So now the battle lines are being drawn over what will happen with the President's new "surge" plan. I'm not sure why they are calling it a surge. A surge is by definition something temporary. In this case, the administration has no date or plan or timetable to remove this alleged "surge" in the future. The word that should be used is escalation. There is no doubt that this is what is about to happen. Just like Vietnam, we are going to throw more lives into the pit to hopefully fill it up instead of responsibly acknowledging the pit's danger and putting up a guard rail to stop troop loss.
As for the clear plan the President now tells he has, where is it? The plan he proposed on Wednesday is nothing more than a rehash of what we have been doing for the last 18 months. We will:
1. Fight Shiite death squads in Sadr City that are sponsored by Sadr. (We've done this continually)
2. Squeeze more enforcement troops into Baghdad proper. (We've done this three times)
3. Push the training of the Iraqi Army up the priority list (They keep saying this but we still only have 2 independent combat battalions after 4 years of training!)
4. Not leave till we achieve the amorphous "victory" the President stubbornly refuses to define clearly.
5. Spend money on infrastructure (9 billion of this money is unaccounted for already and in the pockets of contractors like Halliburton)
This further disappoints me because we have a plan on the table from the bi-partisan Baker Commission on Iraq that WOULD (not could) work. It's comprehensive, and would in effect allow us to claim victory by leaving a stable Iraq behind. Unfortunately the President threw the entire report (except for the word "forward" on the cover) in the curcular filer (trashcan). The only problem with the plan that I can see is that the President has determined in his black or white world that Iran and Syria are black, and may never be allowed to become white. He absolutely refuses to talk to them. The reality is that few nations are black or white. Almost all are a shade of gray.
I know some of you are saying "Aren't they evil?" and my answer would be no. They are just nations. A nation is neither good or evil. They are generally only interested in pursuing their interests to the exclusion of all else. Diplomacy is the art of talking other nations into agreeing that their interests are the same, or benefit, from aligning themselves with your own interests. In order to do that one must talk with their adversaries. Demonizing Iran and Syria, and cutting them off from dialogue is a foolish move that makes the United States (not Iran and Syria) appear childish and foolish. With just a little cooperation between the US and Iraq's neighbors, we could fix Iraq. Further, if it was successful and allowed these nations to take some credit for the fix, we might just be able to get help on the Lebanese and Palestinian issue as well. These problems are all intertwined.
I am writing my letters this morning to all my representatives asking them to oppose the escalation "surge" plan. I think it's time to finally say no to this President about something and make him learn to adapt. The time for letting King George dictate policy without oversight or consequence is over. It's time to kick the Democrats in the pants and make sure they keep that backbone someone lent them. The only thing things will change is if the American people care enough to not just be a poll respondent, but if they communicate regularly with their elected representatives. We have the power, and only we can end this war.
