Mission accomplished 2.0

Cal Thomas:

Nineteen months after Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid declared the war in Iraq "lost" and just nine months after Speaker Nancy Pelosi asserted the war has been a "failure" because it had not brought political change leading to reconciliation, it can now be said conclusively that both were wrong.

One of the great military reversals in history is close to achieving victory. That is contributing to stability in Iraq, along with reconciliation between warring factions.

These conclusions are contained in a report compiled by retired General Barry R. McCaffrey after a recent visit to Iraq during which he consulted with Iraqi and American military leaders and diplomats.

McCaffrey, now an adjunct professor of International Affairs at the United States Military Academy at West Point, wrote a memorandum for his academic colleagues. It concludes, "The United States is now clearly in the end game in Iraq to successfully achieve what should be our principle objectives: the withdrawal of the majority of U.S. ground combat forces ... in the coming 36 months; leaving behind an operative civil state and effective Iraqi security forces; an Iraqi state which is not in open civil war among the Shia, the Sunnis, and the Kurds; and an Iraqi nation which is not at war with its six neighboring states."

While adding that the security situation is "still subject to sudden outrage at any moment by al-Qaida in Iraq" or to "degradation because of provocative behavior by the Maliki government," McCaffrey concludes that "the bottom line is a dramatic and growing momentum for economic and security stability, which is unlikely to be reversible."

McCaffrey notes the sharp drop in attacks and casualties in the last two years and praises the "genius of the leadership team of Ambassador Ryan Crocker, General David Petraeus and Secretary of Defense Bob Gates." He credits these three with "turn(ing) around the situation from a bloody disaster under the leadership of Secretary Rumsfeld to a growing situation of security."

...

It must speak to Republican ineptitude that the Democrats did not pay a political price for being so wrong on such a vital national security issue.

I have been arguing lately about the screw up principal when it comes to election defeats. Democrats were very successful at convincing voters that Republicans had screwed up during the last two elections. On Iraq the opposite was the case, but the Republicans seemed to be more relieved that we were not losing than making the Democrats pay the price they should have for being so publicly wrong.

Comments

  1. Have the overall operations in Iraq improved more because we replaced SOD and commanding general and increased troop levels or have the operations been carried out in a more precise way with less restrictions to not use our arsenal of deadly technology? Doesn't it seem like we have been given greater latitude to attack with more sophisticated weapons on bigger targets?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Have the overall operations in Iraq improved more because we had new leadership and increased troop levels or have the operations been carried out in a more precise way with less restrictions to not use our arsenal of deadly technology? Doesn't it seem like we have been given greater latitude to attack with more sophisticated weapons?

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Bin Laden's concern about Zarqawi's remains