Monday, December 25, 2006

The huge lie that is the "short term surge"

Front paged at Booman Tribune, ePluribus Media and My Left Wing. Recommended at Daily Kos

At the risk of hearing “enough, clammyc – we get it. You don’t think the “surge” is a good idea”, let me give you one more reason why this must be stopped before it goes any further. We know that Bush is in way over his head. We know that the “short term surge in troops” is almost unanimously though of as one of the worst ideas of all of the worst ideas regarding Iraq. And we know that there are those who still cling to the thought that Iraq was the “right war executed in the wrong manner”.



Despite what we may have seen recently from the neocons who are trying to disassociate themselves with their fingerprints on quite possibly the biggest foreign policy mistake in US history, they are still clamoring for more killing, more “strength” and more of the same failed policies.



We know how they have been pulling the strings on US foreign policy since before Bush even stole took office – whether it is the PNAC players, or other right wing “think tanks” like the American Enterprise Institute talk about an 18-24 month duration for a troop increase.


And just as I said earlier in the week:

In fact, if you take the twisted logic of the Bush administration and apply it here, if we set a timetable for withdrawal then the "insurgents" will just wait us out until we leave – or so says the Decider. OK, fine. So if we have a "temporary increase" of 40,000 – 50,000 troops, then why wouldn’t these same "insurgents" just wait us out then as well?



waiting for answer...







......still waiting for answer...



Well, we now have our answer, courtesy of the PNAC leader – one of the men who was the most wrong on everything about Iraq, William Kristol. While the Fox News transcript isn’t up yet, the link above has a video clip of Kristol’s stellar performance – which not only answered my question above, but gave a glimpse into what will no doubt go down as the decision that accelerated the civil war and genocide in Iraq and made this war from horrific to unimaginable disaster:
"There's no point having a short term surge," Kristol said on Fox News Channel. "Especially, if it's proclaimed ahead of time that it's just short term. Then [the enemy] goes into hiding for 3 or 6 months."



"We pull back and we're in the same situation," the Weekly Standard editor said. "Bush will commit -- I believe, when he speaks in a couple of weeks -- to doing this. That this is a strategy for victory and that he's willing to do this for the remaining 2 years of his presidency."



Forcasting the president's plan for Iraq, Kristol adds, "I think [Bush] will say 'We can win. We have to win. We're going to increase troop levels as part of a new strategy for the sake of victory.' And, so, it will not be a short term surge."



And there it is. Screw the overwhelming majority of Americans who want out of Iraq. Screw the unanimous-until-this-week Joint Chiefs of Staff who think that an increase in troops is a bad idea. Screw the 88% of Americans who do not want a troop increase.



Bush and the neocons want their “surge” and more troops, so to hell with the rest of the world. And Kristol’s comments show just how much Bush’s insecurity and “fuck you” attitude are playing into his decision.

Kristol respects the president for increasing troops against conventional wisdom in D.C. and against the wishes of public sentiment, but mocks the majority of people that have doubts about a troop increase, saying, "This is a remarkable moment, though. I came to Washington 30 years ago. How often does a president go against -- what Juan referred to -- the wider consensus in this town, 'the military solution isn't possible?' It's a very broad consensus of the establishment and, I think, that's why there's so much anger among the establishment-types. 'Gee. The Baker-Hamilton Commission pronounced its verdict. And how dare the president make up his own mind and decide that he's not just going to just gracefully accept defeat with this nice bi-partisan patina of the Baker-Hamilton Commission. How dare he decide that we might win in Iraq."


Interesting how Kristol paints the Baker-Hamilton report as “accepting defeat”. I guess since they didn’t say “clap harder will lead to victory”, then reality once again can’t permeate the bubble that these chickenhawk warmongers live in. “How dare he decide that we might win in Iraq”? MIGHT win??? What happened to “we ARE winning”? What a tool.



Kristol may be shockingly incompetent and may have a stellar track record at being wrong on all levels of what is good or bad foreign policy. But he is one of those who is steering this ship. And when he says that Bush is likely going to increase troop levels on a more than short term basis, we should all sit up and take notice.



We cannot let this happen. This is a recipe for more disaster, more killing and most likely a massive chemical weapon bombing campaign against Sadr City. Yes, it is crazy. Yes, it is stupid beyond all belief. And yes, it will have horrific consequences – both short term and long term. Which makes it all the more likely that it is part of the “new way forward”.



No more troops. Not for one year. Not for six months. Not for one day.



Also front paged at Booman Tribune, My Left Wing and ePluribus Media

1 comment:

iconoclastic cat said...

clammy, I posted this on your post on Kos:
______
Next clammy diary: The Iraqi Response

Clammy, I am going to level an accusation at you to which you must respond: despite all the diaries you have written, you have only scratched the surface of the reaction of Iraqis themselves to getting George's "surge" all over them.

Personally, I suspect that the surge is nigh unstoppable. When it does happen, what can we expect from Iraqis? I fear that when we white-phosphorous the crap out of the millions of innocent people in Sadr City, the people of Iraq may turn on the US with full force. That's not to mention the reaction of the Badr Brigade, Mahdi Army, SunniCo, and even Syria and Iran.

What's your analysis? I'm dying to know.
______________