Some would argue against a surge because one consequence of the surge is already certain: more American deaths. Some would argue that pulling out of Iraq is the best course to take because saving American lives now is worth the uncertainty of an Iraqi civil war.
I disagree with your assessment. I think most people argue against a surge because it is just "more of the same" and unlikely to achieve much, at least not on a permanent basis. The opposition to the surge is not just because it risks more American lives. I think Americans are willing to sacrifice lives if the results appear likely, but the surge appears to be just a stopgap measure, and may not even succeed at that.
Also, the Bush administration had ~3 years to achieve the stabilization goal, apparently fas failed, so time is up. That he sold the invastion to the public as a defensive removal of a threat rather than as a humanitarian liberation of an oppressed people doesn't help.
I agree with one poster who argued that Bush should be doing the weekly or biweekly presentations to the country about progress in Iraq and milestones, and he should have been doing them from the start. Most of us have zero idea what the coalition does on a daily basis, what the Iraqi police do on a daily basis, and what is going to cause the suicide bombers to change into productive Iraqi citizens. Since we are left with the Iraqi activity black hole, and the only news we get is daily killing numbers, and we don't aren't inclined to trust our Presidents claims or assessment of progress, he doesn't get support for a plan that says "increase the troop count by 15% and everything will change". I mean, it's a ridiculous claim!
I don't agree with the latter reasoning because (a) we have a moral responsibility to fix what we broke (Powell's "Pottery Barn" argument), and (b) the resulting instability of a civil war would recreate the conditions that breed terrorism. We would essentially create another pre-9/11 Afghanistan, which itself was created when the Soviets pulled out.
Well the latter reasoning you cited was not that of the general public, in my opinion. Americans are extremely ready to fight and die for goals seen as worthwhile and achievable. Unfortunately, the surge doesn't appear to make those goals achievable.
And I don't buy any you broke it you fix it nonsense. It was already broken when we invaded Iraq as the country had been excluded from the international community for the preceding 12 years, and it is now the responsibility of the Iraqis to build whatever life they want for themselves.
Arguing that leaving Iraq now would result in an international terrorist playground is silly, in my opinion. |
