Let's hear it for the lemmings!

Please, somebody--anybody--tell me what I'm missing here!

After today's portentious announcement that more troops were going to be sent to Iraq, we are treated to quotes from the troops themselves, ranging from cautious agreement, depending upon how the troops are used, to weary contempt, stating that the folks at home just don't know what is actually going on over there.

Okay. Enlighten us. I admit: I am totally nonplussed. I'm stymied. I don't have a clue; and I don't like to admit that out loud.

I cannot figure out for the life of me just what in hell the President of the United States is doing. "Surge?" Who writes his material? Is he a military person? Does he have divine insight to which the rest of us are not privy? He mulled this over for a week and then exited his sanctuary, not unlike the oracle at Delphi, and rendered his pronouncement to the enthralled multitude?

He fires the Generals (after all, only military commanders, not politicians,) who don't like the idea, and appoints some who--at least initially--won't object. Isn't he supposed to consult with military leaders so that he can make an informed decision--about policy, not about whose head is to roll?

If the mission is accomplished, then why are the pesky details so difficult to manage? What was our goal (or should be our goal) if the mission was subsequently misplaced?

Recent history shows us that leaders make decisions based upon one or more of the following considerations: 1) obvious motives, moral or otherwise, but clearly comprehensible, 2) devious motives, not obvious to most people but insiders 3) serious alterations in a leader's psyche, characteristic or unknown.

We can rule out "obvious motives." This leaves numbers two and three.

"Devious motives" seems a sure bet. Only question is--how many and what are they? Interestingly, "serious alterations" is unclear, as Bush may very well be operating under the direct instruction of Higher Powers, which, at least in part, seems inescapable.

There's another possibility. Call it "2a." It is a collective aberation of leaders, together with a nefarious motive. In the current situation I can conceive of a plan to hand a tidy profit to the military corporations, coupled with a desire to position us close to Russia's southwestern border, as well as proximate to Iran, coupled with a petulant contempt for the Moslem world, possibly even extending to the awareness that chaos looms and that those very leaders are ready to bail out and leave the field to whomever. Could they actually do that?

You betcha.