Your generous
donations help keep
this site running.
Visa/MC/PayPal accepted.
The entire article is fascinating and well worth a read to anyone interested in what is being done in the name of the United States of America. Mr. Fair was quite brave to come forward and tell his story, and is the first to do so that I have read. This article deserves more prominence than it will likely get, which is why I draw your attention to it.
So while a few Republicans are jumping ship now on legally meaningless concurrent resolutions, by summertime it will be a full-scale rout. Republicans will have the time and distance from Bush to say, "Well, we tried the surge, but it obviously didn't work. It's time to bring the troops home." Some of them are already saying this publicly in one way or another: "If the surge isn't working by summer or fall, I won't support it any more." As time goes by this summer, more and more of them will abandon Bush, publicly.
Yossarian marveled at the logic involved. If you thought the plan was crazy, you were obviously sane and had to fight. If you thought the plan was a good one, you were obviously crazy and could go home, but since you thought the plan was good you'd never want to go home (which was crazy). By pointing out that the president's plan was crazy, you proved you were sane and had to fight, even though you knew the plan (crazy or not) was doomed to failure. The only people who had confidence in the plan were obviously as crazy as the president, and didn't have to fight, but did anyway.
That's right -- the most damning evidence of the Iraqi Army's incompetence comes from the US military itself. Lt. Col. Grunow wrote the article titled "Advising the Iraqis: Building the Iraq Army" after completing a year as a senior Iraq Army training officer. In other words, this is a first-hand view of the Iraq Army's capabilities by one of the key men responsible for training them. He writes the article as advice for other trainers heading to Iraq.
But don't squander the opportunity. If Democrats prove they can't achieve consensus, and the whole exercise devolves into intra-party squabbles about whose plan is best, then the American people are going to (quite rightly) conclude that it was a mistake to give the Democrats control over Congress in the first place, and will vote accordingly next time around. This is a big test, and I hope the Democrats can manage to pass it with flying colors.
But as depressing as these outcomes are, they are still better than the worst-case scenario. If Iraq in essence ceases to be a nation, and dissolves into the miasma of warlordism (much like Afghanistan before the rule of the Taliban), then the entire world will see America's adventurism in Iraq as a colossal and embarrassing failure. This will diminish us even further in the sight of the world, and will once again prove that even if you have the biggest, bestest military ever -- some things are just beyond your abilities. This does not bode well for our ability to deal with (and intimidate) such states as Iran and North Korea in the future.
I mean, it is somewhat satisfying to see the oft-mocked "reality-based" world so resoundingly bludgeon into submission the shameless neo-conservative hucksterism that got us into this war; but we have to be careful to consider the future standing of the United States in world politics at the same time.
As I stated previously, there may just be no good answer. This clearly has to be faced. There may be a bloodbath no matter what the US does, or when it does it. Iraq may be broken beyond our ability to fix. If that is true, though, Americans need to be warned about it so it won't be a shock if-and-when it happens.
The big question that will be answered in the months to come (as with any policy change outlined here) is whether the Bush White House would (1) fully commit to such an idea (as opposed to just going through the motions for political cover), and (2) achieve measurable success by doing so. Look for announcements from the administration very soon on new diplomatic efforts, but also keep an eye on their follow-through to see whether they're truly serious about such efforts.
Early on in the memo, without apparently realizing it, Hadley has written the most hilariously ironic thing ever written by any member of the Bush administration, bar none (pot, meet kettle...): "The information he receives is undoubtedly skewed by his small circle of Dawa advisors, coloring his actions and interpretation of reality." Just change "Dawa" to "neo-con" and the sentence would fit perfectly -- for President Bush.
"On Planet Republican, the Iraq war is in its 'last throes'... meanwhile back on Earth, the insurgency is on the brink of full-scale civil war."
"Five years ago, on Planet Republican, George Bush said he'd get Osama Bin Laden 'dead or alive'... but it took Democrats in Congress to bring him back to Earth and force him not to disband the CIA's Bin Laden unit."