Iraq
September 10th, 2007 |That’s the depth of the problem we’re dealing with: even doubling our troop presence and utilizing them properly hasn’t had much effect on security in Iraq — and it hasn’t had any effect on the political situation. Given this, does anyone seriously think that a mere six additional months of the surge will change the underlying dynamics in Iraq enough to have made a permanent difference?
No one who is serious will seriously think it will make a difference.
3 Responses to “Iraq”
It’s absolutely crucial to have our troops in Iraq for 6 more months. Their presence will allow for the crucial transfer of blame–from Bush to our next president. Bush can stride out of office with reagan-like detachment and cravat-wearing panache. He shouldn’t be tarnished by this unfortunate mess. Our troops should be willing to shed their blood to protect his legacy. Americans will fondly remember Bush’s calm control over Iraq as we watch president obama preside over the apocolyptic withdrawal.
is it really a surge? It seems like it’s just trying to replace the troops from the coalition of those no longer willing.
is it really a surge? It seems like it’s just trying to replace the troops from the coalition of those no longer willing.
The troops from Palau or the ones from Tonga?