The Most Important Fight For Petraeus...

Posted By Blackfive

...may actually be Washington, rather than Baghdad.

Amir Taheri in the New York Post:

...Nevertheless, Petraeus still faces a number of major problems - the most important one being uncertainty in Washington.

There is little doubt that many elements within America's political elite want the United States to fail, for a variety of motives. At least some of those elements would do all they can, short of being charged with unpatriotic behavior, to ensure that the outcome of the war in Iraq is seen as a defeat for the United States - even if it is not so in reality.

Portraying Iraq as a failure isn't hard. To pronounce Petraeus' mission a failure, all that defeat-mongers in Washington need is one car bomb a day and one suicide attack a week.

Uncertainty in Washington will encourage the Iraqi protagonists to hedge their bets, rather than throw all their weight behind Petraeus' mission. In any war, people rally to the side that is perceived to have the highest threshold of pain, and is likely to stay the course the longest.

When House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says that she does not consider Iraq to be "a war to win, but a situation to manage," Iraqis otherwise likely to side with Petraeus will think twice. All this past week, the discussion in Baghdad teahouses centered on a mystery: How could so many senators declare support for U.S. troops in Iraq while pressing for a resolution to oppose their mission?...

Okay, maybe that's not the General's fight. 

It is ours. 

There's a lot more to the story.  Read the whole piece.

Update:  Charles Krauthammer about the politicking of the surge and the war:

...When it came to doing something serious about the surge, the Senate ducked. It unanimously (81-0) approved sending Gen. David H. Petraeus to Baghdad to do the surge -- precisely what a majority of the senators said they did not want done.

If you really oppose the surge, how could you not oppose the appointment of the man whose very mission is to carry it out? Yet not one senator did so. Instead, they spent days fine-tuning the wording of a nonbinding, i.e. entirely toothless, expression of disapproval.

A serious legislative body would not be arguing over degrees of disapproval anyway, but about the elements of three or four alternate plans that might actually change our course in Iraq, something they all say they desire. But instead of making a contribution to thinking through how the war should be either prosecuted or liquidated, they negotiate language that provides precisely the amount of distancing a senator might need as political insulation should the surge either succeed or fail...

Exactly. 

Update 2 - sligtly off-topic:  Ralph Peters on Iran, Syria and others - directly or indirectly - helping the insurgents who are shooting down our bird.

More at FrontPage about Iran from Kenneth Timmerman.

---

Mission: To protect and promote the reputation and dignity of America's Warriors.
Join us!

Comments

The Most Important Fight For Petraeus...

...may actually be Washington, rather than Baghdad.

Amir Taheri in the New York Post:

...Nevertheless, Petraeus still faces a number of major problems - the most important one being uncertainty in Washington.

There is little doubt that many elements within America's political elite want the United States to fail, for a variety of motives. At least some of those elements would do all they can, short of being charged with unpatriotic behavior, to ensure that the outcome of the war in Iraq is seen as a defeat for the United States - even if it is not so in reality.

Portraying Iraq as a failure isn't hard. To pronounce Petraeus' mission a failure, all that defeat-mongers in Washington need is one car bomb a day and one suicide attack a week.

Uncertainty in Washington will encourage the Iraqi protagonists to hedge their bets, rather than throw all their weight behind Petraeus' mission. In any war, people rally to the side that is perceived to have the highest threshold of pain, and is likely to stay the course the longest.

When House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says that she does not consider Iraq to be "a war to win, but a situation to manage," Iraqis otherwise likely to side with Petraeus will think twice. All this past week, the discussion in Baghdad teahouses centered on a mystery: How could so many senators declare support for U.S. troops in Iraq while pressing for a resolution to oppose their mission?...

Okay, maybe that's not the General's fight. 

It is ours. 

There's a lot more to the story.  Read the whole piece.

Update:  Charles Krauthammer about the politicking of the surge and the war:

...When it came to doing something serious about the surge, the Senate ducked. It unanimously (81-0) approved sending Gen. David H. Petraeus to Baghdad to do the surge -- precisely what a majority of the senators said they did not want done.

If you really oppose the surge, how could you not oppose the appointment of the man whose very mission is to carry it out? Yet not one senator did so. Instead, they spent days fine-tuning the wording of a nonbinding, i.e. entirely toothless, expression of disapproval.

A serious legislative body would not be arguing over degrees of disapproval anyway, but about the elements of three or four alternate plans that might actually change our course in Iraq, something they all say they desire. But instead of making a contribution to thinking through how the war should be either prosecuted or liquidated, they negotiate language that provides precisely the amount of distancing a senator might need as political insulation should the surge either succeed or fail...

Exactly. 

Update 2 - sligtly off-topic:  Ralph Peters on Iran, Syria and others - directly or indirectly - helping the insurgents who are shooting down our bird.

More at FrontPage about Iran from Kenneth Timmerman.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfadb53ef00d834300fa653ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Most Important Fight For Petraeus...:

» The Most Important Fight For Petraeus... from Bill's Bites
Russ Vaughn's stuck in a crappy room in Patzcuaro, Mexico, with beds hard as a rock and [not very good] internet service but he wrote to make sure I knew about this: David and Goliath, and Petraeus Steven Alvarez In [Read More]