With the President routinely claiming that the urban battlefields of Mesopotamia are the central front in the War on Terror, and victory against our forces arrayed there the prime objective of our Qaedist foe, the temptation has grown for the war’s political opponents to counter that it just isn’t so. Because it would be one thing to consign the Iraqi people to the kind of Roman Holiday that our precipitous withdrawal would engender, but if they are well and truly committed to the notion, who are we to say no?
And while it’s probably true that the al Qaeda of today is not the same organization that was driven from its refuge in pastoral Afghanistan, that doesn’t necessarily imply that it has morphed into a boys choir. In fact, White House spokesman Tony Snow begs to differ:
All Americans are entitled to their own opinions about Iraq, but they are not entitled to their own facts. We all wish al Qaeda were no longer a threat, but the reality is Gen. Petraeus calls them ‘probably public enemy number one’ in Iraq. It is impossible to completely segregate al Qaeda’s attacks in Iraq from sectarian violence because al Qaeda’s explicit goal is to create sectarian violence to destabilize the government so they can establish a safe haven within the country. Considering Gen. Petraeus’ comments, the National Intelligence Estimate, and news media reports, al Qaeda’s role in fomenting violence in Iraq is ignored at our own peril.
Who are you going to believe? The on-scene commander, equipped with all of the best strategic and operational intelligence available? Or those who want to leverage this into a few more Senate seats?
In probably unrelated news, the NYT issued a correction today, saying that the Prez did not in fact call himself the “Commander Guy.” Which is a pity, because you know, 1.8 million Google hits now have to be caveated.
Just wait.
You’ll see.
Cap’n
Pity we can’t flush the likes of Mr. Murtha and those of his odious ilk out to sea. Then again, I don’t think Davy Jones would welcome their company.
For what it’s worth, I notice a strange comparison between Vietnam (you were too young) and Iraq. In Vietnam, Democrats were in power in both the Congress and Administration. Long and well told are the stories of ‘frag orders’ to companies and platoons from Washington. Since the Dems are only ‘partially’ in power now, perhaps they want to re-visit their ‘Glory Days’ and send ‘frag orders’ to those with feet on the ground. Afterall, their party has the most experience in such matters.
Who do I believe? Why Skippy o’course..
Seniord- that is EXACTLY what they are trying to do. It validates their existence since Vietnam and the bloodbath that followed…Simply ACT II for those aging “boomers”.
b2
Now that’s odd. I cudda sworn those ‘frag orders’ came (often belatedly) from an unenlightened Pentagon, and not from a Democratic Congress. BWDIK
Filterman,
Didn’t say Democratic Congress, just the Democratic Administration The Dems were in power and used it gleefully to prosecute THEIR war.
I’m of the opinion that, like Vietnam, Iraq is morphing into a Special Forces war with backup from the air and sea.
Interesting GWB is on camera calling himself the Commander guy. How does the NYT explain that? Or Tony Snow either? I saw him say it.
“I cudda sworn those ?
“I cudda sworn those ‘frag orders’ came (often belatedly) from an unenlightened Pentagon…” or could it have been an enlightened SEC of DOD?
Forget the main focus of the following link & look @ photo #10. Heh.
http://www.tinyvital.com/Misc/KerryHonoredByCommunists2.htm
Mark – To be sure McNamara was a disaster as SecDef. But that was much more the fault of the man, than of his political party or administrations.
Secretary Laird was an improvement, in that he gave much more autonomy to the JCS. But he was more concerned with “Vietnamization” and pulling out, rather than the actual conduct of the war?
Mark – To be sure McNamara was a disaster as SecDef. But that was much more the fault of the man, than of his political party or administrations.
Secretary Laird was an improvement, in that he gave much more autonomy to the JCS. But he was more concerned with “Vietnamization” and pulling out, rather than the actual conduct of the war…. Which continued to be managed from Washington rather than the field, and still bungled, regardless.
Regarding the photo – although no fan of either man, I am less offended by McNamara’s picture with Mao than I am with Rumsfeld’s more recent photo of him shaking hands with Saddam Hussein.
Skippy,
Maybe “The Commander Guy” is west texas for CINC or maybe he was saying he supports his Combatant Commanders.
W.T.F.C.s except the NYTs?
b2
Pardon me gentlemen, but surely the Troops in the field are the best qualified to know what’s accurately going on in Iraq and Afghanistan. Veterans and arm-chair critics alike, carry on.