Tuesday, January 16, 2007
Another Prominent Conservative Opposes Bush's Troop Surge Plan
America could help the Maliki government in Iraq fight the insurgents. But the evidence, in the last two years especially, is that the strength of the insurgents lies not in their military organization but in their techniques. Our losses are mostly from IEDs — improvised explosive devices. An elevation in American fighting forces in Iraq doesn't diminish, pro tanto, the number of IEDs that will be set off.
The threat in Iraq is from the apparently inexhaustible flow of insurgents who plant the IEDs and who engage in wanton killings of Iraqi defenders. What no strategist, American or Iraqi, has successfully addressed is the question of how to diminish that noxious flow. One American general petitioned the Iraqi government to be more forceful with captured insurgents, many of whom are simply released. But nothing like a galvanized rout of apprehended insurgents is in prospect, which problem touches on -
The sectarian character of the Iraqi population, which is the source of divisiveness extending beyond any dislike or resentment of America.
A geographical division of Iraq is inevitable. The major players are obvious. It isn't plain how America, as an outside party, could play an effective role, let alone one that was decisive, in that national redefinition. And America would do well to encourage non-American agents to act as brokers — people with names like Ban Ki-moon.
On the basis of this analysis I will vote against supplementary American involvement in Iraq.
Bill Buckley joins Colin Powell, Ollie North, George Will, Rod Dreher, James Baker, Chuck Hagel, Susan Collins, Gordon Smith, Norm Coleman, and Charles Krauthammer in the "Famous Republican Figures Against Bush's Surge Plan" Category.
Not to mention that between 61%-70% of Americans in all the latest polls disapprove of the preznut's surge plan.
On the preznut's side - Holy Joe Lieberman, Lindsay Graham, John McCain, the American Enterprise Institute and the rest of the wrist monkeys at NRO, the Weekly Standard, and FOX News.
Can CNN stop couching the surge plan debate as Dems vs. Repubs?
The debate is Dems/sane Repubs/61%-70% of the American people vs. neocons/administration apologists/30% who think Bush is the second coming of Jesus.
Is this so hard to understand?