From the Washington Post:
The U.S. military believes it has dealt devastating and perhaps irreversible blows to al-Qaeda in Iraq in recent months, leading some generals to advocate a declaration of victory over the group, which the Bush administration has long described as the most lethal U.S. adversary in Iraq.
But as the White House and its military commanders plan the next phase of the war, other officials have cautioned against taking what they see as a premature step that could create strategic and political difficulties for the United States. Such a declaration could fuel criticism that the Iraq conflict has become a civil war in which U.S. combat forces should not be involved. At the same time, the intelligence community, and some in the military itself, worry about underestimating an enemy that has shown great resilience in the past.
“I think it would be premature at this point,” a senior intelligence official said of a victory declaration over AQI, as the group is known. Despite recent U.S. gains, he said, AQI retains “the ability for surprise and for catastrophic attacks.”
Ah, just so.
But here’s the thing: “the ability for surprise and for catastrophic attacks” can never be fully negated, and is in fact the metric by which “terrorism” is judged. Which is to say, it remains forever potential.
So yes, here you have me, noted neocon hatemonger, notoriously desirous of the elimination of all brown people not named Clarence Thomas or Thomas Sowell, admitting that terrorism can never be defeated.
May as well pack it in and just learn to live with an acceptable degree of terror then, yes? As John Kerry was brave enough to intimate?
Well, no. As many on the left who scoff at the “War on Terror” are quick to remind us, terrorism is a tactic, and it makes no sense to declare war on a tactic. Which (in keeping with the nuance of the “reality-based” community) is true, but in a trivial sense: the tactic will remain even after those currently deploying it are reduced to a coarse mist, sure. But the purpose of bringing the fight to those engaging in such tactics is to convince them that such tactics will not work — that we will not change our way of life, submit to Islam, or betray our allies and abandon our commitments simply because acts of terror make for spectacular TV, and convince those with short attention spans that resignation and world-weary realism are the proper affectations to adopt in the face of such tactics.
Of course, such a posture is easy when one proceeds from the belief (stated or otherwise) that the targets of terrorist attacks are in some sense responsible for prompting those attacks. Thus, blowback, or “imperialism,” or cultural hegemony, or ill-advised interventionalism, or economic oppression, etc., as “explanations” for why we’ve come to be targeted — explanations that run counter to those offered by the attackers, who are themselves reduced to a sort of symbolic rebuke to our own system made manifest in robes and sandals and swarthiness covered in facial hair.
For my part, I have never looked at the War on Terror as a war designed to defeat a tactic. Instead, it is a war designed to convince those who deploy such tactics that we will not let such attacks go unpunished, and that — in the long term — we have the capability to visit upon terrorist organizations the kind of punishment that persuades them to rethink their “war” against the West.
More simply, this war is designed to kill those zealots who persist in their zealotry, and to convince the next generation of potential zealots that they’d be better off resisting the urge to attack US citizens or coalition interests. And in the process, if we’re able to introduce into the Middle East a philosophical sea change by way of preparing the ground for representative democracy, this sets the stage for the kind of reform movement that needs to begin somewhere — foreign policy realism having proven itself moribund on the day jet planes crashed into the WTC, the Pentagon, and a field in PA.
Thus,
While a victory declaration might have the “psychological aspect” of discouraging recruitment to a perceived lost cause, the White House official said, advantages overall would be minimal. “I recognize that there are pros to saying, ‘Hey, listen, the bad guys are on the run.’ ” But if AQI were later able to demonstrate residual capabilities with a series of bombings, “even though it was temporary,” he said, “the question becomes: How does this play out in terms of public opinion?”
And, sadly, we all know the answer to that: the US mainstream press, given its willingness to see the US as at least partially responsible for its targeting by Islamic terror groups, is happy to use any and every successful terror attack — and again, the effectiveness of such attacks are inexorably tied to their ability to garner the kind of media attention we invariably grant them, in a kind of self-perpetuating cycle of (sometimes inadvertent) complicity — to promote that culture of world-weary resignation that demoralizes our troops, advances the strategy of our enemies, and drives our electorate to the kind of war fatigue that, ironically, provides the enemy with its only chance of achieving victory.
