By Chad Phillips
MTW contributing writer
Two separate stories: one from the New York Times and another from the Washington Post highlight the importance of politics with regard to the Iraq War.
While the Times story only mentions it in passing, the Post gives special deference to the fact that key Republicans are no longer supporting President Bush on his "surge" strategy in Iraq.
As Bush takes his show on the road in an effort to drum up public support, other voices are insisting that the surge is working.
Kagan and another surge supporter, retired Army Gen. John Keane, said the extra troops, the last of whom arrived just weeks ago, are having an impact and should be allowed to stay long enough to make it last. "In my judgment, the security situation is making steady, deliberate progress," Keane said. But he said that to succeed, "the operation has to continue into '08."
Continuing this strategy into an election year, particularly in light of the fact that some Republicans are distancing themselves from Bush is quite telling when one considers that the public favors bringing the troops home now.
Will Bush be able to turn the tide of antiwar sentiment and defecting GOP heavies? Not likely. With elections just around the corner, the GOP smells blood and with the general populace no longer in support of this war, the blood they smell might just be their own.
As you know, I never supported this war and always felt the justification was “dubious” at best.
However, since it was obvious from day one we were going no matter what, it really bothers me the plan was so…crappy.
The Neo-Cons spent at least a decade planning this war and this was the best strategy they came up with?
It’s a tribute to our soldiers that we even lasted this long. Most people would crack under that kind of pressure.
We can’t win no matter how long we stay. We began in such a hole we could never make up any ground.
The planning or lack thereof is a travesty.