« Sirota: Dems Beware | Main | Today's Housing Bubble Post - Another One »


August 14, 2007

What If The Surge Is Working?

-- by Dave Johnson

What if "The Surge" IS making things a bit better for Iraqis? What if by finally, finally bringing a larger force in, allowing the military to apply forces effectively and working with Iraqis instead of against them, things are getting a bit better for the people there? What if this is delaying the civil war that Republican incompetence caused - and is bringing Iraq some breathing room to look for a diplomatic solution?

Let's step back and take a look at this possibility.

Here is a lesson we should all learn from watching how the conservatives operate: don't do what they do. We should always, always look at things the way they are, and not be blinded by ideology and preconceptions.

Bush and the Republicans have created a terrible, terrible mess in the Middle East. But we have to look at where things are today, and figure out how to make the world better starting today.

We want to avoid bringing about another Darfur in Iraq, so we have to look at where things are today, what might work to make things better, and go from there. What if the surge is working?

Posted by Dave Johnson at August 14, 2007 10:10 AM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.seeingtheforest.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-t.fcgi/3170


Comments

I'm not understanding what you are trying to do here Dave. From each and every EVERY account that I have read, the surge is not helping the Iraqis or the Americans either.

I know that you and I have a major disagreement about American engagement in Iraq--you think we have to fix it and I believe that the same rationale (mindset) that created this tragic situation would be completely incapable of fixing it if they wanted to, which I have several hundred billion rea$ons- possibly a trillion or more- to believe there is no motivation for them (u$) to do more than $ow more rea$ons why we must $tay and $ave the day.

If you have any contrary evidence, I would love to see it-you know I'm a regular reader.

Posted by: grannyinsanity [TypeKey Profile Page] at August 14, 2007 3:27 PM

The so-called surge wasn't really a surge but a change in strategy. We only sent in 20,000 more troops. So the question really should be, after the incredible number of mistakes and miscalculations that were made, what's the plan? What are our goals in Iraq? Aside from reducing the place to dust and killing everybody? The goal can't be 'victory' because we're conducting an occupation, not fighting a war. The goal can't be forcing some kind of ideological commitment, either; we already did that when that election was held. The goal has to pretty much be some kind of stable, functioning Iraqi government, and that's up to the Iraqis, isn't it?

Posted by: MJ [TypeKey Profile Page] at August 14, 2007 4:51 PM

I'm new to the blog, but i like this post. It's Objective - not particularly informative - but objective. Very becoming of the blog's name.

- MikeB

Posted by: mtb167 [TypeKey Profile Page] at August 15, 2007 6:51 AM

Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)


Remember me?



Email this entry to:


Your email address:


Message (optional):


Return to main page