NB: For what it’s worth, Thomas Ricks, author of Fiasco, contributed to the Post story.
Fair. Balanced. Unafraid? Not so much.
(h/t CJ Burch. More here and here).
****
update: Via IP, more, from Andrew Bolt:
The question now is: How did we get to this brink of success in Iraq, when the vast bulk of media coverage predicted only defeat, civil war and utter ruin?
[…]
And then reverse my question: How is it that most of the Western media covering Iraq never saw success coming? This is actually the more critical issue.
Lies, all damned lies. We lost this war a long time ago, why must you persist in your delusions?
Inadvertent complicity? Among the reporters, maybe. I don’t doubt that they’re too stupid or ambitious to realize what they’re doing. The editors, and publishers, producers, executives and senior correspondents, the folk who cut their teeth during the tet offensive and spent the seventies ignoring Pol Pot? They know. They know damn well what they’re up to. And they’ve spent forty years lionizing each other for it.
Yes, but is that consistent with the teachings of Original FISA?
Let’s see how crippled Al-Quaeda looks after Turkey cuts the supply line over the Armenian Smooch Resolution. DON’T FUSSSSS WITH ME!!
For a lost war, it sure has a bunch of our troops all over the place.
Ditto Afghanistan.
Winners? They live in caves, take JDAMs down the chimney, Hellfires up the tailpipe or leave rambling You Tube offerings that quote Noam Chomsky.
I’m just waiting for that Bizarro Superman with the backward “S” to fly in here to Baghdad and, as his first act, offer an exclusive interview to Thomas Ricks.
Hitchens in Madison, WI:
I grew up in Ireland during the 1970’s and early 1980’s, moving to England in 1983, and to the the US in 1985.
I remember Bloody Sunday in 1972, the IRA car-bombings in Dublin in 1974, assorted other IRA car-bombings, assassinations, Mountbatten, Airey Neave, the H-Blocks, Bobby Sands, etc.
At no time did the Brits ever indicate they were going to give to the IRA.
Now, mind you, by this stage the Brits had had centuries of experience of Irish bloody-mindedness, and I think they knew they had to meet force with force, however imperfectly. The general public knew this, the politicians knew this, and the media knew this. All things considered, they were pretty decent about it. As I said, I lived in the UK for a while, and had the full brogue going, and never experienced anything but good manners and good humor. The Brits were decent, but resolved.
That’s how we’ll have to be. I think it’ll take a bit more Muslim bloody-mindedness to get us there.
For my part, I have never looked at the War on Terror as a war designed to defeat a tactic.
I don’t think that anyone ever has, including the president. The term “War on Terror” began its life as a euphemism for “War on Islamic Jihad” or some such iteration, and was chosen to downplay the Islamic element, thus to not feed the paranoia of the average Middle-Eastern Muslim who thinks we’re as fixated on religion as he is and therefore believes a priori that we’re trying to eliminate Islam for the sake of eliminating Islam.
Which, the Qu’ran clearly states, is a perfectly legitimate reason to wage armed jihad against the kuffar.
It is also ironic that lefties fail to understand its status as euphemism, given their penchant for not using words to mean what they normally mean as a matter of course. You’d think they’d recognize such linguistic sleight-of-hand from the get-go.
But then, correctly interpreting the president’s words was never the goal in the first place, was it?
Well, dicentra, I’ll just offer this up as an illustrative point following your question…
What do you think the reaction would be in the media or the Holy of Holies…THE DAILY SHOW…if the President said “many of the survivors of the Titanic are very old.”
Now, go find out the Speaker of the House’s quote on the age of “many of the survivors” of the Turko-Armenian-Ottoman whatever it is we’re trying to get to the bottom of in the urgent congressional business of the day.
