patrickmurfin

Day by day Iraq sinks inevitably into full scale civil war while the armed might of American occupation forces stand by virtually helpless. This was far from an unforeseen outcome. Almost anyone who understood Iraq warned about it way before the “pre-emptive” war was launched. But, of course, the administration was wrapped in ideological fervor and studied ignorance. 

According to retired senior diplomat Peter Galbraith the President did not even seem to know that there are deep sectarian divisions in the Islamic world. Quoting from a post at the DailyKos: “January 2003 the President invited three members of the Iraqi opposition to join him to watch the Super Bowl. In the course of the conversation the Iraqis realized that the President was not aware there was a difference between Shiite and Sunni Muslims. He looked at them and said, ‘You mean…they’re not, you know, there, there’s this difference. What is it about?’” The very inarticulate bewilderment expressed by Bush is undoubtedly a testimony to the veracity of the quote. 

Meanwhile Lewis Lapham in the latest HARPER’S MAGAZINE (as poted to TRUTHOUT.COM)  examines the careful case for impeachment of the President laid out in a report prepared by Representative John Conyers, Jr.’s staff. The report details, almost hour by hour, how the Bush administration planned the attack on Iraq from its very first moments and how thin and desperate was the systematic campaign to establish a public rational for their pre-determined policy. Nothing really new here, to read it laid out in meticulous detail remains chilling. 

The inescapable conclusion is that the whole war is a disastrous failure. The Iraqi civil bloodbath is a direct result of our national fecklessness. And what ever “high minded” ideological objectives the administration is thought it was pursuing, the outcome is unmitigated disaster. As has been noted on many blogs, even the conservative rats are now abandoning the Iraq war shipwreck. Those rats include former neo-con luminary Francis Fukuyama (he of the laughable END OF HISTORY theory); William Buckley, Jr., the present-at-creation sage of the conservative movement and founder of THE NATIONAL REVIEW; and even Fox News blowhard Bill O’Reilly. 

Indeed now as we close in on the third anniversary of the start of the conflict, everybody wants to talk of war…which brings us, naturally, to poetry.

I wrote the following piece as the war was just getting underway because I felt that all sides—pro and anti—tended to disassociate their arguments from the reality of what war means. I still think so. This piece has circulated fairly widely and has not been uncontroversial—some folks at my own church felt it was far too graphic for inclusion in our public newsletter. Good. The controversy means the poem works as intended. 

This is part of my new collection-in-the-making (as yet without a publisher, hint, hint), BECOMING AMERICAN, NITS MAKE LICE, AND OTHER POEMS. 

SO YOU WANT TO TALK OF WAR

 

So you want to talk of war.

That's fine by me.

Just step over here and sit down.

We can chat.

I've been thinking a lot about it lately

     and so, I know, have you.

Here, have some tea.

We can talk, as they say in the papers,

     freely and frankly.

 

But first, let's decorate the table.

Hand me that bag in the corner, please.

Yes, I know it's heavy.

Be careful not to stain your clothes.

 

Ah, the bloody, severed head.

Place it just so upon the lazy susan.

There, we can see just what it is

     we are discussing.

 

Now, as you were saying...

 

Not a LiveJournal member?  Comment by e-mail to pmurfin@sbcglobal.net