you noticed? The Bushites' zig-zagging military policy in Iraq has taken another
zig. Or is it a zag?
hard to know, because they change policy every few months. Last year, you might
recall, the official line was that our troops were not there to do the fighting
for Iraq, but to train the Iraqi military to take over. George W, wearing his
little commander-in-chief suit, said, "Our strategy can be summed up this way.
As the Iraqis stand up, we will stand down."
implied a withdrawal policy, and the Bushites even cited the number of Iraqi
troops who were to be trained – 325,000. You might also recall that they kept
touting the training strategy as a
great success last year. Eight of Iraq's 10 military divisions, they asserted,
were taking the lead against the insurgency. Progress!
it wasn't true. It was another Bush fabrication. In fact, in nearly every area
where the Iraq military was given control, the security situation deteriorated
rapidly. As one war analyst put it, "In our initial efforts to hand security
missions over to Iraqi forces, we took the training wheels off too early, and
the bike fell over."
the Bushites have not announced it, they have now abandoned the stand up/stand
down strategy. Instead, their new policy is that our soldiers will have to
defeat the insurgents. That's what Bush's "surge" is about – sending another
22,000 U.S. soldiers into the Baghdad meat grinder. Indeed, the surge plan
includes no new money or staff for training.
W calls his surge scheme: "A New Way Forward." Of course, it's not moving
forward at all; it's a step backward. Rather than fighting for America's
national interest or to "extend democracy," Bush has committed our troops and
our treasury to fight someone else's civil war.