The Question Bush Cannot Answer

I'm tempted to post Tennyson's "The Charge of the Light Brigade" this Friday. To my mind, the poem is not about the soldiers in the poem who are simply doing their job the best they can; the poem staggers the mind because we become aware of those who make decisions without understanding the decision they have made. Bush prides himself on being 'the decider' but he can't be bothered to ask the simple question: "What happens next?"

There was never any question that we could overcome Saddam Hussein's military force. But the question that Bush refused to deal with along with Cheney and Rumsfeld was: "Who do we need to do in the afermath?" The war in Iraq was voluntary and the timing was of our own choosing; Bush and his top advisers knew war was coming for roughly a year. But there was no real planning for the aftermath. The State Dept. tried to be involved in that planning but Rumsfeld would have no part of it. For that alone, Rumsfeld should have been fired long ago.

The same issue is now being raised with Iran. We have the power to badly cripple Iran's nuclear program. But that's not the issue. The issue once more is, "But what happens next?"

Think Progress has a short list of some of the people opposed to Bush's possible war in Iran:

ThinkProgress has created a graphic database featuring quotes from prominent analysts and officials who believe there are no good military options in Iran. The document will be updated as more experts weigh in — if we’re missing someone, let us know HERE or in the comments section.

Brzezinski, for one, should be on the list.