Tuesday, March 13, 2007
The biggest credible indictment of the Bush administration's planning and execution of the invasion and occupation of Iraq is that it failed to imagine the many ways in which the enemy would adjust to each American initiative, whether on the battlefield or in the political reconstruction of the country. It was as if we were planning to fight the war as we imagined or hoped it would be, rather than as it was.
Well, without quite saying as much, the editors of the Washington Post are now accusing the Democrats of doing the same thing:
In short, the Democratic proposal to be taken up this week is an attempt to impose detailed management on a war without regard for the war itself. Will Iraq collapse into unrestrained civil conflict with "massive civilian casualties," as the U.S. intelligence community predicts in the event of a rapid withdrawal? Will al-Qaeda establish a powerful new base for launching attacks on the United States and its allies? Will there be a regional war that sucks in Iraqi neighbors such as Saudi Arabia or Turkey? The House legislation is indifferent: Whether or not any of those events happened, U.S. forces would be gone.
The title of the editorial is "The Pelosi Plan for Iraq: It makes perfect sense, if the goal is winning votes in the United States."
Read the whole thing.
The WAPO has long advocated for a muscular policy in Iraq so this editorial position seems in line with their prior positions. It is also a note of caution to the Democrats Let's see if they heed this.
Throughout the Iraq war one of the most surprising aspects has been the military and civilians lack of communicating a very simple, but very true maxim of war.
It was first propounded by Helmuth von Moltke (the Elder). After studying Napoleons tactics at Waterloo and the Battle at Bautzen. He divised new ways of thinking about tactics. But his most profound acknowledgement was this:
No battle plan survives contact with the enemy.
The second and not so famous maxim is.... War is a matter of expedients.
War does not move in a linear motion.Certainly there is no political body on earth that can formulate,debate,alter, compromise,debate again, and then pass any strategy that wouldn't be superceded by the realities on the ground where the soldiers fight the war and the generals adapt to the flux and fog of war.
For the Democratic Party to undertake this micromanagement of a war thousands of miles away is absurd. Hell the House Permanent Committee on Intelligence recently minted Chairman Silvestre Reyes within the past month could not identify the Sunni and Shiite adversaries...THIS MAN IS THE F'NG CHAIRMAN OF THE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE.
The Democrats are a herd of poseur and charlatans whose only desire is to sully the President. If that loses the war, well to them that's just par for the course.
Moltke's main thesis was that military strategy had to be understood as a system of options since only the beginning of a military operation was plannable. As a result, he considered the main task of military leaders to consist in the extensive preparation of all possible outcomes. NOTICE he said military leaders do the planning. We fail in our wars now because we put political and cultural considerations above winning on the battlefield. And from Korea,Vietnam,Central America,Gulf WarI we have done nothing to unlearn that lesson. One may not be able to unring a bell but we CAN learn that you win wars by conquering the enemy first.
The President has been doing an excellent job of botching the war without any help at all. Maybe with the Democrats on board things will improve.
Of course, the conservative Dems are holding up any real change.
It's nice to see a new voice over here, Habu1. We'll get to know each other over time.
Has Bush made mistaken choices in Iraq? He certainly has. does this make him the villian that people like screwy hoolie need him to be? Certainly not.
It is laughable to laud the Democrats at this point and only a blinded partisan could do so.
let's take this same Mr Reyes, who before the november election was advocating an increase in troop strength. Immediately upon its announcement that same Mr Reyes began lamenting the proposed increase. he' a partisan hack, a man interested solely in demagoguery. It is difficult to accept statements from people like Screwy since he so clearly supports these same feckless democrats.
Screwy, when will the Democrats pick a position with an expiration date AFTER the next poll?