"Both the president's speech, and the Democrats' response to it, delivered by Sen. Dick Durbin (Ill.), contained passages that bordered on the bizarre. The president said, "If the Iraqi government does not follow through on its promises, it will lose the support of the American people." But that support was long since forfeited.
Durbin called upon Iraq's government to "disband" the militias and death squads. Not destroy, but "disband." How is that supposed to happen? By asking them nicely? "Disband, please, and on the way home, if you see a Sunni (Shiite), give him a hug." The great question is whether Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki will cooperate with crushing the Mahdi Army, which is the instrument of his patron, Muqtada al-Sadr.
Twenty years ago, Ken Livingstone, London's (very left-wing) mayor, wrote a book titled "If Voting Changed Anything They'd Abolish It." But America's November voting produced Wednesday's change in Iraq policy. Voters did not, however, intend to bring on what is coming: Chechnya in their living rooms - a spike of high-intensity, high-casualty urban warfare, televised.
Bush and his thoughtful critics, ostensibly at daggers drawn, are actually in agreement on three points. First, the failed policy of the last three years is militarily and politically unsustainable. Second, any substantial departure from that policy must involve a leap into the dark - a bet on the future about which no reasonable person can be confident.
Third, Wednesday night the nation embarked upon the beginning of the end of U.S. suzerainty in Iraq, where, Maliki has said, with more bravado than plausibility, that by June - about when the full surge probably will reach Iraq - his government will be able to handle its security challenges.
Foch's 1914 bravado helped produce the "miracle of the Marne," which was followed by four years of carnage which destroyed empires, including the Ottoman Empire, a shard of which became Iraq. Today, in Iraq, the president's policy - and that of his critics - is to hope for a miracle."
That is what all military leaders do when faced with a hard battle. Particularly when relying so heavily upon allies of indistinct valor. The key to a victory in Iraq resembles every other key back to the dawn of warfare, in that the fight must be without quarter, and the generals must adapt to the adaptations of the enemy. This means removing the artificial tether we've leashed our armed forces to, but, the ensuing scrutiny from the press will be unrelenting and merciless. More than anything, we'll all need an accomplished orator to coax us through the months ahead, and since Bush is horrid at public speaking and getting worse by the moment from whence will the necessary bravado come?
No comments:
Post a Comment