Bravo. Great post as usual. I’ll also second Dicentra’s point about the phrase “war on terror”. We all know the minute that President Bush would have said “war on islamic jihad” or something to that effect, the multi-culti douchebags would have gotten their panties in a million knots. I wish President Bush would have used another term as it would have been more appropriate and it would have pissed off these multi-cultis, but then again, I’m not the President of the United States. Politics isn’t a concern for me.
Heard tell that after Nancy wraps up the Armenian thing, she’s bringing a resolution to the floor that states “from this moment on, Rachael Ray’s ‘3 Minute Crockpot Delight’ will be known as the official goulash recipe for America”
True enough, OI, but you’ll note that the multi-culti douchebags got their panties in a million knots ANYWAY. You know, because of the code words. And the beards.
The great downfall of both the current and previous Administrations has been an outward obsession with legacy. Bubba cajoled and pressed and pushed SO HARD to become The Man Who Brought Peace To The Middle East … only to have Yassir “Suck On My Nobel Prize, Bitch” Arafat kick him in the nads. Likewise, Dubya opened up his tenure by declaring he would be “a uniter, not a divider” … thus leading to a series of failed attempts to appease the opposition at home, with outcomes ranging from disappointing to near-disastrous, trying to “unite” with a faction that (despite frequent claims to the contrary) did not, does not, want to “unite” under any circumstances.
Of course, this only relates to the current topic because the entire “light footprint” approach was borne from a desire to not be perceived as trying to colonize Iraq, which was the whine we kept hearing over and over regardless. It’s now that Petraeus has been authorized to say “screw the ‘light footprint’ bullshit, you crush roaches by stomping hard” that we’re seeing the best results.
Ricks was on the NPR this morning, talking about memoirs emerging from the war.
http://www.npr*.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=15307306
Here’s an excerpt from the one they excerpt:
You win Feet, I was full of crap in comment #2. The reporters, at least some of them, know what they’re doing too, and seem to be sort of proud of it.
Jeff got it exactly:
NPR spent this morning talking to Iraqi refugees in Syria, focusing on the children, who are safe, but they do not have enough government services. The same story they do from any country they have a reporter in, really.
Don’t tell me – NPR criticized Dubya for refusing to expand S-CHIP to cover them, too.
– Apparently Syria isn’t living up to the “Great promise” of ths coming celiphate.
You see how this works, gentle viewer? I say “fine red mist,” Jeff says “coarse mist.”
That makes Jeff a moderate.
The MSM will find an excuse to make bad news out of this, and everything else in Iraq, unless a Dem gets elected President, in which case the war will take a sudden turn (having been over for months) for the better.
Do you know why the blogosphere is a good percentage conservative and the press corps isn’t? The former is self-selected, the latter is selected by editors who choose people who comply. There is a “press corps community” that banishes (Bernard Goldberg) or just socially isolates (John Stossel) people who don’t “comply.”
Why is Pelosi picking the Armenian scab? Doesn’t she know that there is nothing good that can come from it? Blood will flow & it will be on her conscience.
<double-take>
For some reason I always thought that in order to have a conscience one needed to be conscious.
The former is self-selected, the latter is selected by editors who choose people who comply.
It’s worse than that. The journos self-select, too. They’re all the English majors who have decided that it is their Mission In Life to Make A Difference. Like Woodward and Bernstein and Erin Brockovitch and Sally Field in that union movie.
Conservatives who want to Make A Difference start a business and employ people and invent things and donate their own money to charity. Lefties evangelize while denying that they would ever do such a thing.
THE STREETS SHALL FLOW WITH THE BLOOD OF THE NON-BELIEVERS !!!!!1!
Oh My Gaia! I’m totally confused. My liberal betters have been telling me that if we kill the jihadis we only make more jihadis, (and the new ones would be ten feet tall), but now it seems AQI is running out of jihadis. I guess the threat to redeploy to Okinawa has had the desired effect.
Oil closed at over $86/bbl today. Analysts credited the rise to increased US-Turkish tension.
