Surge is a Success!!

[Uncle Timmy]

Interesting take.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/30/opinion/30pollack.html

Sorry Skunkape,

The inherent flaw within this recent hooplah of optimism regarding the Surge is that achieving a brief improvement in the security condition in some parts of the country is irrelevant to what the Surge is supposed to do????.namely offer a long term political solution to the sectarian tensions tearing Iraq apart.

The instability didn?t create the sectarian tensions, rather the sectarian tensions created the instability.

The Surge does not address the core issue, and therefore will not work in the long term.

Under the current course, Iraq is headed for a continuing civil war and probable breakup ?an outcome which is bad for US interests and disastrous for our interests if the instability spreads to surrounding countries.

I stand by my original proposal. (See previous posts) Interestingly, I have seen 2 developments in the recent months which move us in this direction -

One of the most interesting political developments, one now supported by the Bush Administration (interestingly, a blatant reversal of their earlier policy) is the re-Baathification of the Iraqi government. The Shia dominated Maliki Gov?t is dragging it?s heals on this issue. Surprised? No, but at least the Bush Admin now understands the mistake they made earlier and is moving to correct it.

Second, we have been cutting cease fire deals with the Sunnis in Al Anbar province ?interesting development, I say we cut a deal with them in the WHOLE country. The Shia (and Maliki) get screwed but at least we re-establish the stability Iraq had prior to the invasion and if we throw in a few billion in ?aid? to the new gov?t they will be real friendly to our interests.

 

[6thGen]

A "political solution" without security or stability is pointless.

 

[30A Skunkape]

Sorry Skunkape,

The inherent flaw within this recent hooplah of optimism regarding the Surge is that achieving a brief improvement in the security condition in some parts of the country is irrelevant to what the Surge is supposed to do????.namely offer a long term political solution to the sectarian tensions tearing Iraq apart.

The instability didn?t create the sectarian tensions, rather the sectarian tensions created the instability.

The Surge does not address the core issue, and therefore will not work in the long term.

Under the current course, Iraq is headed for a continuing civil war and probable breakup ?an outcome which is bad for US interests and disastrous for our interests if the instability spreads to surrounding countries.

I stand by my original proposal. (See previous posts) Interestingly, I have seen 2 developments in the recent months which move us in this direction -

One of the most interesting political developments, one now supported by the Bush Administration (interestingly, a blatant reversal of their earlier policy) is the re-Baathification of the Iraqi government. The Shia dominated Maliki Gov?t is dragging it?s heals on this issue. Surprised? No, but at least the Bush Admin now understands the mistake they made earlier and is moving to correct it.

Second, we have been cutting cease fire deals with the Sunnis in Al Anbar province ?interesting development, I say we cut a deal with them in the WHOLE country. The Shia (and Maliki) get screwed but at least we re-establish the stability Iraq had prior to the invasion and if we throw in a few billion in ?aid? to the new gov?t they will be real friendly to our interests.

I don't think it is 'hooplah', and the final sentence of the article sums it up. All I was pointing out was that the authors, previously critical of the war (and probably 'the surge') are now entertaining the chance that maybe, just maybe, there is some good news coming out of Iraq rooted in a change in strategy. Why that freaks people out is beyond me;well, maybe not;-)

 

[Uncle Timmy]

I don't think it is 'hooplah', and the final sentence of the article sums it up. All I was pointing out was that the authors, previously critical of the war (and probably 'the surge') are now entertaining the chance that maybe, just maybe, there is some good news coming out of Iraq rooted in a change in strategy. Why that freaks people out is beyond me;well, maybe not;-)

I don?t freak out often, and when I do it usually involves a Le Chic disco track from the late 70's, not politics.

Skunk,

We are wasting our time on the current strategy, and it will lead to a defeat. Iraq is headed for a break-up and the instability may spread to other countries in the region. This is the course Bush has us on.

The O?Hanlon and Polack articles linked aren?t very impressive for one glaring reason -they discuss Ramadi, Tal Afar, Mosul, and Baghdad (all areas that have effectively been Balkanized) as examples of progress while ignoring Baqubah, Samarra, Kirkuk, and the areas south of Baghdad all of which have high levels of sectarian violence and show no signs of progress. If this was intended to provide an accurate assessment of the Surge, why would they have avoided the problematic regions?

Because I have always suspected that the Surge is designed primarily as a strategy to produce a short term appearance of stability so Bush can declare victory and watch Iraq implode over the next few years from his retirement in Crawford.

Bad for American long term interests.

