over and finally stamped. We were ushered along and the driver smiled with satisfaction, “It’s been an easy trip, Alhamdulillah,” he said cheerfully.

As we crossed the border and saw the last of the Iraqi flags, the tears began again. The car was silent except for the prattling of the driver who was telling us stories of escapades he had while crossing the border. I sneaked a look at my mother sitting beside me and her tears were flowing as well. There was simply nothing to say as we left Iraq. I wanted to sob, but I didn’t want to seem like a baby. I didn’t want the driver to think I was ungrateful for the chance to leave what had become a hellish place over the last four and a half years.

The Syrian border was almost equally packed, but the environment was more relaxed. People were getting out of their cars and stretching. Some of them recognized each other and waved or shared woeful stories or comments through the windows of the cars. Most importantly, we were all equal. Sunnis and Shia, Arabs and Kurds… we were all equal in front of the Syrian border personnel.

We were all refugees- rich or poor. And refugees all look the same- there’s a unique expression you’ll find on their faces- relief, mixed with sorrow, tinged with apprehension. The faces almost all look the same.

The first minutes after passing the border were overwhelming. Overwhelming relief and overwhelming sadness… How is it that only a stretch of several kilometers and maybe twenty minutes, so firmly segregates life from death?

How is it that a border no one can see or touch stands between car bombs, militias, death squads and… peace, safety? It’s difficult to believe- even now. I sit here and write this and wonder why I can’t hear the explosions.

I wonder at how the windows don’t rattle as the planes pass overhead. I’m trying to rid myself of the expectation that armed people in black will break through the door and into our lives. I’m trying to let my eyes grow accustomed to streets free of road blocks, hummers and pictures of Muqtada and the rest…

How is it that all of this lies a short car ride away?

This is what George Bush did - throw the lives of millions of people into chaos (at best) and death (at worst) so that he could get his war on. What he and Cheney did was a war crime. It was also the most moronic "foreign policy" I know of, directly in opposition to the interests of every nation affected. He has casually, selfishly destroyed the lives and livelihood of millions. At his command, normalcy was annihilated.

This is what Bush's War has done. It is little solace to anyone that he is the Worst President Ever, and that his name will never be said save with a sneer. How can reparations be made for what this man has done to Iraq? I don't know. I simply don't know.

Anglachel