Pros of Bush's Plan and What about Sadr?--Mass Links

I've dealt with the negatives of the plan--particularly the Iranian/Syrian attacks and lack of dealing with Iraq in regional and international setting. Mass links to follow.

There are what Tom Barnett and Steve DeAngelis call non-kinetics to this new plan. Commentary from the two (co-authored) here. They both talk about the good things coming out of the new counterinsurgency doctrine and non-kinetics but neither see (even with that) this 20,000 troop surge will bring stability. I agree.

Interestingly, Kagan and Keane, the proponents of the surge option are against entering Sadr City, the stronghold of Muqtada al Sadr and the JAM (Jaish al-Mahdi, Mehdi Army). Video of their views in favor of the surge here.

A good Bloggingheads on this subject here.

John Robb more pesimisstic here.

Juan Cole has an interesting theory that PM Nouri al-Maliki has simply told Sadr to calm his people down and lay low for now. Which means the Kagan-Keane version of the surge (vs. McCain's who wants to after Sadr like yesterday) might very well be just a Sunni bloodbath--what has been my fear all along. Don't know what to make of Cole's assertion--seems very possible.

Bush/Cheney are really rolling the dice here-what a buddy at school calls "playing Risk". In this week we have seen the Americans capture Iranians at the Kurdish embassy and recently broke into the offices of SCIRI Leader Abdul Aziz al-Hakim ("the moderate Shia" as he is now known). In other words we attack the Iranians allied with the two groups we are seeking to unite against Sadr ("the moderate coalition"), Sadr himself one of the most anti-Iranian of anybody in Iraq, even though he is Shia.

I don't know if they know what they are doing and/or just don't get the situation/alliances. Partly this is part of Bush's dream (illusion?) of a moderate coalition arising.....in Lebanon? in Palestine? in Jordan? in Iraq? Where Mr. President?

As Thomas Friedman said there are no Vaclev Havels, Thomas Jeffersons, James Madisons, or Lech Walseas on the other of the Middle East Saddam Hussein held-up "Berlin Wall". Bush is a true believer that there is some such person/statesman. There isn't.

Of course the right-wing has formulated this as either you are for the surge or for defeat. False. I could be for a surge if it is fixed to a political solution--which this plan is not. The solution is de facto partition and population movements. That is not defeat nor just being for surge without any larger strategic plan.

The question then remains for the right--instead of critics are inherently pro-defeat--what happens when this surge fails.