Bush Admits Failure in Iraq
Posted by
Kevin
The surge, apparently, was a miserable failure:
With American military successes outpacing political gains in Iraq, the Bush administration has lowered its expectation of quickly achieving major steps toward unifying the country, including passage of a long-stymied plan to share oil revenues and holding regional elections.
… Instead, administration officials say they are focusing their immediate efforts on several more limited but achievable goals in the hope of convincing Iraqis, foreign governments and Americans that progress is being made toward the political breakthroughs that the military campaign of the past 10 months was supposed to promote.
The short-term American targets include passage of a $48 billion Iraqi budget, something the Iraqis say they are on their way to doing anyway; renewing the United Nations mandate that authorizes an American presence in the country, which the Iraqis have done repeatedly before; and passing legislation to allow thousands of Baath Party members from Saddam Hussein’s era to rejoin the government. A senior Bush administration official described that goal as largely symbolic since rehirings have been quietly taking place already.
Remember, please, that the surge was intended to provide the security necessary to allow for political players to come to agreements regarding the future of the the country. No such progress has taken place and no such progress appears likely to take place in a time frame measured in anything less than years. Things are so bad that the Bush Administration is openly telling the New York Times that it is going to claim that things that are already done or just about to be done and whose completion apparently has nothing to do with the real, if slight, reduction in violence are signs of progress. They are like defense lineman bragging about how they stuffed the run after the opposing quarterback took a knee because there were ten seconds left in a game in which his team was up by twenty.
The Surge was supposed to be the be all ebd, the magic bullet that would make all of our Iraqi dreams come true. Instead, we can just add it to the long line of failures in Iraq that the Bush Administration has run up. So what next/ What new pipe dream will they trot out in 2008 to convince the press and the party faithful that is we just stay long enough, if we just get enough American soldiers and Iraqi civilians killed, the pony-filled utopia that they promised us in 2003 will finally appear.
But it wont. It probably never would have; its hard to graft a democracy onto people by force. But the Bush Administration practically guaranteed that it would not almost right from the start. Almost ever decision they have made — going it alone, going in without proper amounts of troops, refusing to plan for the occupation, an over-reliance on firepower and air-power, the poor security around arms depots, the disbanding of the Iraqi Army, the arming of Sunni and Shia militias at the expense of the central government, entrusting the management of the occupation to free-market ideologues and inexperienced GOP hacks and so many more, big and small — has made the situation in Iraq worse or had no appreciable affect. And so here we are, with another grand plan in the dust and no idea what to do next. Heck of a job, George.
Let’s surrender as the democrats want to do and bring home the troops. That should solve everything.
Comment 11/26/2007
OK Morris, no surrender (which would be problematic anyway since there is no entity to which we could surrender). Instead we should… what? What would you like to see happen in Iraq? (I am not holding my breath until I receive a meaningful response.)
Comment 11/26/2007
“What would you like to see happen in Iraq?”
For a start, improved security in Baghdad that allows for more of a more nearly normal life (This is happening.) Security in Anbar Province (This is happening.) Return of Iraqiis who fled the country (This is happening.) Of course, any answer I give is an effort without possibility of acceptance by you and other people who are vested in defeat. You are so blinded by hate that you cannot see.
Comment 11/26/2007
That’s great, but what then? What is the goal that allows us to get the troops out? The recent surge has reduced violence - more than Kevin acknowledges above. But there has been no cooresponding increase in Iraq’s ability to “stand up so we can stand down”.
It seems to me that those who support the invasion of another country and the total dismantling of that country’s infrastructure should be the ones upon whom the onus of solution rests. I’m not vested in defeat. I am against the Iraq war. Was so before it started and still am. And everything that has happened since the invasion backs up my position. Virtually the entire world, and about 2/3rds of the US population agrees with me. You owe yourself a bit of self doubt on this one.
Comment 11/26/2007
I wouldn’t say that the onus of solution is on those who supported the invasion. That’s like saying the onus of putting out the fire lay on the arsonist. It is to everybody’s best interest to seek solutions, regardless of where they feel they stand in the blame game.
What would I like to see in Iraq, that’s easy. Rainbows, flowers, white picket fences, and SUV with decals of Calvin and Hobbes pissing brand name logos.
I think the biggest problem with proposing solutions is the culture gap. We must allow self-determination above anything. The more entrenched we become, by measures of both lives and money, the more of a hand we seem to think we are “owed” in the rebuilding. Plus, we have so much of a financial stake in the rebuilding, self determination seems like a pipe dream. The fatal flaw here, is that we haven’t really proven ourselves nearly sensitive and understanding enough of the nuances of the Iraqi situation, and of the Middle East in general, to act on behalf of the people of Iraq, on their terms, and in accordance with their wishes.
We’re like a group of 20-something bachelor interior decorators - barging into a woman’s bedroom, installing a pool table and Jagermeister tap, and then wondering how she could possibly not love it! Pimp my country!
Comment 11/27/2007
“the total dismantling of that country’s infrastructure”
Hyperbole does not advance your cause.
(Let’s see if the censor deletes this comment too.)
Comment 11/27/2007
Fred, avoiding answering all substantive questions does not advance your cause.
Digg, my comment was only within the context of this discussion. However, I disagree with you insofar as Bush should not have invaded Iraq without a solid, workable plan to end the invasion. I can’t hold those who were against the invasion responsible for the lack of a plan now. Your arsonist comparison is off base, unless you are implying that it was the intent of those who supported the invasion to destroy Iraq and mire the US in an unwinnable situation (an arsonist’s singular intent is to destroy). I believe a more appropriate comparison would be: forest rangers who start a controlled burn to prevent a future wildfire are responsible for a plan to put out their fire.
“I think the biggest problem with proposing solutions is the culture gap. We must allow self-determination above anything.” Apparently not for you.
Comment 11/27/2007
Okay, Ted.
I’ll retract the arsonist analogy. I made that analogy because it seemed like you were implying that not supporting the war absolves an individual from attempting to seek solutions now. It’s fine to say that you didn’t have an exit strategy years ago because you didn’t want to go in. That is especially poignant if one of your reasons for not wanting to go in was the probability of a messy exit. However, “I wouldn’t have gone in in the first place,” is still not an answer to, “what do you do now?” For purposes of that question, you’re fine to consider the fact that going in was a bad idea as conceded. The conservatives who are asking this question genuinely are aware that they are asking for your “plan B.”
Comment 11/27/2007
Digg, I agree. If I were a member of Congress or held some other position of consequence with respect to the war, I would work towards a solution, and I expect everyone in those positions to do so. And I want everyone who supported the invasion to be held accountable for the fact that they do not have a solution.
However, my firm belief is there is no solution. We fucked up that country and we will not be able to fix it. A huge blunder that will adversely impact this country (not to mention Iraq) for years to come.
Comment 11/27/2007