Just Foolin’
Yesterday's L.A. Times carried an eyebrow-raising piece that ought to be getting a whole lot more attention. It carries a Washington DC datelines but relies heavily on blind quotes from a "senior military official in Baghdad."
I'm not dinging the Times. I think what is in the story constitutes crucial info. Precisey because the military sources quoted here are clearly talking to this reporter with a fixed goal in mind: to start defining down the terms of "success" when General David Petreaus is scheduled to report back on progress of the war in September.
Says the Times:
U.S. military leaders in Iraq are increasingly convinced that most of the broad political goals President Bush laid out early this year in his announcement of a troop buildup will not be met this summer and are seeking ways to redefine success... Enactment of a new law to share Iraq's oil revenue among Sunni, Shiite and Kurdish regions is the only goal they think might be achieved in time, and even that is considered a long shot. The two other key benchmarks are provincial elections and a deal to allow more Sunni Arabs into government jobs. With overhauls by the central government stalled and with security in Baghdad still a distant goal, Petraeus' advisors hope to focus on smaller achievements that they see as signs of progress, including local deals among Iraq's rival factions to establish areas of peace in some provincial cities...How about that? We're getting advance warning that a war based on spin and deception will be prolonged based on yet a new layer of spin and deception. Or will it? Does this administration really have the cojones to go into the election with no let-up visible in the war? Check with me next year for the answer. But a waffling report from Petreaus could just easily be used by the admin to throw its hands up in the air in exasperation with the Iraqis and ... just in the nick time for election '08... become prelude to an announced troop pullback.
May 29th, 2007 at 8:05 pm
I said elsewhere that there is only one realistic date for US troop withdrawals from Iraq: Jan 20, 2009. Bush has absolutely no interest in leaving. He’ll stick his successor with the problem and when they leave and Iraq has its Civil War Dubya and his enablers will blame (the probable Democrat) for “losing” Iraq.
I agree here with Ezra Klein over at the AMERICAN PROSPECT that Bush doesn’t give a rat’s patootie about what happens to his party. He’s a selfish little mama’s boy who is so far far in over his head that all he can do now is throw tantrums.
And have you seen the stories of the intrigues over the US-Iran talks with both Cheney and Ahmadinajad working to sabotage the meetings for their own reasons. And see Kagan and Kristol pimp for war there.
We live in interesting times, as the Chinese might say.
May 29th, 2007 at 9:57 pm
The Department of Defense has identified 3,449 American service members who have died since the start of the Iraq war. It confirmed the deaths of the following Americans yesterday:
BAILEY, William L. III, 29, Pvt., Army National Guard; Bellevue, Neb.; 755th Chemical Reconnaissance/Decontamination Company.
BLODGETT, Clinton C., 19, Specialist, Army; Pekin, Ind.; First Infantry Division.
CAGUIOA, Mark R. C., 21, Specialist, Army; Stockton, Calif.; First Cavalry Division.
DUNN, Clayton G. II, 22, Sgt., Army; Moreno Valley, Calif., 82nd Airborne Division.
JAURIGUE, Michael J., 20, Specialist, Army; Texas City, Tex.; 82nd Airborne Division.
LINDSEY, David P., 20, Lance Cpl., Marines; Spartanburg, S.C., Second Marine Expeditionary Force.
MILLARD, Gregory N., 22, Specialist, Army; San Diego; 82nd Airborne Division.
ROSA, Alexander Jr., 22, Specialist, Army; Orlando, Fla.; 89th Military Police Brigade.
SMALLWOOD, Erich S., 23, Specialist, Army National Guard; Trumann, Ark.; 875th Engineer Battalion.
TRUSSEL, Francis M. Jr., 21, Specialist, Army; Lincoln, Ill.; First Cavalry Division.
VILLAREAL, Emmanuel, 21, Lance Cpl., Marines; Eagle Pass, Tex.; First Marine Expeditionary Force.
WALSH, Nicholas R., 27, Sgt., Marines; Millstadt, Ill.; First Marine Expeditionary Force.
May 29th, 2007 at 9:59 pm
Awaiting moderation: 12 names of the dead.
I don’t think the Republican Party will let Bush take the entire ship down with him, although I agree with rlo that Bush himself does not care.
May 30th, 2007 at 5:01 am
We should note, in Petreaus’s playing ball with the White House, that a central part of the betrayal of the troops, and the country, rests with the politicaly untouchable right wing military establishment. From Powell on, these rich soldiers have given Bush the cover he needs to run the Military into the ground. Pace’s slip of the tounge the other day suggests just how out of touch they are. Bush’s endless mantra of “letting the generals fight the war” still goes remarkably unchallenged in all quarters.
This is what the politicaly inepet anti-war Dems could not overcome.
It suggests the trouble Jack Murtha almost got himself into all those years ago was pretty much the tip of the Iceberg; and while Murtha has tried to redeem himself, there are no doubt other Duke Cunninghams who haven’t. This would no doubt be a great story for the altunative press; if we had one.
