Thursday, June 07, 2007
It's nobody's fault........
Those losers have the audacity to report that the Iraqi government is still ineffectual.........despite being given lots of time. Don't they know? ITS NOT THEIR FAULT!
Because when it comes to Iraq-to hear some on the right spout off-you cannot blame anyone for the current fact that we are still stuck there for what will be a fifth and a sixth year.
The President cannot be blamed. He was compelled to invade the "Central Front". Greatest idea since sliced bread-so goes the argument of William "The bloody" Kristol.
Congress can't be blamed-they were blackmailed into supporting the troops. Never mind that they approved the funding the President requested 3 separate times-with timetables for withdrawal attached-it is not their fault that we have to stay and stay and stay. That's the current leadership line-which if recent polls are to be judged is not selling well with the American people.
The US military leadership cannot be blamed-there is a whole segment of bloggers and others who are accusing any one who writes critically of the military leadership of being at the best, insubordinate-at the worst playing into the hands of the terrorists. Our current flag officer leadership is on a noble quest-don't you know that? No one can criticize them because they are not flag officers themselves. Even at a time the former commander in Iraq says things are not as rosy as they appear to be.
Sad to see an Army man work so hard just to become a surrender monkey..........
Nor is it the fault of the civilian leadership that was at the Pentagon-who have all moved on to cushy high paying jobs elsewhere-they had to tinker with the OPLAN. It was not transformational.
Can't be that they should have left well enough alone and did their real job-properly resourcing the armed forces-no not at all. Paul Wolfowitz is just a victim.
Of a woman and mean old World Bankers who don't want change.
And Rummy was set up too. ( By his own stubbornness-but don't bother me with facts.)
So maybe it is the Iraqi's fault- for being useless Arabs who will not put their differences behind them and seizing the opportunity that was given to them. For being tied down in stupid tribal struggles over the legacy of an apostate religion.
NO NO NO! Says Robert Kagan-brother of the author of the "surge" Fred Kagan. Its not the Iraqis fault. Never mind that their government "has been a disappointment. " Its still is somehow not their fault:
Blaming the Iraqis also allows Republicans to acquiesce in defeat without having to acknowledge that it is an American defeat. We didn't fail, the Iraqis did. And blaming the Iraqis clears the American conscience. We got rid of Saddam Hussein, Republicans will say. The rest was up to them, and they failed. The more sophisticated will declare that the Iraqis were culturally destined to fail.
As with any good cover story, there is just enough truth in this one to sell it to those who need an excuse. The Iraqi government has been a disappointment. Sunni and Shiite leaders don't have an easy time compromising with one another, as opposed to, say, Democrats and Republicans in Congress. Sectarian killings continue.
It is what's wrong with this story, however, that makes it so irresponsible. The fact is that, contrary to so many predictions, Iraq has not descended into civil war. Political bargaining continues. Signs of life are returning to Baghdad and elsewhere. Many Sunnis are fighting al-Qaeda terrorist groups, not their Shiite neighbors. And sectarian violence is down by about 50 percent since December.
So says Mr Kagan. Of course he has no axe to grind-even though his brother Fred was the author of the "surge" strategy and it might look bad to criticize his fellow family member's handi-work. The fact that others document the facts in a very different manner makes not a whit of difference to him. Or that by the traditional definition of a Civil War, Iraq has been in one for 6 months.
It can't be their fault.
Because after all, when they said this-they must have been mistaken back in November of last year:
Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki said Thursday that his country's forces would be able to assume security command by June 2007 — which could allow the United States to start withdrawing its troops.
"I cannot answer on behalf of the U.S. administration but I can tell you that from our side our forces will be ready by June 2007," Maliki told ABC television after meeting President Bush on Thursday in Jordan.
Maliki was replying to a question about whether U.S. troops could start withdrawing at that time.
As in contrast to now when their president says not till the end of 2008. But hey-its not his fault his country does not work. Actually to hear others tell it-they have accomplished a lot.
Maybe Iran then-yea its all their fault. Its definitely Al Qaeda's fault.
"If we were to fail, they'd come and get us. … If we let up, we'll be attacked. … It's better to fight them there than here."
Guess that explains that whole JFK thing then?
And it does not explain the circular logic that was pointed out a couple of weeks ago:
See if you can follow this argument: The United States has to be in Iraq to fight the terrorists who are in Iraq because the United States is in Iraq.
If you do follow that familiar argument, you're going in a circle. It's familiar because President Bush has argued it many times before, trying to make the case that Iraq is the "central front in the war on terror." His circular argument didn't persuade Americans before. But that hasn't stopped him from recycling it now.
It's nobodies fault. Because like Love Story making a strategic mistake that runs against the national interest-means not having to say "your sorry".