Posted by
on Thursday, January 11, 2007 12:09:35 PM
The president's speech on 10 January was a home run. That's not "rah-rah" garbage. Every reader we have knows that we have been quite critical of the strategy and tactics used in Iraq. They haven't been cohesive. They haven't been consistent. And they haven't been too logical. But, like the preisdent, we, too, have "stayed the course." The president last night addressed the issues that we have been openly critical about:
The most urgent priority for success in Iraq is security, especially in Baghdad. Eighty percent of Iraq's sectarian violence occurs within 30 miles of the capital. This violence is splitting Baghdad into sectarian enclaves, and shaking the confidence of all Iraqis. Only Iraqis can end the sectarian violence and secure their people. And their government has put forward an aggressive plan to do it.
This is the start. The Iraqis have to step up, and take more control of their country. We have said repeatedly that we can't be there forever, and be a babysitter. If they are not stepping up, then there is a problem, and it must be addressed by the government. He says they have a plan, and he has a plan. That is great, but will it work. Let me see here ... One of our gripes is that after we clean out an area, the bad guys sweep back in.
... . Our troops will have a well-defined mission: to help Iraqis clear and secure neighborhoods, to help them protect the local population, and to help ensure that the Iraqi forces left behind are capable of providing the security that Baghdad needs. ...
... This time, we'll have the force levels we need to hold the areas that have been cleared. In earlier operations, political and sectarian interference prevented Iraqi and American forces from going into neighborhoods that are home to those fueling the sectarian violence. This time, Iraqi and American forces will have a green light to enter those neighborhoods -- and Prime Minister Maliki has pledged that political or sectarian interference will not be tolerated.
I've made it clear to the Prime Minister and Iraq's other leaders that America's commitment is not open-ended. If the Iraqi government does not follow through on its promises, it will lose the support of the American people -- and it will lose the support of the Iraqi people.
Very brave words, and it's a bold strategy. But it's one that many experts--both professional and amateur--have been calling for. It is not just sending the Iraqi military on it's merry way. I draw ana analogy back to our own birth. While the Continental Army had beat back the British, those same people continued to receive training from foreigners until the ranks of instructors had been filled. The same applies here.
When we are sure they can handle it, we will turn secutiry over to them, and there will be no further sectarian garbage coming fromt he government. Sunni or Shia, or Kurd, it matters not. If you are involved with the insurgency, the terrorists, or the militias, the game is up. Iran can't play these games any longer. It's not providing security or stabilization. It is providing more disunion between the populace and the Iraqi government. After all, how long will their own people tolerate the strife they face daily?
The Rules of Engagement (ROEs) are about to change. We're going after the bad guys, and that's not just al Qaeda or other foreign fighters in Iraq. We're going after the former Ba'athists that are causing problems. We're going after al-Sadr's militias. And yes, we're going after the terrorists there. But in doing that we are also sending notice to others ....
Succeeding in Iraq also requires defending its territorial integrity and stabilizing the region in the face of extremist challenges. This begins with addressing Iran and Syria. These two regimes are allowing terrorists and insurgents to use their territory to move in and out of Iraq. Iran is providing material support for attacks on American troops. We will disrupt the attacks on our forces. We'll interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq.
Iran and Syria are now on notice. We know that Syria's been sending it's Hezbollah fighters into Iraq to train elements of al-Sadr's Mahdi Army. We know that Iran has been sending IEDs into Iraq, have been sending weapons and munitions there, and has sent it's own Hezbollah fighters into the nation. This is no longer going to be tolerated under this new plan. And if President Ahmadinejad wishes a confrontation, then I suggest he make peace with his fluffy, little maker because things are likely to get rough before they get better for him. All in all, this plan can work, provided Democrats are willing to give it a chance.
It's telling when Dick Durbin's first comments int he rebuttal translate to "we're losing, and there's no hope for success." That's how the Democrats are playing their hand. Both Pelosi and Reid have communicated to the president that they'll oppose any sort of increase in funding or additional troop deployments. The problem is that it will be put into a bill, and the Congress will have to kill it. IF they do pass a bill that demands a draw down of troops, or a suspension of funds, the president will veto the bill, and they don't have the majority to override the veto. The Democrats are caught between a rock and a hard place.
The plan, as he laid it out, can work. But that only happens if we have the cooperation and full participation of the Iraqis. Furthermore, it will only work if the handcuffs are removed fromt he troops, and they are given a clearly-defined, and unrestricted objective. The president claims that is so. At this point, we would be willing to give him the leeway he has requested. And the American people should, too. It will do them no good to be upset at him for the next two years. He will not be removed from office, and the Democrats do not have the votes to achieve the ends they truly desire in this war. His plan is bold, and provided all of the pieces fit as described, it should work. The other side has provided another alternative except departure. We are willing to give the president his shot.
Marcie & Thomas