Thanks, Nancy!
the price of oil is just another way the busHitlerCo is fleecing the working class of amerikkka they want to increase the price of oil because their crony robber baron butt buddies will line their pockets with the hard earned cash of the poor The war for oil is a failure and now Amerikkka will feel the pain of their collective failure
THESTREETSWILLFLOWWITHTHEBLOODOFTHENON-BELIEVERS
And actus comes in and says absolutely nothing. Yes, it’s another day.
You know, if it weren’t for Thomas & Thomas, we’d be shit outta blacks.
“When do I get my special parking space?” – Osama Bin Laden
The ACLU is working on this as we speak
– If we stole all the oil then why the fuck are gas prices at an all time high. WTF?. Are the giants of industry hiding it all in a big tank in Demoines or something. Common giants of industry, cough it up. Whats the point of being a hedgemonic Imperialism, if we war-mongering NeoCons don’t share in the booty. (I think history is going to look back and decide that the SecProgg cult was the dumbest gaggle of assholes ever to trod the earth.)
Actually, what actus is trying to say is that we should believe 12 captains who haven’t been in Iraq in over a year about conditions on the ground — and disbelieve those who are over there now.
It’s just his way of making a glancing argument that has all the pointedness of a rounded off crayon.
Like I said…actus says nothing. But as usual, you say it so much better! Fuck you Goldstein {said in an absolutely loving way}. I so hope my Indians meet your Rockies! Hey, seriously, any new single malt suggestions? I actually have a suggestion for a very affordable Islay. The Bowmore Legend. Cheap, but still a nice expression of the Islay taste.
So you just offhandedly dismiss the opinions of those who have been over there? Seems to me you equally dismissed the assessments of other veterans — like the ones who write editorials you don’t like. Not current? Oh, right; conditions on the ground change daily. Like you would know.
And let’s keep the baseball hormones pumpin’ I’ll admit I’m happy for them but get real people.
Cynn, you’re a good sport. I’ll say that much. I’ll “just offhandedly dismiss” assholes such as actus. Thank you very much.
I didn’t offhandedly dismiss anything. Actus tried to use the editorial as a trump card. I pointed to a post that pointed out that those assessments were all given by people who haven’t been to Iraq in a year or more.
As for what I’d know, there are several commenters here who are in Iraq. And I IM with a friend who is over there, as well.
But you know what? Fuck you. Nothing galls me more than the chickenhawk argument by someone who takes an antiwar position solely to keep herself from feeling guilty about being a fucking coward. Goodbye.
Funny you should mention it. I’m having Bowmore right now. I recommend it.
The American media didn’t see “success” coming to Iraq because success hasn’t come to Iraq. Iraq is neither self-governing, stable, prosperous, nor an ally in the war on terror. Large parts of the population (about 4 million I believe) are either in internal or external exile. Unemployment is somewhere between 33 and 50% and more than 200,000 Iraqis have died as a result of the occupation.
But if the mission in Iraq is not a success, what is it? “Failure” might have been a good word in 2005 but it’s very “America-centered) and doesn’t fully capture the calamity that the American occupation has visited on most of Iraqi society. During 2006, I would sometimes refer to the occupation as a “disaster” (was Jeff G calling it a “success” then as well). But that’s rather dated now as well because it doesn’t account for the additional destructiveness of 2007. What about the suicide bombing campaigns of the spring and summer, the continued decline of the Iraqi economy, the paralysis of the government, the militia take-over of Basra, or the dangerous political fragmentation of the Shiite population?
What word accounts for them?
In the final analysis, it seems that adequate words are really hard to find for the horrors of the situation in Iraq. I think Josh Marshall referred to the war today as “catastrophic.” That might be the best we can do for now.
I think in 2005 I was trying to keep people like you from surrendering, Rick.
Beyond that, I don’t think I declared on an ongoing operation either way, except to say I continued to support the effort, and that it would be a bad idea to break our commitment.
You on the other hand — if you don’t make the commitment personally, well, then NOT IN YOUR NAME.
