First of all, there are extremists in both parties who say nonsensical things. There are also candidates for President who don't have a real vote in Congress who say things that they think will play to their party. They're politicians--like, duh.... It is hardly the case that "all Democrats" are calling Petraeus a "liar," although personally, I think he and/or the mility at large are being less than candid with how they bandy about their "proofs" that they are finding "success" in Iraq. I already posted an article which goes into that in some detail (here: Message 23871564 )
Second, what the hell counts as success? Iraqi Sunnis turning against AQ. OK, that's good. We can agree on that. But, aside from the fact that this "flip," as you call it, began well before the Surge began and the Sunnis were even rebuffed at first by the military according to reports I've read, that has nothing to do with the truly main issue: political reconciliation in Iraq. Will the Shia factions and the Sunni factions actually be able to get along with and trust each well enough to resolve their problems politically rather than with force? At this point, it would be a major success if the answer to this question turns out to be "Yes." However, the only possible way that this might (emphasize that word) be possible is the solution pushed by Gelb, Galbraith and Biden, IMHO, and that has basically been ridiculed by the Bush administration and Republicans generally (admittedly, the ridicule has lessened lately, since they can't offer any real alternate to it other than Maliki et al making the "tough choices"--as if they are so adept at making tough choices). |
