Details have been leaking for a while now:
Sources said the plan will call for sending at least 20,000 U.S. troops to Baghdad and perhaps other areas in the region.
They said the debate within the administration has been whether to send them all in as a “big bang” force right away or phase them in from month-to-month, contingent on whether the Iraqis meet certain political and military goals.
As one put it: “The whole struggle — has been for weeks and even months — is: what is (Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki) going to do about (radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr)?”
Everyone is focusing on the minor troop increases but it’s what they’re doing, how they’ll be used, that counts. Herschel Smith is not optimistic:
Trackback this Post:A moderate troop size increase coupled with the same strategy and tactics will be likened - and properly so - to Olmert’s last desperate battle with Hezballah where, in order to save face and make the war effort appear as a victory for Israel, he sent more IDF troops to their deaths and then retreated. It will neither appear as a victory nor accomplish anything good.
Right Click for URL
January 8th, 2007 at 8:37 am
A Changing of Guard in Iraq: More than a “Surge”
By: Charles Jines, January 6, 2007
Lt Gen David Petraeus
Lt Gen David Petraeus
Up until this point, the war in Iraq has been carried out from the playbook provided by the Project for A New American Century. This think tank composed of Neo-Conservatives produced a report in 2000 titled Rebuilding America’s Defenses, which reflects the strategy that has been attempted for the past three years in Iraq. Among the recommendations in this report was to restructure the military into small armies of one hundred and fifty thousand men, that would be capable of conducting “multiple theater wars.”
This approach is in direct conflict with the old conservative guard, known as the Powell Doctrine, that called for use of overwhelming force. We have seen this reflected in the disputes between Rumsfeld and Powell concerning troop levels in Iraq. From the start, I personally agreed with Powell and the old school conservatives. Time has shown that I was not incorrect in siding with Powell and the old school philosophy.
We have now seen a changing of the guard with the stepping down of Gen John Abizaid, who has been serving as overall commander, and the nomination of Adml William Fallon to replace Abizaid. As well, Gen George Casey, who has maintained that we should slowly pull out as the Iraqis step up, will be retiring. Nominated to take his place is Lt Gen David Petraeus, who led the 101st Airborne’s Screaming Eagles during the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and then devised a successful counter-insurgency plan. We will see if the democrats will choose to drag their feet in the isle, or confirm the new nominations.
Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid sent a letter to President Bush saying that they feel sending more troops is not the answer, offering the suggestion that we should seek diplomatic solutions.
The talk now is a surge in troop levels by about thirty to forty thousand. My opinion is that this is still not enough and that troop levels need to be doubled in order to quell the violence. If this continued violence is not stopped, than all else fails. Business will not be able to function, people will not feel secure, and the government will remain stagnant and impotent. Further half-measures simply will not do.
So far, the taste of freedom has been bitter-sweet for the Iraqi people. On one hand, a brutal dictator was removed and the people freed to elect their own government. On the other hand this gave the Iraqi people freedom to slaughter each other. This is on them and not America. I would be embarrassed, if I was an Iraqi, with the way my fellow citizens have conducted themselves. Freedom is a great thing when held by people of virtue. It is the most wicked of things when held in the hands of barbarians. We may be able to bring freedom, but I do not know if we can bring virtue. This is something that has to be cultivated amongst the people themselves.
In order for there to be any hope of virtue being able to take hold, the violence must be suppressed. The only way for this to take place is through overwhelming force, which another forty thousand troops will not satisfy. All of the borders need to be sealed, both in Iraq and in America. We have our doors wide open on both ends.
Even with all of this, there is no guarantee that Iraq will become democratic. Not in the short run. This is totally up to the Iraqi people. You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink. The Middle East is about one thousand years behind in the realm of moral development.
No matter what the outcome, we must move forward and not back. The question is how to proceed. The Democrats offer nothing in a way forward. The current administration offers a way forward, but it still seems to be filled with half measures. I hope we double the troop levels, I hope we institute the draft. And I hope that other nations, who up to this point have fallen woefully short in stepping up to the plate to do their duty, get involved for the benefit of humanity. This week’s change of guard might be a good beginning.
January 8th, 2007 at 10:44 am
Weblog Awards Voting is Closed…
The voting is over, and SCO placed 5th in its field of 10. Congratulations to Blogs of War, the (so far unofficial) winner of our bracket, with almost double the votes of the second place contender…….