Buzz off. I’m tired of the attacks on my character. I’m in a purging mood tonight.
Like Hitler.
Sure Perfesser – I’ll take your word for it and ignore my lyin’ eyes. I sure wish I had access to the info you do…
Cynn, “Oh, right; conditions on the ground change daily. Like you would know.” He might not, but I damn well do – and conditions do change. Would you take the word of an Anzio survivor that we didn’t have a flaming chance in late 1944? Try to be a little more serious next time.
I wasn’t partictularly addressing you personally. No need to assume the weight of the world. Sorry if I offended; I am addressing all those who think this “mission” is done.
Not until every last brown person breathes the air of freedom.
Oh. And Belarussians.
I wonder where Ric gets his numbers and then I realize that I don’t really care. It is Perfessor Caricature, after all.
Sorry if I offended; I am addressing all those who think this “mission†is done.
Cynn, please point out just who in this thread said that the “…“mission†is done”. I’m just a country bumpkin, barely able to read and write, and I’d appreciate your help in seeking out those overzealous optimists, and forcing them to enlist in the Marines.
Thank you.
That all depends on what you think the mission is. When do you figure we finished up in Germany?
Oh, wait, Cynn, did you mean this, at the beginning of Jeff’s post?
The U.S. military believes it has dealt devastating and perhaps irreversible blows to al-Qaeda in Iraq in recent months, leading some generals to advocate a declaration of victory over the group, which the Bush administration has long described as the most lethal U.S. adversary in Iraq.
But as the White House and its military commanders plan the next phase of the war, other officials have cautioned against taking what they see as a premature step that could create strategic and political difficulties for the United States. Such a declaration could fuel criticism that the Iraq conflict has become a civil war in which U.S. combat forces should not be involved. At the same time, the intelligence community, and some in the military itself, worry about underestimating an enemy that has shown great resilience in the past.
Were you thinking about this? Because I don’t know that I can make an Army general enlist in the Marines.
Thanks again!
Sleep well, Ric.
– Or Mohammud shelves the Jihad schtick by yelling…..”Stop, stop the martyrdom crap already….. we’re running out of vurgins…..
“Cynn, please point out just who in this thread said that the “…“mission†is doneâ€Â.
That would be perfesser Ric and andy, JeffS. I think it is encouraging cynn is starting to see through their bullshit.
Perhaps, Big Moe, but that’s not the way I read it. Still, if I be wrong, I apologize for any ill-directed sarcasm, cynn. But I would like a clarification.
Here’s your clarification. I don’t blame the media; I blame our own preonceptions. It’s lovely that al Quaeda is supposedly quashed for now. But that whole fucking country is still fractured and restive; we are threatening to mess with Iran; and the pissant pod people democrats want to slam Turkey over a century or so older dispute.
Let’s Dance!@!
Where to start…
1. “Professor” Caric–Iraq expert. Your numbers are…suspect. I’m being charitable. Saddam was the castastrophe. And all the positive news streaming from Iraq…reported by people WHO ARE HERE like Michael Yon, for instance? Continue to ignore it. You twits still can’t bring yourselves to give Ronald Reagan credit for anything after all these years. We expect intellectual dishonesty from you. Keep it up, you have accomplished what is normal for the left: the intersection of caricature and actual behavior.
2. The real howler: “the dangerous political fragmentation of the Shiite population?”
That fragmentation was always present. Dangerous? Please explain. This should be good.
3. “Andy”: I think we can muster up 12 current Majors who think withdrawal would be precisely the wrong thing to do. Yahtzee!!!
Oh, come on, people. We’re talking about people who still haven’t come to grips with the utter and catastrophic economic failure of the atavistic Marxist experiment, and deal with Stalin’s legacy, much less Mao’s.
And you’re expecting them to revise their decision on Iraq?
They’re simply not capable of dealing with new ideas, these progressives.
Cynn: Thanks for the clarification. Now for a little from me…..
It’s lovely that al Quaeda is supposedly quashed for now.
