Tuesday, April 24, 2007

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 :
tags technorati :


Post a Comment

<< Home