Judging by the torture lovin slate of Republican candidates, the party might not be that far away from Bush; whatever common cause dreams our Hillary haters may still entertain.
May 30th, 2007 at 9:25 am
It would be nice to think that a sense of self-preservation will eventually seize the GOP and distance themselves from the Boy-Emperor but I’m not sure that they will be there by September. Even for the Ministry of Truth people at FOX that will be too swift a U-turn.
And see the piece by Tony Blair that Gleenwald cits in SALON. Tony is still justifying this as a noble venture.
Take up the white man’s burden indeed!
May 30th, 2007 at 11:49 am
Until the last week or so, the only reasonable scenario for Petraeus’s report would be him staring down the senators and reporting that, yes, the surge had not freed Baghdad and yes, the goals we had set for Iraqi good faith cooperation had not been met, but THERE IS LIGHT AT THE END OF THE TUNNEL. Maybe 6 more months, maybe 30,000 more troops, probably extending the 15 month tours to 18 or 20 or 24, and that would provide the margin for success.
But recently Bush has thrown out some new concepts. First, he drastically redefined “success in Iraq”–allowing that success means something far short of victory…reducing the people’s exposure to some sort of tolerable or at least survivable level of violence. And last week he suggested that perhaps the next step was to follow the Iraq Study Group plan for reducing fighting forces in Iraq.
On both occasions one sensed a hint of the old smirk when he casually dropped these comments. His demeanor suggested that these were suggestions he had made many times…perhaps we weren’t listening.
Anyway, it is apparent that Bush sees his options as “open.” Perhaps he and God have concluded that the Iraqis do not deserve freedom. If, after all the Christian lives and Christian limbs we have invested, the Iraqis want us to leave, well, we ought to just leave. So long as Prince Bandar signs off on it.
May 30th, 2007 at 5:40 pm
Permanent military bases.
May 30th, 2007 at 6:15 pm
Over at NRO Rick Lowry is reporting that GOP operatives are telling him that if no progress is made in Iraq by Sept as many as 25 Republican Senators will defect and join the Dems in supporting a funding bill with timetables.
‘Course Duncan Black (ATRIOS) thinks that is hooey.
Place your bets!
May 30th, 2007 at 7:38 pm
Wouldn’t it be interesting if you had the exact opposite, all rebubs voting for withdrawl EXCEPT the ones running for President?
Don’t count on it.. they will try it both ways: claim enough progress that they can start bringing the boys home… Peace with honor. Sure, it will require a new level of brazen, but hey, these are Republicans we are talking about…
May 30th, 2007 at 9:31 pm
The Department of Defense has identified 3,454 American service members who have died since the start of the Iraq war. It confirmed the deaths of the following Americans yesterday:
CHURCH, Theodore U., 32, Chief Warrant Officer, Army; South Point, Ohio; 25th Infantry Division.
HEIDTMAN, Keith N., 24, First Lt., Army; Norwich, Conn.; 25th Infantry Division.
HESTER, Charles B., 23, Pfc., Army; Cataldo, Idaho; Second Infantry Division.
McFALL, Thomas M., 36, Staff Sgt., Army; Glendora, Calif.; Second Infantry Division.
SANCHEZ, Junior Cedeno, 20, Pfc., Army; Miami; Second Infantry Division.
May 31st, 2007 at 9:07 am
Goals have to be revised all of the time and in every field. I suspect that the L.A. Times views a 10% drop in subscriptions as “success,” whereas they would never have done that before. It’s better to adjust goals to reality than stubbornly stick by them and never achieve what you started out to do. Time and changing situations provide information that wasn’t available before.
The Democrats should know, who were for the war before they were against it before they wanted full withdrawal before they decided to back away from that before who knows what is next.
May 31st, 2007 at 1:14 pm
The shorter Woody – “I’ll have whatever George is having.”
May 31st, 2007 at 1:36 pm
reg, how is the Democrat’s war on poverty coming? With all the costs and programs, have they won that yet?
May 31st, 2007 at 4:43 pm
If you want to ignore the issue at hand and compare non sequiters, the “war on poverty” went a hell of a lot better than the conservatives’ war against “big government”.
May 31st, 2007 at 6:13 pm
Woody in 1960 the pverty rate in the US was 22.2 per cent or better than one in five Americans. By 1969, after five years of the Great Society it had dropped to around ten percent or a fifty per cent decline. It stayed at roughly that same rate till 1980 when the “Reagan Revolution” began and by 1992 had risen to 16% Under Clinton it dropped again to 12 per cent and, yes, you guessed it, under Dubya its rising again.
Tell me again about free markets and those rising tides!
May 31st, 2007 at 7:15 pm
Wow! So, if we can cut down the number of terrorist attacks by 1/3, then the Iraq war will be considered a success using your measures.
May 31st, 2007 at 7:39 pm
I suppose so except the State Dept Terrorist report – an annual BTW – says that Terrorist incidents are UP!