Political Forum - View Single Post

jsh1120 · #3 (**permalink**) 07-09-2007, 05:45 AM

So this is what the pollyanna's are reduced to? "Only" an average of 40 dead civilians a day in Iraq? An "estimate" from an anonymouse Iraqi government source who, undoubtedly, has no reason to minimize the figures. Of course, July isn't looking very good, what with hundreds killed in separate bombings over the first 8 days and the average number of bodies turning up each morning in Baghdad alone averaging 40-50.

But forget all that. No need to preach to 'the Left." You might want to contact the senior Republican senators that are jumping ship. I'm sure they're simply unaware how well things are going. Poor old Dick Lugar and Pete Domenici are obviously out of touch. But while you're at it, you might want to get in touch with Bob Novak who characterized the White House as "out of touch" and quoted a Republican senator who attended recent meetings with Stephen Handley, the President's National Security Advisor, as ""not recognizing the depth of the difficulty they are in." (When Bob Novak writes this stuff there aren't many rats left on the ship.)

Or perhaps you should alert the White House, itself. According to reports today, Secy Gates is pushing for what is essentially a commitment to the Iraq Study Group proposal from last year. “When you count up the votes that we’ve lost and the votes we’re likely to lose over the next few weeks, it looks pretty grim,” said one senior (White House) official..."

Of course, all of this is pretty academic. There has never been any question that if you flood Iraq with enough troops (and make them targets) it's possible to "put a lid on a sectarian cauldron," as Colin Powell put it in an interview over the weekend. At least for awhile.

Trouble is, of course, that keeping that lid in place, even at the current level of conflict, requires troops the US doesn't have. On current deployment schedules, there won't be anyone else to send to Iraq after nine more months. And those schedules have already lengthened deployments to 15 months. The only option then will be to send the National Guard back in force and lengthen the deployments to 24 months.

According to Novak, the plan may well be to stretch it out long enough to shift blame to the military. "Hadley increased latent fears of the U.S. military being made the fall guy -- a concern shared by many retired and some active senior officers, including a current infantry division commander."

When the pullout begins, I'm sure you'll find some way to claim that despite all this magnificent "progress," "the Left" will be responsible for cutting and running. In fact, of course, it will simply be that there are no options left to this incompetent administration and no more cannon fodder available.

That assumes, of course, that somehow, some way, Bush will be able to keep the Republicans in the Senate as a blocking force 'till then. You'll discover though that political survival for those 21 Republicans up for re-election in '08 will weigh much more heavily than "progress" you're pointing to long before next March. And if that doesn't happen, Republicans in '08 will want to apply for inclusion on the endangered species list.