The Other Side of the Argument in Iraq

Readers of my blog know my position on Iraq.

This article by Kate O'Beirne (NRO) about Rep. Christopher Shays (R-Conn, probably the best and smartest Republican in the House by my lights) is the best I could find for those on the other side of the debate. Shays was a strong critic of things like de-Baathification, Rumsfield's Pentagon, Abu Ghraib, etc.

Article here.

The points are the ones you often hear in the talking points: the tribal leaders in Anbar fighting al-Qaeda, increased security in Baghdad (unfortunately the death rate the country over is just as high), etc.

My main disagreement: towards the end of the article O'Beirne (summarizing Shays) argues that Democrats got what they wanted from the 2006 election results......a SecDef, Commander, and a "new strategy."

There is no new strategy and that someone as bright as Kate O'Beirne (who is quite sharp) falls into this stupidity is sad. I can't guess whether she just doesn't know the difference between a strategy and a tactic (which would be very bad) or she does know better in which case she's making herself a mouthpiece for propaganda (which is much much worse). Either tarnishes her image.

The surge is a change in tactic. Not strategy. And certainly there is no new goal.

tags technorati : christopher shays

tags technorati : kate o'beirne