Actually, AQ is not “quashed”; the article Jeff quoted is so full of qualifications as to the “demise” of AQ, that “quashed” can be inferred only by those not reading and comprehending the words.
However, I’m certain some over eager (and exceptionally stupid) flag officers wish to declare this to be so. I know, I have worked for several flag officers before. Personally, I rate such desires to be on a level of idiocy lower than Dingy Harry’s pitiful pontifications. Especially after that silly hoopla over a “Mission Accomplished” sign on a carrier.
AQ is not “quashed”, although we have likely kicked AQ/Iraq in its collective gonads, and they are hurting. But administering the coupe de grace is certainly pre-mature.
But that whole fucking country is still fractured and restive; we are threatening to mess with Iran; and the pissant pod people democrats want to slam Turkey over a century or so older dispute.
No one disputes the first point, but there are signs of improvement, and cautious hope is not against any law that I am aware of.
On the second…..I would be happy not to threaten to mess with Iran, except that Iran is messing with us. I was in Kuwait when one of the first uses of those Iranian manufactured directional mines against US troops took place. It killed two soldiers. In 2005. And many more since then.
So, perhaps, you know, there might be a justifiable reason for threatening to mess with Iran, them helping to kill US troops and all. If they are not doing the deeds themselves, they are certainly supplying the means.
The third point garners no argument from me, whatsoever. Saying why would go way off topic, and use lots of bandwidth; I’ll just chortle over your description of “pissant pod people democrats”….I am so stealing that!
-…And so as the pissant pod people’s peopley powered people’s boat people sinks slowly in the West, and the sun pulls away from the shore, someone who nows the real drill has spoken and we hear the mournful sounds of the “surreality based community”…….Damn Bush…..Damn him all to hell….
–
–
– …..*crickets*
– I don’y know. Maybe the Left can still find a way to change gold to shit, but for now things aren’t looking to good for them, and without a defeat in Iraq their odds for 2008 look dimmer and dimmer.
Actually, what actus is trying to say is that we should believe 12 captains who haven’t been in Iraq in over a year about conditions on the ground  and disbelieve those who are over there now.
12 former captains, to be sure; only one of which has seen the inside of Iraq within the last year. As has been noted, major change has been effected in the last six months. I suppose it’s possible, though, that they’re both getting current information from buddies on the inside, and somehow privy to better information than everyone else that’s writing about what’s so in Iraq right now.
I’m guessing, though, that if Iraq does come up with a stable government that can handle the insurgency and AQ all by itself, someone, somewhere, self-caricatures will be outraged that they’ve not yet been added to G7, and that they’ve got just as much of a theocracy as we’re now seeing under the Bush administration.
“Comment by Ric Caric on 10/16 @ 8:47 pm # ”
“There are none so blind, as those who would not see…”
“In the final analysis, it seems that adequate words are really hard to find for the horrors of the situation in Iraq. I think Josh Marshall referred to the war today as “catastrophic.†That might be the best we can do for now.” Perfesser uummmmm, preferred the glorious days of state sanctioned brutal killings by Saddam’s henchman. The state sanctioned gassing of entire populations. The state sanctioned rape and mutilation of “bytches that MUST have had it coming to them” (A strawman, I know, but then again perfesser ummmm has straw for brains). But the most important part of all those “peace time” atrocities that was the Utopia of Iraq pre the Hitler McChimpy warforoilandbrownpeople war mongering days, was that all those things were “state sanctioned”. Remember wingnuts, the “state” is GOD!!!!!
Maybe the Left can still find a way to change gold to shit, but for now things aren’t looking to good for them, and without a defeat in Iraq their odds for 2008 look dimmer and dimmer.
I dunno, BB(pyu), snatching defeat from the jaws of victory is a speciality of idiots. We’ll just have to wait and see how things roll out.
[…] response to my post “Al Qaeda reported crippled in Iraq,” La Rana, in a post entitled “Dumb people La Rana reads for some reason,” attempts a […]
Cool!
Interesting…