Dems Say Iraq-Namese Surge Has Failed, White House Disagrees

The two political parties in Washington have already started trying to frame the debate over September’s report from General David Petraeus on the effectiveness of the troop surge in Iraq-Nam. Even before the general has opened his word processing program, the Democrats have written a letter to the president saying the surge has failed. Meanwhile, Tony Snow, back in action after a cancer scare, has already said the September report will be important but not pivotal. America’s leaders are being entirely predictable; facts be damned, there are political points to be scored.

The Petraeus Report, as it is certain to be known, will undoubtedly give a mixed military picture. As they teach at West Point, Sandhurst and every other military academy worthy of the name, no plan survives first contact with the enemy. As a result, there is always a list of things that have gone, are going or will go wrong. No plan is ever entirely unsuccessful either; the disaster at Dieppe, when the Allies attacked Nazi-held France in 1942, taught lessons that would be needed for Operation Overlord in 1944 (which more or less worked despite airborne troops starting the whole thing off miles from where they were supposed to be).

On the political front, General Petraeus will undoubtedly be blunt and direct to the point of being undiplomatic when it comes to America’s Iraq-Namese allies. The fact is the Iraq-Namese parliament isn’t getting much done, that fact is there for the world to see, and if America fails, it will serve as a useful scapegoat. Two years ago, this journal wondered what would happen to Mr. Bush’s policy (“As Iraqis stand up, America can stand down”) if the Iraq-Namese didn’t stand up. The world is now finding out.

On the Democratic Congressional side, Senate Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) have sent a letter to the president which reads in part, “As many had foreseen, the escalation has failed to produce the intended results. The increase in US forces has had little impact in curbing the violence or fostering political reconciliation. It has not enhanced America’s national security. The unsettling reality is that instances of violence against Iraqis remain high and attacks on US forces have increased. In fact, the last two months of the war were the deadliest to date for US troops.” The two have also said that they intend to send Mr. Bush legislation that will “limit the US mission in Iraq, begin the phased redeployment of US forces, and bring the war to a responsible end.”

At the GOP White House end of Pennsylvania Avenue, Tony Snow, the White House flak, told the press, “I have warned from the very beginning about expecting some sort of magical thing to happen in September. What I would suggest is, rather than it’s, sort of, a pivotal moment, it is the first opportunity to be able to take a look at what happens when you’ve got [the troop increase] up and running fully for a period of months. It is naive to think, suddenly – boom – you snap a finger and you've got an instant change in the situation.”

In other words, neither side is going to actually review the Petraeus Report. They’ve decided what it should say, and are acting accordingly. Having opted for the stupidity of the surge rather than starting a post-election withdrawal (that could have been completed by July 4 as this journal proposed), neither side really cares whether it works or not. Facts don’t matter. It’s a lousy way to fight a war, and a definite way to lose one.

© Copyright 2007 by The Kensington Review, Jeff Myhre, PhD, Editor. No part of this publication may be reproduced without written consent. Produced using Fedora Linux.

Home