"I just wonder if they will ever tell us the truth." - Harold Casey, Louisville, KY, October 2004.
Here's a speech that the marvelous Maverick McCain gave last year at Neocon Central, the American Enterprise Institute (AEI): Winning the War in Iraq 10/10/05.In this passage that is identical to one that appears in his "Stay to Win" article in January 2006 print issue of Current History (most of the article is very similar and in many places exactly the same), the great Maverick repeats stock Bush administration happy-talk:
Despite the daily bombings and attacks, the terrorists have not achieved their goals. They have failed to incite a civil war, because Kurds and Shia still have faith in the future and in American and Iraqi security efforts. The insurgents have not prevented Iraqis from joining the military and police, in spite of horrific attacks at recruiting centers. Oil exports continue, despite concerted efforts at sabotage. And the insurgents have not stopped the political process, even while they assassinate government officials and attack polling places.
The bold Maverick may have been indulging in some wishful thinking here. It wouldn't be the first time. After all, the old "straight-talker" cheered Bush's preventive war on Iraq based on fake claims about WMDs from the start.
Let's see: civil war, incipient civil war, the "brink" of civil war. But it don't look very good right now. Kurds and Shi'a still have faith in US and Iraqi security efforts? Well, at least the Shi'a did then because the US was still backing them in their sectarian non-civil-war against the Sunnis. Later the Americans started tilting a bit toward the evil, evil Baathists and vicious Sunni terrorists we've been fighting the last three years. So the Shi'a aren't so thrilled with Bush and his friends at the moment, it seems.
Teh insurgents have actually caused a lot of trouble for Iraqis joining the military and police. But there were plenty of sectarian militias who have been willing to sign up. And lots of spies for resistance groups, too.
And, yeah, oil exports continue. It's just that oil production is still far below prewar levels. And, no, the insurgents haven't stopped the political process. Not exactly. I mean, the parliament elected last December is still trying to form a government.
The Maverick back in November was saying that if the US withdraws soon, "the most likely result would be full scale civil war". It seems like the most likely result of the US staying is civil war, too.
The bold Maverick is fond of the testosterone argument for "staying the course". That's the one that says if the US withdraws, The Terrorists will brag to their buddies about how the United States is weak and we can't let them do that. That doesn't exactly explain why the US should continue with a disastrous policy that's badly damaging the country's interests. But, hey, we can't let The Terrorists get away with strutting in their caves about how they're superior to the Americans! So says the Maverick:
If we leave Iraq prematurely, the jihadists will interpret the withdrawal as their great victory against our great power. Osama bin Laden and his followers believe that America is weak, unwilling to suffer casualties in battle. They drew that lesson from Lebanon in the 1980s and Somalia in the 1990s, and today they have their sights set squarely on Iraq. The recently released letter from Ayman al-Zawahiri, bin Laden’s lieutenant, to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, draws out the implications. The Zawahiri letter is predicated on the assumption that the United States will leave Iraq, and that al Qaeda’s real game begins as soonas we abandon the country. In his missive, Zawahiri lays out a four stage plan – establisha caliphate in Iraq, extend the“jihad wave” to the secular countries neighboring Iraq, clash with Israel – none of which shall commence until the completion of stage one: expel the Americans from Iraq. Zawahiri observes that the collapse of American power in Vietnam, “and how they ran and left their agents,” suggests that “we must be ready starting now.”
Most of the arguments that the Maverick makes here are the same as the Current History piece. In fact, much of the language is identical. It's worth checking out what the Maverick has to say about staying in Iraq while the country goes to pieces around our soldiers.
Among other peculiar things is this argument, in which the famous Maverick seems to assume that the Afghan government of Hamid Karzai actually controls the country outside of Kabul, and that he's doing it on the strength of his own army:
The lesson of Afghanistan is instructive. There, the United States insisted – over initial objections from the Afghan Ministry of Defense – that each new military unit be carefully calibrated to include Pashtuns, Tajiks, Uzbeks, and others. This diversification within units serves three important functions: first, over time, it helps build loyalty to the central government; and second, it makes it more difficult for militias to reconstitute, should any decide to oppose the government. More broadly, the multiethnic Afghan National Army has provided a powerful psychological boost in a deeply divided country. Simply seeing Pashtuns and Tajiks and Uzbeks, in uniform and working together, has had a great impact on Afghan public opinion and the way Afghans imagine their country.
Does "straight-talk" mean "straight-out silly"? That would explain that colorful notion.
I talked about the Maverick's, uh, imaginative idea of how to reorient the American military effort in Iraq in a post at The Blue Voice. The bold Maverick's idea seems to be based on the famous line from the Vietnam War, "we had to destroy the village in order to save it".
Wars are easy to get into, but hard as hell to get out of." - George McGovern and Jim McGovern 06/06/05
No comments:
Post a Comment