The longer we delude ourselves that Bush has a workable plan to stave off a complete disaster here and avoid changing tactics the harder it is going to be to salvage any chance of a solution.

 

[30A Skunkape]

I didn't mean to imply you freaked-out, but you must admit, in some circles good news out of Iraq, ESPECIALLY heading into election season will be cause for alarm. You have way more of a grip on the politics there than I do;all I am saying is that to an average Joe such as myself, good news is a welcome change. I know we agree in hoping that there will be long term stability in the country no matter who our President is or who controls Congress. Now look at the glass and let us see what we will...

 

[Chickpea]

I didn't mean to imply you freaked-out, but you must admit, in some circles good news out of Iraq, ESPECIALLY heading into election season will be cause for alarm. You have way more of a grip on the politics there than I do;all I am saying is that to an average Joe such as myself, good news is a welcome change. I know we agree in hoping that there will be long term stability in the country no matter who our President is or who controls Congress. Now look at the glass and let us see what we will...

Let's for the sake of the argument ignore both extremes - those who will never ever admit that dragging us into a pointless war will have severe long term ramifications in the middle east (far far beyond Iraq) - as well as those who will never give an inch to GW Bush and who only look for bad news to bolster their arguments - I have as little patience for both positions given that most rational people actually at this point would LOVE to get some serious good news from the area.

But I have to agree with Timmy when he states the position that many people have which is that the surge has done zip for addressing sectarian violence WHICH this senseless war has heightened and exposed to the potential detriment of the whole area. Believe me, there may well be a time in the not so distant future when the maddening and insane violence there now pales in comparision to what could be formenting at this juncture (and I personally take no comfort or joy in this).

And for the record, my opinions and thoughts on this war are totally devoid from my own political leanings OR even on how incompetent and pathetic I thought Bush was as a president before 911. I would feel the same disgust and anger at anyone who deliberately misled this country into war (democrat or republican).

 

[6thGen]

Timmy, until you've established sufficient credibility to be published in a respected daily, you are no more than a crazy anonymous internet person who thinks he's smarter than everyone by posting various banality that has zero impact on the way people think.

Chickpea, you do realize that when you start with the premise that the war is pointless and senseless, you are not only wrong, but you are out of the mainstream that you purport to appeal to, right?

 

[6thGen]

http://pajamasmedia.com/2007/08/soldier_censored_at_kos_conven.php

If you'll watch until the end, the Kos moderator threatened to get this man dishonorably discharged for nothing other than noting that the surge has brought down Iraqi casulties. It really is easier to have debates when everyone starts with the same premise, even when said premise is wrong.

 

[Chickpea]

Chickpea, you do realize that when you start with the premise that the war is pointless and senseless, you are not only wrong, but you are out of the mainstream that you purport to appeal to, right?

6th Gen,

My snobbish side is coming out - I have no desire nor have I ever stated that I aim to appeal to mainstream with my personal thoughts on this war (in fact mainstream America which travels very little and is even less often exposed to other religions and culture would find the nuanced thinking required to be too rigorous and demanding). I am interested in having discussions and healthy debates on this subject with people who are either lucky enough to have traveled outside of this country OR, if they have not been fortunate enough to take advantage of this are at least well read and informed (which many people on this Board are).

It would be laughable to me if it were not so tragic, to hear people whose sole vacation per year is to take their family to Disney World (year after year after year....) pontificate about this subject. They can talk amongst themselves ad nauseum - just pls leave me out of this.

And like I have previously said, I continue to have no interest in debating you - have no idea who you are, what you do, how much you have traveled, etc... - you are obviously well read and intelligent - but it is obvious to me what your opinions on this administration and its doings are - as obvious as what and how you view my opinions - so you surely agree that we can leave it at that. I leave others who have informed opinions to debate you since they have infinite more patience and energy than I do.

Thanks.

 

[Andy A]

First step, get rid of the idiots in Washington who think exactly as you do.

You know, the ones who got us into this mess in the first place and, like you, show no apparent ability to learn from their mistakes.

Yeah. And replace them with those who promised change and improvement and so far have done not one blessed thing constructive since they won their great "victory". Congress is a mess! Both Democrat and Republican. You are right about get the idiots out of Washington but you should include BOTH parties in that little endeavor. Social Security, Immigration, Health Care(Not Hillary's solution) and a dozen other really compelling problems we need to address. A pox on all you verbose and philosophical posters on this site! Most of you obviously don't have a clue as to what real sacrifice and personal giving is all about.