Tonight president Bush articulated (as only he can) his plan to increase the troop level in Iraq by a little over 20,000.  Personally, I’m not sold on the move.  I think that “going big” - bigger than even what he is now proposing - might have helped at one point in time, but that ship may have sailed.

However, I thought he did an adequate job of laying his plan out.  Al-Malaki’s government has turned a blind eye to the Shiite “death squads” that have fomented the sectarian fighting.  Apparently Bush told al-Malaki to get in line or get run over because it sounds like those death squads that have operated with impunity will now be in the cross hairs.  Bush is taking a hard line against Iran and Syria; all but opening the option of cross border strikes.  I’m sure there will be much hand wringing in the media at his refusal to follow the ISG’s suggestion of diplomacy.

In military parlance Iraq could be labeled a charlie foxtrot.  It’s a bad situation, but it is the situation we created.  The president is 100% correct when he says that simply pulling out of Iraq would be disastrous.  All of the people who lament the atrocities taking place in Darfur would find a new cause célèbre in post-surrender Iraq.  The low level sectarian war would become an unconstrained war ending in the “cleansing” of the losing sect.  Bush’s plan may not be the best, but it at least attempts to avoid this outcome.

Dick Durbin, whom I loathe, was responsible for the Democratic response.  (Every time I see Durbin the word goober comes to mind.)  I’m a little sick of the (insert other party name) response after every major policy speech.  One person says the sky is blue and the responder says it’s red simply to go on record as refuting the first guy.  Anyway, Durbin’s response was pretty sad.  First there was this gem of a line:

“Instead of a new direction, the president’s plan moves the American commitment in Iraq in the wrong direction.”

Well Dick, if the president is moving us in a direction, wrong or right, then it is a new direction.  You may not like it, but it is a new direction.

Whereas Bush offered details, Durbin proffered his preferred option of withdrawal without details as to how and why it will work.  He just said it would work.  He thinks that the Iraqi government, who can’t quell the rebellion with our help, will be able to accomplish that goal without our help.  I’ll agree that our very presence encourages some of the attacks, but that doesn’t mean an abrupt absence would eliminate the violence.

Related content:

This entry was posted by Brian on Wednesday, January 10th, 2007 at 11:04 pm and is filed under Iraq. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site. Please note the copyright policy.