We Shall Plan for Victory by...Planning for Victory
On Wednesday, the president spoke at the U.S. Naval Academy about his plan for victory in Iraq. Although the main purpose was clearly to bolster morale, it is worthwhile to look at the plan and try to see what it means for the future of the American presence in Iraq.
Posted on Yahoo! News by the AP:
Bush's speech at the U.S. Naval Academy, the first of at least three he'll give between now and the Dec. 15 Iraqi elections, did not outline a new strategy for the nearly three-year-old war. Rather, it was intended as a comprehensive answer to mounting criticism and questions. Billed as a major address, it brought together in a single package the administration's arguments for the war and assertions of progress on military, economic and political tracks.
And later in the article:
The president said the U.S. military's role in Iraq will shift from providing security and fighting the enemy nationwide to more specialized operations targeted at the most dangerous terrorists. "We will increasingly move out of Iraqi cities, reduce the number of bases from which we operate and conduct fewer patrols and convoys," the president said.
Still, Bush remained steadfastly opposed to imposing a deadline for leaving Iraq.
"Many advocating an artificial timetable for withdrawing our troops are sincere — but I believe they're sincerely wrong," Bush said. "Pulling our troops out before they've achieved their purpose is not a plan for victory."
Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada called on the president to release a strategy that has military, economic and political benchmarks that must be met. "Simply staying the course is no longer an option," Reid said. "We must change the course."
Bush was ready for that.
"If by `stay the course' they mean we will not permit al-Qaida to turn Iraq into what
(SEARCHNews News Photos Images Web) Afghanistan was under the Taliban — a safe haven for terrorism and a launching pad for attacks on America — they're right," Bush said.
"If by `stay the course' they mean that we're not learning from our experiences or adjusting our tactics to meet the challenges on the ground, then they're flat wrong."
There are about 160,000 U.S. troops in Iraq. The
(SEARCHNews News Photos Images Web) Pentagon has not committed to any specific drawdown next year beyond the announced plan to pull back 28,000 troops who were added this fall for extra security during the election.
We shall win by...winning. Great...
What exactly is winning? Are there clear goals that are quantifiable or are there open-ended goals that could have us sitting there for years and years? We cannot sustain this occupation forever.
At least in previous wars and operations, there were clear goals. In the Gulf War, it was to kick Hussein out of Kuwait. In Vietnam, it was to prevent the Communists from taking South Vietnam (and presumably, to go north and unify Vietnam under our choice of leadership). In Korea, it was to defend South Korea, then it became to unify Korea under the South's leadership, then to defend South Korea again.
What is the goal here? To establish democracy? What kind of democracy? Would we accept a religious figure being elected?
To defeat terrorists? Well, what's our definition of a terrorist in Iraq? Would a Sunni rebel who only cares about bringing back Sunni authority be a terrorist? If so, how do we know they're defeated?
And have we abandoned the original reasons for going to war? Have we given up on the WMD? Hussein has been toppled and captured and is now in trial.
And how will we deal with the fact that the Coalition of the Willing is now the Coalition of the Shrinking? Would we need to replace those soldiers or not? How do we deal with the fact that the occupation will become an increasingly American venture?
There wasn't a Plan for Victory at all. The President may be able to calm down the growing resentment in the Democratic camp as well as stirrings in the Republican camp if there was a concrete plan. And yes, that does mean timetables. Maybe Iraq's enemies will wait until the deadline to strike, but it will also give Iraq a deadline for when they have to shape up and be in charge, rather than constantly relying on American forces for their operations.
The Plan for Victory has to be more than being victorious. We've said we do not want to be in Iraq one minute longer than is necessary. So we must have quantifiable goals to ensure that we don't end up doing just that.
Posted on Yahoo! News by the AP:
Bush's speech at the U.S. Naval Academy, the first of at least three he'll give between now and the Dec. 15 Iraqi elections, did not outline a new strategy for the nearly three-year-old war. Rather, it was intended as a comprehensive answer to mounting criticism and questions. Billed as a major address, it brought together in a single package the administration's arguments for the war and assertions of progress on military, economic and political tracks.
And later in the article:
The president said the U.S. military's role in Iraq will shift from providing security and fighting the enemy nationwide to more specialized operations targeted at the most dangerous terrorists. "We will increasingly move out of Iraqi cities, reduce the number of bases from which we operate and conduct fewer patrols and convoys," the president said.
Still, Bush remained steadfastly opposed to imposing a deadline for leaving Iraq.
"Many advocating an artificial timetable for withdrawing our troops are sincere — but I believe they're sincerely wrong," Bush said. "Pulling our troops out before they've achieved their purpose is not a plan for victory."
Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada called on the president to release a strategy that has military, economic and political benchmarks that must be met. "Simply staying the course is no longer an option," Reid said. "We must change the course."
Bush was ready for that.
"If by `stay the course' they mean we will not permit al-Qaida to turn Iraq into what
(SEARCHNews News Photos Images Web) Afghanistan was under the Taliban — a safe haven for terrorism and a launching pad for attacks on America — they're right," Bush said.
"If by `stay the course' they mean that we're not learning from our experiences or adjusting our tactics to meet the challenges on the ground, then they're flat wrong."
There are about 160,000 U.S. troops in Iraq. The
(SEARCHNews News Photos Images Web) Pentagon has not committed to any specific drawdown next year beyond the announced plan to pull back 28,000 troops who were added this fall for extra security during the election.
We shall win by...winning. Great...
What exactly is winning? Are there clear goals that are quantifiable or are there open-ended goals that could have us sitting there for years and years? We cannot sustain this occupation forever.
At least in previous wars and operations, there were clear goals. In the Gulf War, it was to kick Hussein out of Kuwait. In Vietnam, it was to prevent the Communists from taking South Vietnam (and presumably, to go north and unify Vietnam under our choice of leadership). In Korea, it was to defend South Korea, then it became to unify Korea under the South's leadership, then to defend South Korea again.
What is the goal here? To establish democracy? What kind of democracy? Would we accept a religious figure being elected?
To defeat terrorists? Well, what's our definition of a terrorist in Iraq? Would a Sunni rebel who only cares about bringing back Sunni authority be a terrorist? If so, how do we know they're defeated?
And have we abandoned the original reasons for going to war? Have we given up on the WMD? Hussein has been toppled and captured and is now in trial.
And how will we deal with the fact that the Coalition of the Willing is now the Coalition of the Shrinking? Would we need to replace those soldiers or not? How do we deal with the fact that the occupation will become an increasingly American venture?
There wasn't a Plan for Victory at all. The President may be able to calm down the growing resentment in the Democratic camp as well as stirrings in the Republican camp if there was a concrete plan. And yes, that does mean timetables. Maybe Iraq's enemies will wait until the deadline to strike, but it will also give Iraq a deadline for when they have to shape up and be in charge, rather than constantly relying on American forces for their operations.
The Plan for Victory has to be more than being victorious. We've said we do not want to be in Iraq one minute longer than is necessary. So we must have quantifiable goals to ensure that we don't end up doing just that.
posted by Will at 12:51 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home