The New Way Forward In Iraq
The President’s New Iraq Strategy Is Rooted In Six Fundamental Elements:
1. Let the Iraqis lead;
2. Help Iraqis protect the population;
3. Isolate extremists;
4. Create space for political progress;
5. Diversify political and economic efforts; and
6. Situate the strategy in a regional approach.
Bush GW: 0-5; 2 K, BB. I mean, it sure is a "regional approach," isn't it? Beyond that? The Iraqis can't even get a hanging in without there being sectarian bullshit, we've been helping the Iraqis protect the population to wondrous effect over the last few years, extremists are rolling, and Iraqi pols can't go more than fifty yards before they get shot at. I mean, wow.
And the details are filled with never-gonna-happens. For example:
Work with additional Coalition help to regain control of the capital and protect the Iraqi population.
"OK. Everybody left in the Coalition--hey, Poland, where you going? C'mon, sit down for a sec. Right. We need more people to go into Baghdad. We promise you won't get shot at. Much. Any takers? Anybody? Not all at once."
And then there are these equally fanciful doozies:
Increase efforts to support tribes willing to help Iraqis fight Al Qaeda in Anbar.
Yeah. This worked really well in Afghanistan. (Or, I should say, would have, if we had kept the pressure on things there and not let the Taliban recover.) Even money that any said tribes become turncoats within a year.
Key Elements Of The New Approach: Political
[snip]
All Iraqi leaders support reconciliation.
Moderate coalition emerges as strong base of support for unity government.
Oh for Pete's sake. "All Iraqi leaders support reconciliation?" The Shiites are running the show, the Kurds are running their own show, and the Sunnis are running for cover. If you can see a moderate coalition running Iraq with any kind of coherence and competence, then you should quit your job and take over for the horoscope columnists (who sucked on today's predictions--they said bad day, I got a raise).
---
So what can we gather from this? Tonight is going to be a shell game--but Bush is probably going to suck at it so hard that the American people will know where the ball is at all times.
Post-preamble: Rich Lowry over at the National Review comes in with this wish, inter alia:
He should have some pretty strong words for Iran and Syria.
OK. He's on crack. If Iran and Syria start something, what in God's name could we do at this point? Any sane conservatives out there? Oddly enough, one of the far-righties, Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.), turned today. Per Andrew Sullivan:
I do not believe that sending more troops to Iraq is the answer. Iraq requires a political rather than a military solution. In the last two days, I have met with Prime Minister Maliki, with two deputy presidents and the president of the Kurdish region. I came away from these meetings convinced that the United States should not increase its involvement until Sunnis and Shi'a are more willing to cooperate with each other instead of shooting at each other.
Well then.
Well that was unexpected: Per MSNBC (TV, no link sadly, and thus no direct quote), the President will say that any mistakes that were made rest with him. That's interesting. The heads analyzing on the fly are supposing that the GOPers that abandoned the President (including Brownback, Collins, Coleman, and perhaps others) pushed his hand.
Kickoff is in a minute: are we going to get body / actual language that says "chastened," or "I hear you," or "screw you all?" Kick back and relax, guys.
2001 (CST): Katie Couric says that this is "his most important speech ever." Three words: bring back Schieffer.
2004: The President is talking about stuff that could happen. Sorry--it's happening now. And now a 9-11 / Iraq reference. Great.
2006: It's not just Baghdad and environs. We've lost a couple of outer provinces too. But anyway. He's now dictating policy to the Iraqi government. And saying the Iraqi goverment is going to do this--he apparently has faith in them. Uh-huh.
2010: Americans will have the green light to go into the hood, and Iraqis will cover us. What about this says "what the hell are you thinking?" And gaining trust from the people of Baghdad turns on (a) what part of town you're in, and (b) which brand of Islam you subscribe to. I don't know about this.
2012: Training of Iraqi troops is just about the only thing that makes sense at this point, if we are going to stick around. Other than that: a washout so far.
2013: Now he gets to Anbar province, where "we are protecting the local population." Not that it shows or anything. 4,000 more troops for this? And that would defeat al-Qaeda in Anbar?
2015: Rich Lowry called it -- Iran and Syria are getting it now. They might stick out their tongue at that one, but give it no further thought.
2016: Getting Arab states to help us? That seems like a gimmick play to me--wonderful if it comes through, but really dicey in the execution. Boise State got the miracle this year; could we get a second one here?
2018: "Democracy fighting for its life." And "bloody and violent" year ahead--a hedge, that. Oh: "no surrender on a battleship." They were talking about this pre-game, how this militates against that whole "mission accomplished" thing.
2019: "Phased withdrawal" equals total disaster. As opposed to moderately-bad disaster, which is what we have now, I guess. Scrutiny is welcome, he says. Lieberman gets a mention--that wasn't an accident, I figure.
2021: "Talented civilians." Does that sound like a bunch of contractors? Pass.
2022: Softlight now on the troops, so it looks like he's winding up.
2023: "The author of liberty." Which is to say the Big Fella, who is getting tired of this shit, just as we are.
Postamble: Same old shit, really. We waited since the election for this turn around, and we got just about what we expected--not much, in the end.
Post-postamble: The Iranians hold a lot of keys here, don't they? If they push, they can make things even worse than they are now. They can't do it openly, but they can cause a lot of trouble just under the surface.
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) is on now, calling it what Bush wouldn't: a civil war, based on "fourteen centuries" of conflict. Time for Iraqis to "stand and defend their own nation." Can they do it? Maybe not. Can we? It shows, doesn't it?
Well, that's it. I need a drink, and there's nothing useful in the fridge. Night, all.
