August 15, 2007
AS THEY STAND UP...:
Top general may propose pullbacks: Petraeus is expected to tell Congress that Iraqis can assume duties in some areas, freeing U.S. troops for other uses. (Julian E. Barnes and Peter Spiegel, August 15, 2007, LA Times)
[G]en. David H. Petraeus is expected to propose the partial pullback in his September status report to Congress, when both the war's critics and supporters plan to reassess its course. Administration officials who support the current troop levels hope Petraeus' recommendations will persuade Congress to reject pressure for a major U.S. withdrawal.Posted by Orrin Judd at August 15, 2007 7:46 AMThe expected recommendation would authorize U.S. commanders to withdraw troops from places that have become less violent and turn over security responsibilities to Iraqi forces.
Am I the only one who thinks this is just a little too coordinated?
As the story shifts from 3.5 years of incompetence to the "successful" surge, the troops start to come home in mid summer of 2008?
All the while, the many "incompetent" years of flailing about in Iraq just happened to coincide with a hugely successful "flypaper" strategy that succeeded in importing 10s of 1000s of jihaddis to Iraq to be dispatched.
I still chalk it up to dumb luck. But Bush, of all people, must understand that it is far better to be lucky than to be good.
Posted by: Bruno at August 15, 2007 3:55 PMBruno: Duh. Just as with Vietnam, we're just looking for any excuse to leave now. Without Bush or Cheney on the ticket, and with troops withdrawing from Iraq, what exactly does Hillary have to campaign on?
Unfortunately, as with Vietnam, it looks for now like we're going to leave the enemy (Iran & Syria) standing. However, I suspect that they're more than stupid enough to start a war next summer, so I wouldn't be surprised if Syria gets taken care of before Nov. 2008.
Posted by: b at August 15, 2007 4:05 PMBruno, or smart.
Posted by: erp at August 15, 2007 4:41 PMThe surge isn't so much about more soldiers as it is new tactics: take and hold rather than take and return to base. The new tactics require two things: first, that the civilian population be tired of AQ; and, second, that the Iraqis have a force able to stand up and relieve the Americans. Those two things didn't coincide until now, so the surge couldn't have worked until now.
The unanswerable question is whether Brenner was right to dissolve the Iraqi army and start from scratch, which made the intervening years unavoidable. This, in turn, goes hand in hand with what kind of government we left behind. If we had left a Sunni strong man, the Iraqi army didn't have to be dissolved and we could have left in '04. Leaving any sort of Shi'a government required that the (Sunni) officer corp be dissolved and replaced.
Posted by: Ibid at August 15, 2007 5:26 PMWatch for some in Congress (Murtha, most likely) to huff and puff and say that no American soldier should march at the command of an Iraqi officer. So we must leave immediately.
I would love to see Robert Gates (or Tim Russert, for that matter) ask Murtha if he is going to recant his charge that the Marines are cold-blooded murderers. Wouldn't it be great if McCain did it on some Sunday news show? Mad Jack would probably stomp off the set.
Posted by: ratbert at August 15, 2007 10:31 PM