The only news coming out of Washington yesterday related to the Congressional report by Gen. David H. Petraeus on the progress of America’s mission in Iraq.
But it reflects the American people’s surreal disinterest in (or frustration with) the national tragedy this mission has become that the headlines had little to do with Petraeus’ report. Instead the way the three presidential candidates (namely, Senators John McCain (R-Ariz), Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) and Barack Obama (D-Ill)) posed rhetorical questions to Petraeus dominated coverage.
To be fair to the media, however, everything Petraeus had to report about the mess in Iraq was as predictable and un-newsworthy as the posturing of these presidential candidates.
For example, Petraeus stressed the fact that the surge strategy President Bush ordered a year ago has led to “pockets of success.” Yet senators had to virtually waterboard him to concede what is plain for all to see, namely that:
We haven’t turned any corners, we haven’t seen any lights at the end of the tunnel. The champagne bottle has been pushed to the back of the refrigerator. And the progress, while real, is fragile and is reversible.
Most importantly, Petraeus conceded that any notion of withdrawing troops – as Hillary and Obama have proposed (and which a vast majority of Americans favor) – is simply unthinkable. And this means that American troops will be propping up successive Iraqi governments for the next 100 years no matter how much Hillary and Obama ridicule McCain for admitting this fact.
Therefore, here’s what the general reported in a nutshell: Despite over 4000 soldiers dead and half a trillion dollars spent, America is no further along in building an Iraq that can govern itself, defend itself and sustain itself that it was five years ago.
Specifically, the “progress” Petraeus cited has done little to foster political reconciliation among Iraq’s political factions, and even less to rebuild the country’s infrastructure or clean up the slums where al Qaeda fighters and Iraqi insurgents thrive. All of which, of course, constituted the stated mission of Bush’s surge strategy.
Meanwhile, just as he did after Petraeus’ last Congressional report seven months ago, Bush has scheduled another address to the nation tomorrow night to put a presidential spin on this report. And, true to form, he will not only reiterate the rosy scenario about the state of affairs in Iraq that he’s been peddling for the past five years; but will also try to convince the American people that they’re getting good value for all of the blood and treasure being wasted in Iraq.
For a little perspective, on May 26, 2005, I wrote an article titled Groundhog days in Iraq…and in President Bush’s head. And in it, I dismissed, in fact decried, Bush’s delusional war updates from the Oval Office. Alas, what I wrote back then remains as relevant today and will serve as a fair preview of his address tonight:
[I]t came as no surprise that last weekend 20 Americans were reported killed in Iraq amidst more car bombings, serial assassinations and general mayhem.
It was instructive, however, to observe President Bush when a reporter asked how he thought things were going there. Because his answer (which, in essence, was that victory is at hand…if we only stay the course) suggests that he’s suffering from a variant strain of the Groundhog-day syndrome that characterizes the stalemate in Iraq.
Therefore, I submit that the only change of course worth considering now is the one I endorsed years ago when “shock and awe” was the war jingle of the day, namely: US military forces should execute the Powell Doctrine.
So instead of fiddling with timetables for withdrawing troops, Bush should deploy hundreds of thousands (i.e., at least 500,000) of them to secure every nook and cranny of Iraq and enforce strict Martial Law.
Because only under these prevailing conditions would it be possible to fulfil America’s mission in Iraq. And, incidentally, even if executed flawlessly, this will take decades; not the months or years being debated.
But unless America really occupies Iraq and assumes plenary responsibility for rebuilding it, all of the talk about staying the course or bringing the troops home is just bullshit.
NOTE: Neo-con war hawks were salivating after Petraeus reported that Iran is masterminding the Iraqi insurgency that is bedeviling and killing American troops. Because, by their reckoning, this means war. Therefore, let us pray that Obama becomes president before they convince Bush that the only thing he can do to seal his legacy is to launch a war against Iran.
Of course, McCain and Hillary have called Obama naive for vowing to hold talks with the Iranians about stabilizing the situation in Iraq. But there’s no way they can reconcile their position in this respect with the fact that every American president held talks with the Russians to stabilize similar conflicts during the Cold War.
Related Articles:
Another groundhog speech from President Bush
General Petraeus Iraq report
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.