Thoughts on Odom and Hewitt

Radio interview between Lt.Gen William Odom and Hugh Hewitt, listen here.

This interview encapsulates my frustrations with both (typical though not the only) left and right wing responses and what I see as this ignorant stalemate over Iraq and Middle Eastern myopia.

Odom has called for immediate American withdrawal from Iraq. He has been calling for this for sometime. He scores a point by noting that no country has any investment in Iraqi security so long as America is involved as occupier. Iran and Saudi Arabia are working back door deals (see interesting piece on Saudi diplomacy here).

Hewitt asks him repeatedly what will be the result of a precipitous American withdrawal. Odom waffles. He should in my opinion be more honest and just say genocide will happen in fact it is already happening--why would over a million people flee a country in less than 5 years if there wasn't genocide and social breakdown?

Hewitt is part of Victory Caucus.com whose main effort this week has been to work to unseat the 17 Republicans who voted for the non-binding House Resolution. In other words, victory in their minds is a must, although minus some triple bank shot on the surge I see very little in the way of a strategy outlined as to how realistically this can be achieved. Victory is not a strategy goes the saying.

So I can't really side with either of these men--only partial points scored to either. I go back to the difference between seeing this as a war or as post-war peacekeeping. One piece both Odom and Hewitt agree on, which is where I fundamentally part ways with both, is that they see the Iraq conflict as a war. I do not. Although I use that language for convenience's sake, I do not see it as a war. The war was over when Saddam and the Army was defeated. War in the conventional sense is heading the way of the dodo but what is not and what is increasing is terrorism, state breakdown, ethnic conflict, and the rest.

Odom is far too soft on Hussein. Hewitt makes the useless analogy to Nazis WWII--again if you accept that premise the Nazis are Sunni jihadists which means the Iranians are the Soviets which means by Hewitt's own logic Iran should have a nuke and we should work with them. I think it's a dumb analogy, but at least follow it properly if you are going to use it. But sadly Hewitt asks about how an Iranian nuke will mean Ahmadinejad will rain down atom bombs on Israel and deterrence won't work because he is waiting for the Apocalypse.

Only problem? He doesn't make that decision and has no real effective power. Hewitt brings out these useless fear-tactic tropes that only undermines his own position--which has some merits to it no doubt, but this stuff is just so stupid. Odom correctly slams him on his superficial Iranian foreign policy reading.

On the other hand, Odom leads towards isolationism and the left-wing becomes the new realist camp of stability in the Middle East. Hewitt sees defeat not as a possibility and that plan leads to a further weakening of the US Army and its image around the world as it will continue to be unable to completely thwart the insurgency---that is their home, they do not need to win but rather not lose to win.

But neither then calls for the strategy and army and more importantly the non-kinetic reconstruction department necessary.

Hewitt's position would be strengthened a la his point about genocide if he were to argue that the US should be promoting Saudi-Iranian diplomacy as well as the Palestinian Unity gov't with Israel, Turks and Kurds, and Syria with Israel. Those dynamics are going to decide the future of that region not the Americans. By the stupid policy of not recognizing the Palestinians minus the Israel status, by not dealing with Iran and Syria diplomatically, the US has isolated itself and made itself impotent. Therefore it can only continue bluster through more military buildup and scare tactics which are showing structural weakness, e.g. the botched Iranian charges last week.

This interview and the Senate/House debates about debating about debating symbolic resolutions are very meaningless to me.

The Left hasn't thought through what after drawdown. Hewitt-like elements of the right won't face up to the realities on the ground. The Left doesn't want to admit its position is going to be a massive humanitarian tragedy for Iraqis. The Right doesn't want to admit that it is a major cause as to why that day of reckoning is sadly soon upon us. A pox on both those houses.