The Last Big Bet

The spokespeople supporting the continuation and escalation of the war in Iraq are fewer and fewer. Now we are down to the few diehards from a few think tanks to cheer the continuing devastation. Most of them admit that this is the last opportunity to "win" the war. They seem to be more concerned with the consequences of losing. The fact is that we can learn from our mistakes only if we realize that we have made them. This particular foreign policy adventure was a gamble to begin with and is now simply on the last "all or nothing" bet.

Detaching myself, for the moment, from the reality of war I will try to look at the possibility of "winning". Can the military do it? They say they can only sustain an increase for about six months; beyond that time the Iraqi military will have to be prepared to sustain any advances in stability. The military can do that much and would deserve our fondest respect for the devotion and effort involved. A political solution is another matter; this too is possible but it may require accepting an Iraq that is not a democracy but an evolving theocracy. It may also mean that Iraqi oil will be going to China and probably not to the U.S. to the extent that we are not able to accept such outcomes we will be limiting the political options. If by winning we mean a stable Iraq then we must allow the Iraqis to form a government that works regardless of its shape or sympathies. This requires that we hold formal peace talks with Iran. Syria, Turkey and Iraq where we play a role of facilitator and not negotiator. The object is stability and peace not overt U. S. interests. If we can succeed in saying that we want the region to rule itself we will have won and having won we may yet have some small influence on the direction and outcome of future events. It is less than we went in with but it is more than we have right now. I am not as confident that the State Department is as capable of such focus. The military has more regard for human sacrifice.


Now let me return to reality. Everything the President said about the prospects of failure are accurate and he would do well to start forming a strategy for dealing with those outcomes now than by putting more troops in the line of fire. Some in Congress think that we should limit the Commander in Chief's ability to wage war by not funding for the additional troops. It matters little that this is probably unconstitutional what matters is that it will have no effect. They should be demanding from both sides of the isle that regional talks be initiated now. Secretary of State Rice should be presenting proposals now. The President should be proposing it now. Instead The Secretary appeared in Congress to hail the policy of escalation. Her response to the question of negotiations was that we have no leverage and that we would appear as a supplicant. It is time that you eat humble pie, Madame Secretary, than to uselessly sacrifice more American lives to the alter of winning. The unfeeling President has decided to move another carrier group into the gulf--the assumption is that he is planning to target nuclear facilities in Iran. Another unilateral attack on a Moslem nation will do more to advance the causes of terror than anything the terrorists could possibly dream up and it will be a perfect excuse for developing nuclear weapons as a deterrent and a defense against such aggression.


I am reminded of the "Where is F.E.M.A." signs of a year ago. Government is ugly when it fails and it is failing on a grand scale now. I'll tell you what approach the congress could take that is constitutional; they could impeach him for gross negligence of his responsibilities.