Neo-con stalwarts William Kristol and Frederick Kagan have a bizarre article in the Weekly Standard on the war in Iraq in which they don't refer to the war at all. It's like a theatrical set-piece in which the neo-cons introduce most of the characters involved in the war but don't seek to work out the consequences of the action on the ground in Baghdad, Diyala, Basra, and other parts of Iraq.
There's President Bush (right strategy), Congress (surrender deadline), General Petraeus (right general), the Syrians (letting in the jihadis), the Iraqi government, and all the foreign jihadis streaming into Iraq. However, there is no idea of how the war is going. The closest thing to reality is that "our victory there will be an important victory in the larger struggle against terrorism--and our defeat there would embolden and empower our enemies." But no idea of whether we're winning or whether progress is being made.
That might be because progress is not being made. Baghdad is not secure, terrorist attacks are exploding in places like Diyala, and Sunni insurgents have in fact become stronger now that the Shiite militias have gone underground. Moreover, the Maliki government has not been able to pass legislation needed for a compromise between Shiites and Sunnis and there is no immediate prospect of their doing so. Finally, American military casualties are rising but it's not because we are putting pressure on the enemy. Instead, there are just more American soldiers driving around to serve as targets for roadside bombs or ambushes. Far from making progress or gaining "an important victory in the larger struggle against terrorism," the surge seems to have resulted in further deterioration of the ground situation.
Like the big bad wolf, the neo-cons keep huffing and puffing. But their hot air does not make the situation in Iraq any better.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment