See you in September
The WaPo makes it official. The White House has won their battle. No "sensible person" should even discuss changing the president's Iraq policy until September.
Yes, certain significant Republican Congressional members have said they will "reevaluate" in September, but ask yourself this: Will the evidence be any more clear in September than it is today?
Do you really expect Petraeus' September report to clearly admit failure, or will it more likely echo the current convoluted reporting, that despite significant setbacks, there are "promising signs," and given more time....?
In the meantime, every single political element in Iraq is moving further and further away, (The Mahdi's agitating, the Sunnis are talking about withdrawing completely from the government, the Saudis seem to have given up on the US, the Turks want to invade Kurdistan....)
But, hey, we can wait until September. It would be irresponsible not to give this plan a chance to work. Right?
(Later: (AP) "The Pentagon has notified more than 35,000 Army soldiers to be prepared to deploy to Iraq beginning this fall, a move that would allow commanders to maintain the ongoing buildup of troops through the end of the year if needed.")
Yes, certain significant Republican Congressional members have said they will "reevaluate" in September, but ask yourself this: Will the evidence be any more clear in September than it is today?
Do you really expect Petraeus' September report to clearly admit failure, or will it more likely echo the current convoluted reporting, that despite significant setbacks, there are "promising signs," and given more time....?
In the meantime, every single political element in Iraq is moving further and further away, (The Mahdi's agitating, the Sunnis are talking about withdrawing completely from the government, the Saudis seem to have given up on the US, the Turks want to invade Kurdistan....)
But, hey, we can wait until September. It would be irresponsible not to give this plan a chance to work. Right?
(Later: (AP) "The Pentagon has notified more than 35,000 Army soldiers to be prepared to deploy to Iraq beginning this fall, a move that would allow commanders to maintain the ongoing buildup of troops through the end of the year if needed.")
posted by mikevotes at
8:20 AM
8 Comments:
I'm predicting 'containment' will be the next big catch word.
By
Anonymous, at 10:51 AM
That's not a bad guess at all. The theory of containing the damage is the next logical step, but I haven't yet seen that word used anywhere.
Separate from policy, which combined with a regional political effort is the best likely policy, linguistically, that's a very interesting transition.
It would have to come definitionally with some admission of failure, but it's about the softest admission of failure possible. (etched with echoes of the successful Soviet containment.)
Thanks. You've given me something to think about.
By
mikevotes, at 11:24 AM
Failure is not an option so call it something else. Or maybe I just think about all this stuff too much.
By
Anonymous, at 11:32 AM
Again, I would judge your guess a likely course, even if the Dems took over everything.
They want Bush to be a failure, but I don't think they benefit by calling the war a failure.
By
mikevotes, at 1:14 PM
What is completely missed by the MSM is that the Bush's death spiral strategy has been in place for 4 years. It is embarrassing that these so called journalists are so easily lead by the nose -- so easily co-opted -- into believing that this "strategy" is something new.
We can wait until Sept 2020 -- until 50,000 soldiers and innumerable civilians are piled in a heaping monument to Bush -- and the war will not bring us any closer to peace than we are today. In fact, if history is any prognosticator, we will be further from peace and the region will be more unstable.
By
-epm, at 9:01 PM
Well, it's actually a slightly altered tactic deploying small clusters around Baghdad and gave the the territories to the same batch of troops as opposed to rotating patrols, but the patrols and activities themselves are exactly the same.
They pretty much changed where they sleep.
But in total you're absolutely right.
By
mikevotes, at 9:11 PM
Tactics aside, the strategy is to beat "the enemy" into submission. No that's not right. The strategy is on of attrition; to serve tit for tat until "the enemy" gives up trying. The blood of American servicemen is cheap. The blood of Iraqis, worthless.
There is also a hope, but no strategy, that "politics happens." That the disparate Iraq factions suddenly channel the spirits of Jefferson, Madison, Franklin, et al. and New America (Middle East edition) springs forth from some Baghdad government center.
By
-epm, at 10:07 AM
Well, the forces on the Sunni Shia politics are all towards divergence, and there's no peace that way no matter how well the US soldiers do.
By
mikevotes, at 9:06 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home