Wednesday, February 24, 2010
I argued that while the Iraq 'surge' could cut down on the violence (as it indeed has), it would not lead to peace in Iraq... and the reduction in violence would only last as long as our troops were there keeping things quiet.
This prediction was based on my (6,000 mile away) sense that the Iraqis didn't care to live happily with one another... that they weren't interested in sharing power with one another... and that they would use violence to keep from having to do so.... and they would resort to violence once our troops were out of the way.
And I felt it stupid to equate a temporary reduction in violence with long term 'victory' in Iraq. It's one thing to have American troops clamp down on insurgents, and so much so that the insurgents cut back on their attacks for fear of being detected, caught and killed... but it is a whole different matter to believe that this would lead people who for thousands of years haven't liked one another to abandon their long standing complaints in order to hold hands, drink Cokes and live together in peace.
Well... it seems like no less an expert than Thomas Ricks seems to agree that Iraq ain't in such great shape, that trouble lies ahead, and is calling for a slowdown in the plans to pull US troops out of Iraq.
And the funny thing? The anti-war folks, Obama included, were right when they said the surge wouldn't work, that it wouldn't result in true peace. But for some reason, Obama and Biden have decided to take ownership of Iraq... just in time for it to fall apart. So now the guy who opposed the war now has to finish it... right after taking credit for the 'victory' they were stupid enough to think we had achieved.