<body><script type="text/javascript"> function setAttributeOnload(object, attribute, val) { if(window.addEventListener) { window.addEventListener('load', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }, false); } else { window.attachEvent('onload', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }); } } </script> <div id="navbar-iframe-container"></div> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> gapi.load("gapi.iframes:gapi.iframes.style.bubble", function() { if (gapi.iframes && gapi.iframes.getContext) { gapi.iframes.getContext().openChild({ url: 'https://www.blogger.com/navbar.g?targetBlogID\x3d27708445\x26blogName\x3dWatchingTheHerd\x26publishMode\x3dPUBLISH_MODE_BLOGSPOT\x26navbarType\x3dLIGHT\x26layoutType\x3dCLASSIC\x26searchRoot\x3dhttp://watchingtheherd.blogspot.com/search\x26blogLocale\x3den\x26v\x3d2\x26homepageUrl\x3dhttp://watchingtheherd.blogspot.com/\x26vt\x3d8775860279176631146', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe" }); } }); </script>

Monday, February 05, 2007

War Detractors Offer No Ideas

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070205/ap_on_go_co/us_iraq

"I don't think it's appropriate to say that you disapprove of a mission and you don't want to fund it and you don't want it to go, but yet you don't take the action necessary to prevent it," said McCain, top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee and a 2008 presidential candidate from Arizona.

(snip)

Bush's new budget on Monday will ask for $100 billion more for military and diplomatic operations in Iraq and Afghanistan this year — on top of $70 billion already approved by Congress for the current year. The budget will call for $145 billion in war spending for 2008.


=======================

1) The policy team that was willing to lie to lead America into war is not likely to suddenly adopt reality and truthfulness as a core strategy component.

2) The policy team that ignored the military and starved the original mission of manpower required to ensure stability after the fall of Saddam is not likely to have learned any tactical lessons if they still have to shop for generals by retiring and reassigning commanders until they find ones which agree with their ideas.

3) Spending billions more to "rebuild" Iraq's infrastructure before eliminating the threat of sabotage produces no improvement in the political situation or security situation. The only thing it produces is more profits for American contractors and consultants who get to "contract" and "consult" for the same project over and over again.

4) No one supporting additional troop deployments can describe exactly how putting more soldiers in the path of roadside bombs and more helicopters in the path of rocket-propelled grenades is weakening the enemy or destroying their ability to wage war. The $363 billion we have spent so far has not demonstrably weakened our original enemy, Al Qaeda or our new enemy within Iraq, militant Shi'a and Sunni fanatics eager to kill each other or kill Americans in the way. How is the next $315 billion for 2007 and 2008 going to produce results different than those produced by the first $363 billion? Is twice the strife our goal?

John McCain's argument that those without a complete strategy for extricating us from the current debacle must stay silent while its original planners worsen the situation is far more cowardly than attempting to apply the brakes through a non-binding resolution.

Continuing to expand our presence is a crass attempt to delay public recognition of the fact that flawed American decision-making lost a war that shouldn't have been waged in the first place.

How about THAT for an idea?