Politicians committed to national defeat for narrow partisan purposes?
Or your own lying eyes?
The worst possible outcome for those who have prematurely declared the war in Iraq lost - even as America’s soldiers surged overseas in support of a new strategy - is that we just might win.
A non-trivial possibility, according to Michael E. O’Hanlon of the Brookings Institution and Kenneth M. Pollack of the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at Brookings:
Viewed from Iraq, where we just spent eight days meeting with American and Iraqi military and civilian personnel, the political debate in Washington is surreal. The Bush administration has over four years lost essentially all credibility. Yet now the administration’s critics, in part as a result, seem unaware of the significant changes taking place.
Here is the most important thing Americans need to understand: We are finally getting somewhere in Iraq, at least in military terms. As two analysts who have harshly criticized the Bush administration’s miserable handling of Iraq, we were surprised by the gains we saw and the potential to produce not necessarily “victory” but a sustainable stability that both we and the Iraqis could live with.
Congress continues to struggle in their core function of actually passing legislation. They’ve rowed back away from such reforms as increasing the transparency of the pork-laden earmark process. Their leadership has instead focused on one after another series of partisan star chamber hearings, hoping to make somebody do the frog walk - Karl Rove of a preference, but anyone would do in a pinch. By pandering to the loudest haters on their party’s fringe rather than positioning towards a responsibly governing center, they have done little more than to provoke a bruising constitutional crisis over the separation of powers with a lame duck administration that literally has nothing left to lose. The result has been a near-complete loss of confidence by the people with their active arms of government - a president whose approval ratings are among the lowest in history, a congress with approval ratings less than half of his. They have labored to give themselves a wound.
And now they can’t even properly lose a war.
18 responses so far ↓
1
Angevin13
// Jul 30, 2007 at 8:18 am
A perfect storm for Harry Reid and crew? A hopeful Iraq op-ed, written by two critics of the war, who happen to work at America’s leading left-leaning think tank…
Unfortunately, no amount of evidence will convince the most ardent anti-war activists or reverse politicians like Reid, who has cast his lot with the anti-war left and has a vested political interest in seeing the U.S. fail in Iraq, to support the war effort.
The Democratic leadership is seen to own defeat. If they keep it up, and progress continues, extricating themselves from that perception will be the real “quagmire.”
2
SeniorD
// Jul 30, 2007 at 10:33 am
Cap’n
I’m already on record as having an extremely low opinion of politics in general and the Socialist-Democrat Party in particular. Quite frankly, I sort of prefer them to keep beating their collective heads against a brick wall.
At least that way, my ever-shrinking wallet is safe for the time being.
3
badbob
// Jul 30, 2007 at 12:27 pm
re - The Democratic Party and their “…..properly losing a war” strategy.
It’s the small razor cuts that add up such as this-
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/29/AR2007072901219.html
Bastards and Bastardesses.
b2
4 An Op-Ed We Just Might Blog at Blog P.I. // Jul 30, 2007 at 7:39 pm
[...] Lex / Neptunus Lex [...]
5
rt
// Jul 31, 2007 at 1:38 am
?¢‚Ǩ?ìwe can win, but it wasn?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢t worth the cost?¢‚Ǩ¬ù
ah, the left’s favorite passtime: moving the goal posts while the ball is still moving thru the air.
and you’re right, that’s exactly what’s going to be said.
6
Skippy-san
// Jul 31, 2007 at 3:50 am
Knowing this is not a popular line, I will remind all here that the Republican administration set the expectations game from the start. Namely that we would go in and be able to get out in relatively short order. Now that it is four years later the public patience is used up. That’s present on both sides of the aisle and its not just the Democrats who have been poorly led in both houses of Congress.
And that is, as I see it, the major problem here. “Victory” for the Iraqis requires a long term US troop presence-at a time that that idea is not popular at home. As far as victory or defeat goes I would submit the US won its victory when Saddam went to the gallows. We’ve accomplished what we set out to do. It will be the Iraqis winning or losing-not the US.
And people know that deep down-that inside all of this the Iraqis still are not stepping up the way they should. And no one can promise the American people when the US forces can come home. Without that promise-the anger on both sides is going to continue to build. Its more than just a simple partisan thing.
7
P-3W
// Jul 31, 2007 at 8:37 am
Skippy,
I think the Iraqis are stepping up, albeit slower than we’d like. But we’ve burned them once after the first Desert Storm, so it isn’t surprising that they’d be reluctant to believe us this time.
We’re finally proving to be reliable partners in routing the bad guys, and they are finally getting fed up with them too, so cooperation is the new word for the day.
I just hope that all the talk in Washington about giving up doesn’t mess up the good work our troops are doing there and cause more doubt on our resolve to help and support them.
I fully expect to have troops there for the next decade, just as we have had to have troops based all over the world for various reasons. Not a good thing, not a bad thing — just a fact.
8
lex
// Jul 31, 2007 at 9:04 am
I imagine that if I was one of the family members of the many thousands of Iraqi security forces that have died trying to secure their country - and their folks have died in far, far greater numbers than our own - I might take a little umbrage at the notion that they, as a people, aren’t “stepping up.”
It’s an almost attractive calumny, because it allows us to play Pontius Pilate when and if it all falls apart.
But history was as unkind to Pilate as it was to those he governed. And, in fact, those in whose name he governed.
9
Skippy-san
// Jul 31, 2007 at 3:22 pm
Flawed biblical analogies aside, (33 CE is not the correct analogy-70 CE is) its not the umbrage of the Iraqis that any American should be concerned about. As long as the Iraqis have the yoke of Islam around their neck, their nation will continue to wallow in conflict. Iraqi umbrage is not my concern. American umbrage is.
I will caution folks again that people should not delude themselves, the clock has been ticking on the patience of the American people. Take away all the partisanship and spin, there is still deep down a frustration that “Win we stay-lose we stay”.
The President will get his wish to hand this war off to another administration. However the administration that we get in 2009 is going to be determined by American anger over Iraq.
10
Skippy-san
// Jul 31, 2007 at 3:24 pm
Better explanation here.
Leave a Comment